Y isn't no one answering my question

1according to the passage, carol-ann normandin had all of the following symptoms except

She took up a scalpel and slit the monkey's abdomen, making a slow and gentle cut, keeping the blade well away from her gloved fingers. the spleen was puffed up and tough, leathery, like a globe of smoked salami. she did not see any bloody lesions inside this monkey. she had expected that the monkey's interior would be a lake of blood, but no, this monkey looked all right, it had not bled into itself. if the animal had died of ebola, this was not a clear case. she opened up the intestine. there was no blood inside it. the gut looked okay. then she examined the stomach. there she found a ring of bleeding spots at the junction between the stomach and the small intestine. this could be a sign of ebola, but it was not a clear sign. it could also be a sign of simian fever, not ebola. therefore, she could not confirm the presence of ebola virus in this animal based on a visual inspection of the internal organs during necropsy.

After thea elvsted leaves the room, crushed by lovborg’s statement that he had destroyed the manuscript, he says to hedda, “to you i can tell the truth, hedda.” why does he think he can tell hedda the truth? do you think he’s right in this statement? why or why not? your answer should be at least one hundred words.