Originally posted by SpencerH
so?
so?
Its not my fault you dont know the definition of pandemic. I suggest you look it up.
1) (of a disease) affecting persons over a wide geographical area; extensively epidemic.
2) a pandemic disease (isn't that circular?)
Wide geographical area could be granted, but "extensively epidemic"?
Epidemic: adjective
1) (esp. of a disease) attacking or affecting many persons simultaneously in a community or area.
noun
2) a widespread occurrence of a disease
3) a rapid development, spread, or growth of something, esp. something unpleasant
So I guess it depends on what you consider "many persons", "widespread", or "rapid". 4,000 people worldwide in a couple of months -- and outside of China & Toronto, no concentration of more than a couple hundred -- doesn't qualify as "many" or particulary "rapid" to me, in a world of 6 billion. YMMV.
Contrast with 1918, here's just one example: the first case of Spanish influenza hit the state of Georgia on Oct. 1, 1918. The next day, 138 soldiers at Camp Gordon had it. By the 5th, Camp Hancock had 3000 cases, and 52 deaths. That's a pandemic, if you ask me. SARS hasn't come close to that level of threat yet, and God willing, it won't.
the new recommended infection protection measures published by the CDC include those for airborne transmission ie negative pressure rooms and respirators.
Travellers to Toronto have now spread SARS to the Phillipines and possibly to Australia. I would say that travellers to Toronto should be made aware of that.
Please feel free to cite your expertise in the field of infectious disease.
Personally, I think its a lost cause.
Unlike other emerging diseases that cause flash epidemics but havent spread worldwide I think SARS will be around for a long time.
I'm gearing up to run diagnostics in my lab now.
Comment