RE: SARS: update

From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Sat Mar 29 2003 - 11:43:24 MST

  • Next message: Sean Kenny: "Re: [Iraq] More enthusiasm than news in Fox's coverage of war"

    On Sat, 29 Mar 2003, matus wrote:

    > Do we have any idea what the fatality rates are compared with how long one
    > has been infected?

    Probably not. I suspect there are genetic and or other health
    factors (e.g. nutrition) that would be involved, so it is going
    to be hard to tease apart the factors.

    But it seems clear that it knocks down infected people for several
    weeks if not a month or more -- that would be typical time for one
    to develop a robust immune system response. So it is an infection
    with severe physiological consequences until your immune system
    ramps up to deal with it (if it can do so).

    > 55 people dead out of 1500 is scary enough, but if its
    > 55 people dead out of the 55 who have had it the longest, thats really
    > scary.

    Yep, its a 3%+ fatality rate *minimum*.

    Not smallpox -- but certainly an early warning sign we should
    be paying attention to.

    Robert



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 29 2003 - 11:50:31 MST