I wonder sometimes; we know that the speed of travel and the easy accessibility of produce among the richer nations will supposedly lead to us being more vulnerable to infection. Does it not then seem reasonable that we have already had our immune systems given a real boost simply by virtue of the fact that we *are* in contact with so many more people and all the little infections?
We take life for granted; our infant mortality rates are very low, our life expectancy is very high; we *know* with some certainty that our children will grow to adulthood.
However, we're not stupid; Canada stopped SARS in it's tracks once it knew what it was dealing with, and we are all aware now.
If a real flu comes I know we cannot expect 100% survival rates, but I seriously doubt that 50% mortality will result.
Some clear guidelines of how infection spreads, how to contain it, how to nurse the affected properly, how to deal effectively with those who don't survive as well as those who do, will I assume be forthcoming if the need arises.
Most folk in the west have radio, tv, or internet contact with mainstream society; information is easily spread. Unfortunately so is scaremongering.
If this threat scares us, imagine how badly those less fortunate must feel?
It was the young and fit who were most vulnerable last time, and the world was at war. Maybe it's time to stop the conflicts and concentrate on the common enemies, disease, hunger, poverty.
Toddy