Sorry for the double title. (Extra, extra, read all about it).

4% death rate, eh?

It happens. It happens.

"4% death rate, eh?"

Nope. More than twice that. Read the below article:

SARS Much More Deadly Than First Estimated

Bump for later

If you click on the link, the first graphic of information was the one I wanted to show.(I know, I'm really on a roll) I found it interesting.

It was also reported on the local news for Mpls/St. Paul that border patrol for Canada are wearing masks and gloves.

The news coming out of research in Canada tonight is that it may not be a coronavirus. Apparently, this conclusion was drawn from the lack of success is the test that has been developed.

Two things I have been thinking about with regard to SARS.

1. Mortality rate is 4%. Some say it is higher. Even if it is 10%, that means 90 out of 100 people survive. Not something you want to catch but hardly a death sentence.

On the other hand,

2. It seems that today, most people do not believe a world wide epidemic is something that would or could happen. Of course, history would argue otherwise. Add to that our global mobility and one could easily imagine a repeat of the 14 century or 1919.

That wouldn't work for me. I guess I'd have to unplug my computer. (never!)

Thanks.

http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/5715901.htm

I don't think a comparison with 1349 is quite apt, but a comparison with the so-called Spanish Flu might be something close to a possibility.

The hype sells newspapers, but the Media has, indeed, been crying 'wolf' far too much. The nature of Ebola, for example, demonstrates raging symptoms but flares up in such a way that prevents it from becoming more than a local epidemic. West Nile, on the other hand, is running more slowly and will definiely have a terrible, wide ranging effect on many animal species.

Very good! I think I am going to print this out and put it above my desk.
It has been interesitng reading all of the differing opinions on SARS. Wonder who will be right?