Biological Warfare

Small pox was the only sickness that effect man only. Black Death is than sickness of rodent like animal too. It very rarely effect man unless certain factor are present like flaimin(lack of enought food for people), living in dirty
contin widespead, widespead social unrest or warfarse.
Europe in 1343 was than dirty place with people not washing then self sometime for year at a time. There was not than enought food for serval year in europe , there was wide spead social unrest and constant warfare in europe which help the death death happen. In just 3 year it kill 66% of the population of europe. The people who live thought it where not the same as before their body and mind where change. Black Death can cause mental sickness in the one who live throught plus seeing many people die at once than societry breakdown doesnot help either.

 

That's because it was some lousy shit, not true anthrax. A few words from a scientist who worked on anthrax:

Everyone can see that what was sent to those offices in US could be everything but real anthrax. As I said it was some lousy, perhaps even "home made" derivative. Anthrax particles can travel by air and, to quote the same scientist

 

I'm a Medieval historian, a specialist in the 12th-14th centuries, especially France... and you, good sir, are full of shit.

The Plague is extremely easy to contract in humans. The only known animal, in fact, that does NOT get it easily (at all, even) is the horse, for reasons still unknown.

The no-bathing thing is a MYTH.

The population loss from 1347 (first occurence of Black Death, in Sicily) to 1351 was nowhere near 66%. The actual figure is more like 25-33%, and that's still a wild guess.

The famines that hit Europe were from 1315-1322, a quarter of a century before the Black Death.

There was no "society breakdown" following the plague. Sorry, that's another myth. There were economic affects, of course, but those evened out in fairly short order, too.

I could go on, but I'm not in the mood, and no one else probably gives a rat's ass (pun intended).

 

Do you mean all animals, or just mammals? I was under the impression that it affected mammals only, is that incorrect? I know that most diseases are very specialized and only affect one species, rabies being different because it attacks all mammals, but can diseases jump from say, mammals to reptiles?

 

The (relatively) good news about biological warfare is that the majority of it is bacterial or toxin-based. That means that it's area of effect is just that of it's immediate release. Of these two, only bacterial agents are infectious, and these agents can be countered fairly easily.

Viral infectants are more vicious, but almost impossible to deliver except through direct transportation and release, and even then, in very small quantities.

In the event of any outbreak, immediate quaranteen will ensue anyway, and the shutting down of most of the area's transport network, so the chance of a pandemic (worldwide infection), or even an epidemic (massive area infection) are very small.

It still scares me though....

 

Snowmane - you're right. I should have said mammals. Oops.

Ferret - the quarantine idea sounds neat, but...

If a biological attack happened, it wouldn't likely be done with a bomb or anything similarly obvious. Rather, no one would probably know they were even infected right away. And in the <insert incubation period here> time it takes for a disease to manifest, how many people would travel? And how many people would they subsequently, unknowingly infect? How do you begin to quarantine if, say 100 people are infected at a busy airport or subway terminal? By the time the CDC (or similar agency) determined "Ground Zero" and figured out who was there at the time, those people would be everywhere, cheerfully spreading whatever misery they had gotten, probably not even connecting their <insert symptom here> with their business trip (or whatever) a week or two before... I think, if you give it a little thought, you'll see the possible bitch of a job it could be to handle such a thing. I'm not saying it's not possible, but simply that the potential for disaster on a massive scale does indeed exist.

 

I don't have a rat anywhere near me to deliver its ass to you so I will only state that it's a very interesting read.

Shut down New York (for example)? And even before symptoms are visible? Hardly possible dare I say.

 

At least they're not turning to Resident Evil for Bio Warfare ideas!

 

nbrosz, that's the stupidest and most irrelevant picture and comment I've seen all day. Hell, all week.

Luchaire, just what do you do as a Medieval historian, apart from impressing us all with your knowledge of the 12th-14th centuries, particularly in France?

As for the rest of the thread, well, like I said earlier, not much you can do about it. I think it likely that the government would realise that some sort of biological attack had taken place on it's citizens in a crowded area - someone is bound to notice something - and the people there and those they'd come into contact with would probably be rounded up pretty quickly I'd say.

 

It's called a JOKE. Ever heard of it? Heck, I thought even a sour old pickle like you could take one.

 

Joke or not, it was completely irrelevant. If you want laughs, find a picture that has something to do with the topic.

 

If you have ever played Resident Evil, you will know the whole game is about creatures created due to a huge biological warfare research project. That guy on that picture is just the first stage of the biological weapon's work. It is pleanty relevant.

 

I'm not sure whether to take that as written or as a mound of sarcasm, but if it's a real question.... When I finally get my PhD in Medieval Studies I hope to teach it at a major university.

 

No offence, but I hope you aren't MY teacher!!
That was just a joke - I'm actually going to collage for computer science when I am old enough.

 

Ha - as if you'd ever get into a university.

Collage... doesn't that involve cut-up newspapers? 0

 

Even computer science majors are required to have SOME history classes :evil:

 

Whoa! Chill there! I was just kidding. I probably won't go to a university if I don't have to.

Etalis: With that much support, no wonder most Americans dont make it through high school!

 

MOST americans? Come on now - that's a serious twisting of the facts. Yes, there is a dropout problem, but to say MOST is just plain wrong and I take serious exception to it. :evil:

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/droppub_2001/

 

Not to derail the thread or anything, but

Thank you Ferret. You echoed me da's thoughts exactly. (Again, not that they are right and undebatable, but I do agree with them.) Also, thank you for being the only one not to totally scare the shit outta me. Luchaire's posts had me contemplating putting a bullet in my head, just to get it over with.

 

Oh, I meant it as written. I just wondered what you were going to do with your degree. For intellectual rewards, I sure as hell wouldn't have done a Bachelor of IT . Actually, come to think of it, what else could you do with your history degree? I mean, not everyone in your class could become lecturers in it could they?

Yeah - the history of computers. Hahahahaha.

See, nbrosz, that was a joke. And it was corny. Yours was just plain stupid. Everyone knows about Resident Evil, but your comment was just really stupid.

Also, you would do well to recognise the fact that despite what all the job indicators say, shitloads of IT people are being laid off worldwide. I can't go a week here without reading how some major employer just axed 130 IT dudes. I read figures there are over 8000 unemployed men and women with IT degrees in Australia alone. Similar sorts of figures worldwide as well - cheap IT labour is undercutting everyone. Half our call centres are (sometimes apparently) based in India for fuck's sake!

I'm can't trust the civilian employee market. Chances are excellent that when I finish my degree, I'm off to join the Army.