Marburg Virus Explained: The Deadliest Filovirus

Marburg virus causes a hemorrhagic fever that has killed between 24 and 88 percent of the people infected in past outbreaks, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). It belongs to the same virus family as Ebola, it lives in a cave-dwelling fruit bat, and it has no licensed vaccine or antiviral drug. Yet the largest recent outbreak, in Rwanda in 2024, ended with 66 cases and 15 deaths. This article explains where the virus comes from, how it spreads, what the illness looks like, and what the outbreak record says about why some outbreaks are far deadlier than others.

Educational content, not medical advice. This article summarizes public-health information from WHO and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Anyone with possible exposure or symptoms should contact a doctor or local health authority.

What is Marburg virus?

Marburg virus is a member of the family Filoviridae, whose name comes from the Latin word for thread, because the particles look like long filaments under an electron microscope. The family also includes the viruses that cause Ebola disease. WHO lists two viruses that cause Marburg virus disease: Marburg virus (MARV) and Ravn virus (RAVV), both grouped in one species, Orthomarburgvirus marburgense.

The disease is a viral hemorrhagic fever, a term for illnesses in which a virus damages blood vessels and the body's ability to clot, so that bleeding and organ failure can follow. Not every patient bleeds visibly, and the bleeding is usually a late sign rather than the start of the illness. For a primer on what a virus needs to do once it gets inside a cell, see how viruses work from infection to replication.

Marburg is rare. Since 1967, the CDC's outbreak list shows about 20 outbreaks or imported clusters, most in central and East Africa. Rare, however, does not mean unimportant: each outbreak has tested health systems that were already stretched, and each one has taught responders something about how to stop a disease with no approved treatment.

The fatality figures quoted for Marburg range from 24 percent to 88 percent, and the gap is not a measurement error. Small clusters, delayed diagnosis, hospital quality, and whether "probable" cases are counted all move the number, as the outbreak table below shows.

The 1967 outbreak: how a laboratory discovered a new virus

Marburg virus was identified because it made laboratory workers sick. In 1967, people in Marburg and Frankfurt, Germany, and in Belgrade, in what was then Yugoslavia, fell ill after handling tissue from monkeys imported from Uganda. The CDC outbreak list records 31 cases and seven deaths across the two countries, and the WHO table splits those as 29 cases and seven deaths in Germany and two cases with no deaths in Yugoslavia. The German city where the first cases were identified gave the virus its name.

Seven deaths among 31 cases is a fatality rate of about 23 percent, which looks mild next to later outbreaks. That figure reflects the circumstances: patients were in well-equipped hospitals in Europe, and almost all were identified quickly. It is a useful reminder that the same virus produces very different statistics depending on where, and how fast, people get care.

Ebola was not described until 1976, nine years after Marburg. For the story of that second filovirus, including its far larger outbreaks, see Ebola virus explained.

Where the virus lives: the Egyptian fruit bat

Between outbreaks, Marburg virus persists in animals. WHO and the CDC both name the Egyptian rousette bat, Rousettus aegyptiacus, as the natural host. It is a fruit bat that roosts in large colonies in caves and mines across much of sub-Saharan Africa. The CDC notes that the virus is found in the bats' saliva, urine, and feces, and WHO adds that human infection is usually linked to prolonged time in mines or caves where the bats live.

A natural host, or reservoir, is an animal species in which a virus can persist long term. The bats are not the problem in themselves. They are a normal part of the ecosystem, and the virus does not appear to make them visibly ill. People enter the picture when they work, sleep, or tour in the places where the bats concentrate.

The CDC outbreak list shows this pattern repeatedly:

• Most cases in the 1998 to 2000 outbreak in Durba, Democratic Republic of the Congo (154 cases, 128 deaths) were young men working in a gold mine.
• The 2007 outbreak in Kamwenge District, Uganda, involved young men working in a lead and gold mine.
• Cases in Kenya in 1980 and 1987 were linked to Kitum Cave in Mount Elgon National Park.
• A 2008 case in the Netherlands, in a tourist who had visited Uganda, was linked to a cave in Maramagambo forest.

Spillover, the jump of a pathogen from an animal to a person, is a broader pattern with many viruses. How viruses jump from animals to humans covers what makes those events likely. Bats in particular have a reputation as viral hosts, and their unusual biology is part of that story, as discussed in how bats use echolocation.

Is the bat link proven?

For Marburg, the evidence is stronger than for Ebola. Researchers have found the virus in wild Egyptian rousette bats, and the CDC and WHO both treat the species as the natural reservoir. For Ebola, the bat connection is widely suspected but not as firmly established, which is one of the standard distinctions drawn between the two diseases. Genomic sequencing during Rwanda's 2024 outbreak linked the first patient's virus to strains found in fruit bats in a mine, according to a Gavi account of the response.

How Marburg virus spreads

Once the virus has entered the human population, it spreads from person to person through direct contact. The CDC and WHO describe the same routes:

• Blood, secretions, organs, or other body fluids of a person who is sick or has died, including through broken skin or the mucous membranes of the eyes, nose, and mouth.
• Contaminated objects, such as bedding, clothing, needles, and medical equipment.
• Semen from a man who has recovered, because the virus can persist in some tissues after the blood has cleared.
• Burial practices that involve direct contact with the body of someone who died of the disease.

It does not spread through the air the way influenza or measles does. WHO also states that people are not infectious before symptoms appear and remain infectious as long as the virus is in their blood. That detail matters for control: it means that finding and isolating symptomatic people, and watching their contacts, can actually stop a chain of transmission.

Health workers are at particular risk. WHO notes that they are often infected when infection-control precautions are not strictly followed, and that contaminated injection equipment and needle-stick injuries are linked to more severe disease. Early in an outbreak, before anyone has named the disease, a patient with fever and vomiting looks like a patient with malaria or typhoid, and standard precautions may be skipped.

How long after exposure do symptoms start?

The incubation period, the time between infection and the first symptoms, ranges from 2 to 21 days, according to both WHO and the CDC. The upper end of that range is the reason that contacts of a case are monitored for 21 days, and that an outbreak is declared over only after 42 days (two full incubation periods) with no new cases.

What the illness looks like

Marburg virus disease starts abruptly. WHO describes a sudden onset of high fever, severe headache, marked malaise, and muscle aches. The CDC adds chills, chest pain, and a sore throat to the early picture.

The next phase is dominated by the gut. Watery diarrhea, abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting can begin around day three, according to WHO. A non-itchy rash may appear two to seven days after onset. From about day five, some patients bleed from the nose, gums, or needle puncture sites, or have blood in vomit or stool. Brain involvement can cause confusion, irritability, and aggression, and a painful inflammation of the testes can occasionally appear late.

Stage	Typical features	Timing (WHO)
Incubation	No symptoms	2 to 21 days after exposure
Sudden onset	High fever, severe headache, malaise, muscle aches	First days of illness
Gastrointestinal phase	Watery diarrhea, abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting	From about day 3
Skin and bleeding signs	Non-itchy rash; bleeding from gums, nose, puncture sites, vomit or stool	Rash days 2 to 7; bleeding from about day 5
Severe disease	Confusion, shock, multi-organ failure	Deaths most often 8 to 9 days after onset

Death, when it occurs, is most often 8 to 9 days after onset and usually follows heavy blood loss and shock, WHO reports. The CDC lists liver failure, delirium, shock, and multi-organ dysfunction among the later features.

Why diagnosis is so hard at first

In the first days, nothing about the illness is unique. WHO notes that Marburg disease is hard to tell apart clinically from malaria, typhoid, shigellosis, meningitis, and other viral hemorrhagic fevers. That is why outbreaks often have a long head start: in Tanzania in January 2025, according to the CDC, eight of the ten cases died before the outbreak was even confirmed.

Laboratory confirmation uses antibody-capture ELISA, antigen-capture tests, RT-PCR (a test that detects viral genetic material), or virus isolation in cell culture. WHO adds that samples that have not been inactivated are a serious biohazard and need maximum-containment laboratories and triple packaging for transport. In practice, this means that a clinic in a remote district cannot confirm the disease on its own, and samples must travel.

Outbreak history, 1967 to 2025

The CDC and WHO tables together give a record of what Marburg has done. The figures below are the CDC's, with notes where WHO's differ. Counts in older outbreaks were often revised as investigators reclassified cases, so small differences between sources are normal.

Year	Place	Cases	Deaths
1967	Germany and Yugoslavia	31	7
1975	South Africa (case linked to Zimbabwe)	3	1
1980	Kenya	2	1
1987	Kenya	1	1
1998 to 2000	Democratic Republic of the Congo	154	128
2004 to 2005	Angola	252 (CDC); 374 (WHO, August 2005 update)	227 (CDC); 329 (WHO)
2007	Uganda	4	1 (CDC); 2 (WHO)
2012	Uganda	15	4
2017	Uganda	4 (CDC); 3 (WHO)	3
2021	Guinea	1	1
2022	Ghana	3	2
2023	Equatorial Guinea	16 confirmed plus 23 probable (CDC)	12 confirmed; all 23 probable cases died
2023	Tanzania	9	6
2024	Rwanda	66	15
2025	Tanzania	10 (2 confirmed, 8 probable)	10
2025	Ethiopia	14 confirmed	9

Sources: CDC outbreak history and the chronology table in the WHO fact sheet.

The largest on record: Angola, 2004 to 2005

The largest Marburg outbreak so far began in Uíge Province in northern Angola in October 2004, according to the CDC. WHO's final update, on August 24, 2005, counted 374 cases and 329 deaths nationwide (a fatality rate of 88 percent), of which Uíge accounted for 368 cases and 323 deaths. WHO's earlier reports called it the largest and deadliest on record, and a joint government and WHO statement in April 2005 put the share of cases in children under 15 at about 80 percent. The last confirmed case died on July 21, 2005.

The CDC's page gives lower totals (252 cases and 227 deaths). The difference appears to come from which cases each agency counts, and anyone citing the figure should name the source. Either way, the 2024 Rwanda outbreak, sometimes described as the largest, was far smaller than Angola's.

Equatorial Guinea and Tanzania, 2023

In February 2023, Equatorial Guinea declared its first Marburg outbreak. The CDC reports 16 confirmed cases with 12 deaths, plus 23 probable cases that all died; WHO's final count, cited in coverage of the June 8, 2023 end-of-outbreak declaration, was 17 confirmed cases. Probable cases are people who died with matching symptoms or links to confirmed cases but were never tested, so they are counted separately.

Tanzania reported its first outbreak in Kagera region in March 2023, with nine cases (eight confirmed, one probable) and six deaths. The CDC states that it found no evidence linking the two 2023 outbreaks.

Tanzania and Ethiopia, 2025

Tanzania's second Marburg outbreak, in Kagera region, was announced in January 2025 (the CDC dates WHO's notice to January 14), and the outbreak was declared over in March after 42 days without a new case. All ten cases (two confirmed, eight probable) died, according to the CDC, and eight of them died before the outbreak was confirmed.

Ethiopia confirmed its first-ever Marburg outbreak on November 14, 2025, in Jinka, in the South Ethiopia Region. The final count was 14 confirmed cases, nine of them fatal, and five further probable deaths, according to reports on WHO's end-of-outbreak announcement, which came in late January 2026 after 42 days with no new cases. Health teams identified and monitored 857 contacts.

Ethiopia and Equatorial Guinea are both far from the caves and mines of Uganda and Kenya where earlier cases clustered. The recent record shows the disease appearing in countries that had never reported it.

The 2024 Rwanda outbreak: what a fast response looks like

Rwanda's outbreak is the best-documented recent example of containment. Blood samples tested positive for Marburg virus in Kigali on September 27, 2024, and WHO describes it as the country's first outbreak. Within 72 hours the government had a response plan covering identification, isolation, and investigation of suspected cases, according to Gavi.

By the time the outbreak was marked over on December 20, 2024, less than three months after it was announced, more than 7,000 people had been tested. Sixty-six confirmed cases were treated in a designated center in Kigali, 15 people died, and 51 recovered, a fatality rate of 22.7 percent. Gavi's account, which draws on an interview with a Rwandan response official, credits several elements:

1. A command post run by multiple agencies.
2. Contact tracing that kept most new cases within lists of people already being monitored.
3. A dedicated treatment center where confirmed cases were isolated.
4. Laboratory capacity strong enough to test every suspect case with a fast turnaround.
5. Candidate vaccines and treatments used alongside standard care.

The outbreak was linked to a hospital cluster and its contacts in Kigali, and genomic sequencing connected the first patient's virus to strains in fruit bats in a mine. The share of cases among health workers is not given in the sources reviewed here, so this article does not state one.

The 23 percent fatality rate was low by Marburg standards, but it is worth being careful about what caused it. Rwanda used early isolation and supportive care, and also gave experimental drugs to some patients. Because those drugs were given in a trial setting to a small number of people, the outbreak cannot tell researchers whether they worked. Earlier detection, better hospital care, and a different mix of patients (the sources do not give an age breakdown) could each contribute.

Why the death rate varies so much

The range from 24 percent to 88 percent has several causes that are largely unrelated to the virus itself.

Care makes a difference. WHO states that early intensive supportive care, including rehydration and treatment of specific symptoms, improves survival. The 1967 cases in German hospitals and the 2024 cases in a Kigali treatment center both had a lower fatality rate than outbreaks that were found late in remote areas.

Who gets counted matters. In Equatorial Guinea in 2023, the 23 probable cases all died, because people who were never tested were counted only if they had died. That pushes the apparent fatality rate up. In an outbreak with many mild or undiagnosed infections, the same effect would pull it down, but nobody has measured how many such infections exist.

Small numbers swing wildly. A cluster of three cases with two deaths has a fatality rate of 67 percent. Ghana's 2022 outbreak had exactly that, and the percentage says little about the virus.

Viral strain may play a role. The CDC and WHO describe more than one Marburg virus (MARV and RAVV). Whether differences between them explain fatality rates is not established in the sources reviewed here, so it is better to say that the question is open.

The takeaway for a reader looking at a headline number is simple: a fatality rate is a property of an outbreak, not a fixed trait of a virus.

Vaccines and treatments: what exists and what does not

WHO and the CDC are consistent on this point: no vaccine and no antiviral drug is approved for Marburg virus disease. Care is supportive. That means oxygen, fluids, blood pressure management, and treatment of other infections, and it improves the odds even without a specific drug.

Several candidates are in development. Gavi's October 2024 summary lists the vaccine candidates that WHO prioritized from at least 28 under development:

Developer	Platform	Status as of October 2024
Sabin Vaccine Institute	Adenovirus-based	Phase 1 in 40 healthy U.S. adults found it safe, with rapid and robust immune responses; phase 2 in 125 adults in Uganda and Kenya ongoing
University of Oxford	Adenovirus-based (ChAdOx1)	Phase 1 trial began in the UK in 2024
International AIDS Vaccine Initiative	Vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV)	Phase not specified
Public Health Vaccines LLC	Vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV)	Phase not specified

An adenovirus-based vaccine uses a harmless, modified cold-type virus as a delivery vehicle that carries one Marburg gene into cells, so that the immune system learns to recognize the protein without any risk of the disease. The same idea underlies other vector vaccines; how vaccines work explains what the immune system does with that information.

What Rwanda tested

In Rwanda, the Sabin vaccine was used in a phase 2, open-label trial approved by the country's ethics and regulatory authorities. Sabin shipped its first 700 doses on October 5, 2024, nine days after the outbreak was confirmed, and vaccination of front-line workers and contacts began the next day. A second shipment of 1,000 doses arrived October 12. More than 1,600 people received a single dose, and vaccinated health workers were monitored for 29 days. Gavi's account notes that efficacy was not yet confirmed and that antibody tests at 14 and 28 days were still under review.

For treatment, WHO and Rwanda launched what WHO described as the first clinical trial of Marburg treatments. It tested remdesivir, an antiviral also used against COVID-19, and MBP091, a monoclonal antibody. A monoclonal antibody is a lab-made copy of a single antibody; MBP091 was derived from an antibody isolated from a Marburg survivor, and the U.S. Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response supplied doses. Antibody structure explains how such proteins grip their targets. Remdesivir was also given to some high-risk exposed people to try to prevent illness.

Two other antivirals, galidesivir and favipiravir, have shown promise in preclinical studies but have not been proven in humans, according to Gavi.

Candidate	Type	What is known
Remdesivir	Antiviral	Used experimentally in Rwanda; part of WHO's trial
MBP091	Monoclonal antibody	Derived from a survivor's antibody; human efficacy unknown
Galidesivir	Antiviral	Preclinical promise; not proven in humans
Favipiravir	Antiviral	Preclinical promise; not proven in humans

Controlling an outbreak without a vaccine

Most Marburg outbreaks in history ended without any vaccine, because the tools of classic public health work against a disease that spreads through close contact and is not infectious before symptoms. The basic steps, drawn from WHO's guidance and the Rwandan account, are:

• Find cases early. This requires clinicians to suspect the disease and laboratories able to test for it.
• Isolate patients. Confirmed and suspected cases are separated from other patients and cared for with strict protective equipment.
• Trace and monitor contacts. Everyone exposed is watched for 21 days, so that new cases are found while they are still isolated.
• Protect health workers. Standard precautions for all patients, and extra measures for suspected cases.
• Make burials safe. WHO says burial practices that involve contact with the body can spread the virus, and that outbreak control includes safe and dignified burial.
• Support survivors. WHO does not recommend isolating convalescent patients who test negative, and it recommends counseling for male survivors, because the virus can persist in the testes. Transmission through semen has been documented up to seven weeks after recovery, so WHO advises monthly semen testing until two consecutive tests are negative, or safer sex practices for 12 months without testing.

Think of it as a fire that spreads only by direct touch. You cannot put it out with a sprinkler system you do not have, but you can build a firebreak by moving fast, keeping the exposed list short, and watching the edges. That analogy has limits (a fire does not hide for eight days before it burns), but it captures why speed matters more than any single tool.

Prevention at the source is also possible in principle. WHO advises that people who visit or work in mines or caves with fruit bat colonies wear gloves and protective clothing, including masks, and that animal products such as blood and meat be thoroughly cooked during outbreaks.

Marburg versus Ebola

The two best-known filoviruses cause very similar illnesses, and clinical features alone rarely separate them. The differences are in the epidemiology and the countermeasures.

Feature	Marburg virus disease	Ebola disease
Family	Filoviridae	Filoviridae
First identified	1967, Germany and Yugoslavia	1976, Central Africa
Established natural host	Egyptian rousette bat	Bat link suspected, less firmly established
Reported fatality range	24 to 88 percent (WHO outbreak table)	About 50 percent on average, 25 to 90 percent across outbreaks
Largest outbreak	Angola, 2004 to 2005 (374 cases per WHO)	West Africa, 2014 to 2016 (tens of thousands of cases)
Licensed vaccine	None	Yes, for Zaire ebolavirus only
Licensed antiviral or antibody	None	Antibody treatments for Zaire ebolavirus

The Ebola row on fatality and countermeasures follows the SciHub101 article on Ebola virus explained, which gives the fuller account. The practical consequence is that a Marburg outbreak lacks the vaccines and antibody treatments that exist for one Ebola species, so containment depends more heavily on the public-health steps listed above.

Another hemorrhagic fever helps put filoviruses in perspective. Lassa fever, caused by an arenavirus carried by rodents, is a useful contrast. The two diseases are unrelated viruses with different animal hosts, and they share only the clinical label "hemorrhagic fever." For a broader ranking of dangerous pathogens, see the deadliest viruses on the planet.

What the body does against the virus

Public sources describe the outcome of Marburg infection more fully than the mechanism, and some details remain under study. In general terms, filoviruses infect immune cells and vessel-lining cells, disrupt the early immune response, and trigger widespread inflammation. The result is leaking blood vessels, abnormal clotting, and failing organs. A normal infection triggers a coordinated response, described in how the human immune system fights viruses; in Marburg, the problem is that the response is slow to start and then overshoots.

This is also why timing is the basis of every treatment idea. A drug or antibody that arrives before the virus has taken hold has more to work with than one given after organs are failing. That is the logic behind giving remdesivir to exposed contacts, and why researchers designed Rwanda's trials to start treatment early in the illness.

Common misconceptions

"Marburg is airborne." It is not. WHO and the CDC describe spread through contact with body fluids and contaminated objects. Health workers and family caregivers are at risk because they touch patients, not because the virus drifts through a ward.

"Marburg kills almost everyone it infects." Historical fatality rates range from 24 to 88 percent, depending on the outbreak. Rwanda's 2024 rate was 22.7 percent, according to Gavi.

"The 2024 Rwanda outbreak was the biggest ever." It was large by recent standards, but Angola's 2004 to 2005 outbreak, with 252 to 374 cases depending on the source, was larger.

"There is a vaccine now." Not yet. Candidates were used in trials, and efficacy had not been confirmed in the sources reviewed here. WHO's fact sheet says no vaccines or antivirals are approved.

"You can catch it from a bat cave visit." Only in specific circumstances: prolonged exposure to a cave or mine with infected bats. Casual contact is not the typical route, and most cave visitors never become infected. WHO's advice for visitors is protective clothing and gloves.

"A survivor is no longer a risk." In most respects survivors are not infectious, and WHO recommends against isolating those who test negative. The exception is semen, where the virus can persist, which is why WHO recommends counseling and testing for male survivors.

What remains unknown

• How often spillover happens without anyone noticing. The outbreaks that get counted are the ones where people became sick enough to be tested. Whether bat-to-human transmission happens silently is unclear.
• Why recent outbreaks are in new places. Equatorial Guinea in 2023 and Ethiopia in 2025 were first-ever outbreaks for those countries. Better surveillance, a changing range for the bats, and chance could all contribute.
• Whether the candidate vaccines and drugs work. The Rwanda trials were designed for speed, not to produce a definitive efficacy answer in a few dozen cases.
• What causes the difference in fatality between strains and outbreaks. The evidence points to care and reporting more than the virus, but strain effects are not ruled out.
• How long immunity lasts in survivors. Survivors will be followed for about six months in the Rwandan study, according to Gavi, a short window for answering long-term questions.

Frequently asked questions

Q: What is Marburg virus? A: Marburg virus is a filovirus, in the same family as Ebola, that causes Marburg virus disease, a severe hemorrhagic fever. It was first identified in 1967 after laboratory workers in Germany and Yugoslavia became ill. WHO and the CDC name the Egyptian rousette bat as its natural host.

Q: How deadly is Marburg virus disease? A: WHO reports an average fatality rate of about 50 percent, with past outbreaks ranging from 24 to 88 percent. The rate depends on how quickly patients are found and how good their care is. Rwanda's 2024 outbreak had 66 cases and 15 deaths, a rate of about 23 percent.

Q: How does Marburg virus spread? A: It spreads to people from infected Egyptian rousette bats, then between people through contact with the blood or body fluids of someone who is sick or has died, or with contaminated objects. Semen from recovered men can also transmit it. It does not spread through the air, and people are not infectious before symptoms start.

Q: What are the symptoms of Marburg virus disease? A: Symptoms begin suddenly, two to 21 days after infection, with high fever, severe headache, malaise, and muscle aches. Diarrhea, vomiting, and abdominal pain follow, a rash may appear, and bleeding can begin around day five. Deaths most often occur 8 to 9 days after onset, according to WHO.

Q: Is there a vaccine or treatment for Marburg virus? A: No vaccine or antiviral is approved. Supportive care, including fluids and treatment of complications, improves survival. Candidate vaccines from Sabin, Oxford, and others are being tested, and remdesivir and the antibody MBP091 were used in a trial in Rwanda in 2024. Their effectiveness is not yet established.

Q: What was the largest Marburg outbreak? A: The 2004 to 2005 outbreak in Angola, centered on Uíge Province, was the largest. WHO counted 374 cases and 329 deaths by August 2005, while the CDC lists 252 cases and 227 deaths. About 80 percent of cases in April 2005 were children under 15, according to a joint WHO and government statement.

Q: Could Marburg virus cause a pandemic? A: The sources reviewed here do not describe airborne spread, and WHO states that people are not infectious before symptoms. Those features make containment through isolation and contact tracing feasible, as the Rwandan response showed. The main risk is local, in health facilities and households where care is given without adequate protection.

The takeaway

Marburg virus is dangerous, but it is not unstoppable. It spreads only through close contact, it is not infectious before symptoms begin, and it has a 21-day incubation window that lets health teams watch the people who may have been exposed. The outbreak record shows what that means in practice: the same virus killed 88 percent of the patients counted in Angola in 2005 and under a quarter of those treated in Kigali in 2024, with no licensed drug in either case. What changed was speed, testing, isolation, and care. The open question for the next decade is whether the vaccine and antibody candidates tested in Rwanda add a second line of defense, and the honest answer today is that the data are not in yet.

Sources

• World Health Organization. Marburg virus disease fact sheet: incubation, symptoms, fatality range, outbreak chronology, prevention, and survivor guidance.
• U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About Marburg virus disease and Marburg outbreak history: symptoms, transmission, reservoir, and outbreak counts through 2025.
• Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. How a candidate vaccine and other treatments stopped Rwanda's Marburg outbreak and Everything you need to know about candidate vaccines and treatments for Marburg disease.
• WHO Disease Outbreak News, Angola Marburg update, April 22, 2005 and August 24, 2005.
• CDC, Tanzania 2025 Marburg outbreak.
• WHO Regional Office for Africa, Marburg outbreak in Tanzania declared over, and Ethiopia declares end of first-ever Marburg virus disease outbreak.

---

Read next:

• BK Virus, JC Virus & Polyomaviruses Explained
• Ebola Virus Explained: How It Works and Why It's So Lethal
• West Nile Virus Explained