Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : SARS and Avian Flu -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Biomaven who wrote (736)	5/6/2003 10:12:43 PM
From: Condor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4232

Thank you, that explanation I understand.

To: Biomaven who wrote (736)	5/8/2003 3:39:44 PM
From: SBHX	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4232

There were two warnings from WHO. The first one was a low-key one about ARS. The hospital in Toronto that was labelled "SARS central" by the workers there apparently did have the ARS warning before the first sars patient showed up. However, after the 2nd WHO warning, the very strongly worded one about SARS (rename, the Severe added for emphasis)was broadcast worldwide, the cat was already out of the bag. For Toronto, the chance to nip it in the bud was if the 1st WHO warning was taken seriously by everyone in the chain, but in restrospect, that would have been a herculean effort that is likely impossible to ask for. That won't stop nitpickers from suggesting someone screwed up though. I'm actually curious about why the very high sars transmission rate from the first patient seem to be forgotten today. Now, the papers in Toronto are talking West Nile, a disease that is possibly more dangerous than SARS and has killed and crippled more people every year in the NA continent than SARS. From the discussions in the media, you'd think someone somewhere with a birdbath would be lynched by his neighbours soon.