Well, a month on and no sars deaths. Or, if there are a few undetected, it's not exactly an epidemic.
So, it seems that sars is a non-event for 2004.
To keep us on our toes, chicken flu is on the rampage, but not going person to person.
How come it gets from bird to bird, across oceans, across miles of countryside? Are people moving it with hatchlings or something? Or is it flying with migratory and other wild birds and we only notice it in our domestic species?
It seems worse than sars. 25% mortality! <Of the patients, 36 people, including 14 positive with H5N1strain, died; 43, including one postive with H5N1 strain, had recovered and left hospital; and the remaining 140 patients are still under going treatment in hospitals.-Enditem >
I prefer dealing with AlQaeda. It seems that defence budgets are allocated too much towards fun gadgets which go wooooosshhhhBOOOOMMM. Islamic Jihad is pathetic compared with chicken flu.
25% and that includes young people who, unlike with sars, seem to go down just as easily as old people.
This is grim if it starts spreading person to person while maintaining mortality rates.
Imagine what it would be like if we had both sars and bird flu on the rampage together. I suppose the people vulnerable to one would be vulnerable to the other so maybe the mortality rate wouldn't be much higher. But even 30% of the world's population being dead would be bad for property prices, not to mention CDMA sales.
The mortality rate in hens is high too. It's not just that they get it ready for us.
Mqurice |
