You are right, it is a bit sensationalized. The 1.4M-by-Jan projection from the CDC is the highest currently and also seems to be the least official. CDC has stated this as a "worst case" scenario with no intervention. It's hard to find the source material from CDC but it has been parroted since last week. I think it may have been a remark from a CDC scientist but not an official release. It's worth considering other estimates

- WHO says 21,000 by mid January

- NEJM says ~10,000 by mid January http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1411100?query=fea...

The article links to the CDC report: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/su63e0923a1.htm?s_c...

The CDC report and the article present both worst-case and best-case scenarios for Liberia and Sierra Leone. 1.4M is worst-case (no intervention) and "almost ended" is best-case ("If, by late December 2014, approximately 70% of patients were placed either in ETUs or home or in a community setting such that there is a reduced risk for disease transmission [...] then the epidemic in both countries would almost be ended by January 20, 2015").

No, the fact that Fox News may abuse the phrase "could reach" does not mean that every use of the phrase is equivalent to Fox News's use of it.

People are downvoting you, but your comment seems fair enough to me, since the alternative scenario discussed in the article is that the epidemic could be "almost ended" by the same date. So, could be 1.4 million, could be "almost ended". Certainly seems like a misleading and intentionally sensational headline to me.

Perhaps the downvoters thought that the snark about Fox News was unnecessary and not the underlying premise.

These estimates come with a variety of scenarios. 1.4 million is the worst-case one.

what else do you want? "will reach"? This is not an exact science here