as SARS - severe acute respiratory syndrome

I don't know it seems to spread pretty well and the flue of 1918, which killed 20-50million people, had a similar fatality rate.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Ill still fear drunk drivers more.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

just got back from Japan, most people on the airplane had masks, though no one seemed to realize they dont work...Anyways, the fatality rate is 10%...and only 5,000 of about 2.5 billion people in the afflicted area are infected and the infection rate is going down...i fear drunk drivers more as well

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Actually nothing is about to stop sars. Just because 10% of the affected area have it now doesn't mean much, I mean it only just started what do you want from it? It will get around a fair way before its stopped.
And if we find a cure different strains will emerge. Sars is similar to influenza. Notice how you are supposed to get a vaccine for influenza just about every year? Thats because it is constantly changing. They don't even have a vaccine for sars and even when they do it will just change.
For the public, the only difference between sars and influenza is sars kills people.
Its going to be around for a long time IMO, and that means it is more than likely that it will eventually be close to you.
Of course, drunk drivers are never far away either...

 

influenza used to kill people as well...Over 18 million if i remember.
And that was without medical care! Maybe SARS will go the way of Influenza and become something that will pain that opposite spot my other arm where the my sesame street bandaid will be.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

There is very little even today that we can do to a newly identified virus! Antibiotics are useless and anti-viral drugs only work on specific species they were designed for. We have nothing to combat SARs except for emergency rooms and life support machines, which they did not have in the late 1910's. Most of all don’t expect a vaccine any time soon.

 

well, so far they are treating the symptoms until the disease has run its course and in the US, it seems successful?

 

I live kind of near Toronto. The World Health Bureau issued a teavel alert, but almost all the cases were contained, and Totonto is fighting the alert. But, to encourage tourism to Toronto, the mayor bought the entire stadium for a Blue Jays game, and resold them to anyone for $1!!!, or you can have a hotel, a 4 course meal, and a ticket to see Mama Mia for $125!! I've been in the Toronto area a couple times since "the SARS outbreak", and it is buisness a usual

 

Sars isnt that bad. It only has a 6% fatality rate. Quite a few are worse. Now if it was ebola I would be a little bit more freaked.

 

SARS death rate moves to 10%…

Source newscientist.com cant remember the link…

 

I say it again:

The flue of 1918 had the same fatality rate and it killed 20-50 million people in under 24 months! That flu though spread much MUCH faster then SAR, either for viral reasons or modern quarantine practices.

 

"More than 3000 children die each day due to malaria."
-World Health Organization

 

The 1918 pandemic was spread by returning soldiers.
In some isolated communities that rarely encountered new strains of flue the death rate was 100%.

One of my friends in his late 30’s die of malaria.

 

Malaria is a parasite it can be fought off with drugs. Most 3rd world countries don’t have the money though.

 

i'm sure sure anymore, but I thought that no malaria drug was actually 100% effective at the moment.

 

Just like any drug is not 100% effective.

 

Russian scientists claim to have come up with a novel way of warding off SARS – a double shot of vodka. Of course, that's also their cure for Chlamydia, hangnails, athlete's foot, flat tires, toxic shock syndrome, and countless other heinous ailments.

:m: Peace.

 

I think Dr. Vorobijev was pretty drunk when he said those statements.

 

BIO-WARFARE?

Could there be any truth to the theory that SARS virus is a biological warfare agent?


In order for an agent to fulfil a role as a biological warfare agent-it must posses three important charecteristics


1.a short incubation period (2-7 days for SARS)
2.a high virulence
3.a high case fatality rate.(only 3% for SARS)


Now Sars fulfils the obligations of the first two conditions ,however with respect to the third point, the disease only hase a fatality of 3%,but even this can be conceded as evidence for a biological weapon.

a)the corona virus was unintentionally released into the environment at an intermediate stage of development

b)the virus has been so engineered to cause a low fatality ,so as to encumber the medical and financial infrastructure of the target nation with a massive number of cases which would have to be treated,as well as achieve a military objective by rendering large numbers of troops redundant(wheras in case of death,the problem of treating them does not come into view-)

This would also allow any political objectives to be acheived,by acting as a psychological weapon

 

If SARs is genetically engineered we can tell from its genome: it would have gene to identical to other sources as well as genetic parts of intermediate transporters. The problem with corona virus is that their little ssRNA genomes are very small and it would not be easy inserting more genes into them without rendering it sterile.