[TheLooseThread]

Well I really can't speak to trilateralists, Y2K suvival, or about the future of the economy since I don't really know about those things.

But if Alan Greenspan were to say he felt "gravely concerned" about the economy I would sit up and take notice. If you do not know who D.A Henderson is, that is fine. There is nothing wrong with not knowing who he is.

Likewise, if you don't know anything about smallpox or viruses that is also fine. We all pick and choose what subject we want to learn. There are many subject I don't know about.

You also don't want to discuss data or facts about smallpox. Which, again, is fine. There are many subject I don't wish to discuss.

But, frankly, if you don't know about this subject and you don't want to talk about the facts/data/issues of the subject, then you should really not inject yourself into the discussion.

[elfman2]

Henderson's job is to be gravely concerned. If the Surgeon General (the equivalent of Alan Greenspan) ever uses that language, it's probably a signal that the vaccination program for healthcare workers or the population is to begin.

It looks like you're interested in analogies. Here's an imperfect one, but it should help.

Someone posts an article analyzing racial tensions following some Rodney King type incident that you feel the need to weigh in on as people are promoting the idea of an upcoming racial warfare. Perhaps you're just concerned about public perception here getting out of control. (This is the imperfect part of the analogy. A story of racial tension can't get out of control like public fears of bio warfare, but bear with me.) Someone responds to you (like you did to me in post 10) and says:

"The more I learn about the ethnic hatred, the more chicken little looked like a prophet.

Here is the book link."

Granted, Preston's quite a bit more lucid than this guy, but he does look suspicious, tripling historic deaths from those listed in the article, and the risk of panic is many times worse. I posted here with an interest in making people aware of what panic can do, not in digging into the details of smallpox. Nevertheless, I just took about an hour to skim Preston's abstract and to research a few questions elsewhere.

It looks like we're unsure if Saddam has smallpox and if everyone involved is willing to use it. It looks like there's some possibility that an attack might not be as effective as predicted. It looks like we're nearing preparations for vaccinating our population if needed, but it looks like there's some danger in doing so .

More than debating the mechanics of smallpox, I'm interested in the mechanics of panic. I see that you were here when a dozen anthrax deaths put a little dent in our economy. What do you think an announcement of anthrax attack by some 22 year old al-Qaeda mid-level grease ball during our Iraq attack would do to our economy? How fast do you think a rumor of symptoms would spread across this and other forums?

I'm not arguing that there's no danger. I'm asking what is the risks and benefits of hyping it?