Slashdot Mirror


Webcams to Enforce Singapore Quarantine

magarity writes "Singapore has hired a private security firm to install internet connected webcams in homes of persons quarantined for SARS in order to watch them to see if they go out. They are considering adding electronic wristbands as well. 9 of the 490 persons have broken the quarantine despite a fine of 10,000 singapore dollars ($5,621US). Just over 100 people worldwide have died from SARS so far."

420 comments

  1. Captain Tripps... by PinchDuck · · Score: 2, Funny

    "It was just the cold!"

    Do you dream of the dark man, too?

    1. Re:Captain Tripps... by Kredal · · Score: 2, Informative

      This isn't off topic.. mods on crack. (:

      Captain Tripps is what they called the killer disease in The Stand... and the Dark Man, aka Randall Flagg, is the bad guy in the book.

      --
      Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
    2. Re:Captain Tripps... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and SARS has a mortality rate of about 4% (mostly affecting the sick or elderly), almost the same as measles.

      But wait, the media needs some good stuff to cover now that we're finishing up the fun stuff in Iraq (now just hard stuff - the boring diplomacy).

    3. Re:Captain Tripps... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      measles has a 0.2% mortality rate.

      thanks for playing.

    4. Re:Captain Tripps... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish the 'Steven King is dead' troll was not just trolling. I hope Steven King succumbs to SARS, and then his body falls out of an airplane and crushes your fat, ugly head.

    5. Re:Captain Tripps... by Julian+Plamann · · Score: 1

      NADINE NADINE
      oh how I love to love NADINE

    6. Re:Captain Tripps... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That rate is only an estimate based on the like 3000 cases and is hardly considered entirely accurate. Of course, the mortality rate seems small if it is contained but if it spreads in a city like New York with 8 million people you could see deaths in the 5 and 6 digits easily.

  2. 1984... by zm · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Big brother? Where?

    --
    Sig ?
    1. Re:1984... by Zerocool3001 · · Score: 1

      Can you say "Brave New World"

      --
      Science will save us. The question is, will it destroy us first?
    2. Re:1984... by dr_eaerth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you'll read the article, you'll see that 1984 parallels don't really work.

      Those quarantined "will be called at random intervals daily and requested to turn on the camera and present themselves in front of the camera to show their presence," the ministry said.

      The cameras stay off until the person turns it on. It's no more intrusive than someone knocking on your door and requesting to see that you're there (which is intrusive, but not frightingly so). Since the camera is under the control of the person under quarantine, this is more similar to being a video phone than 1984-type constant surveillance.

      Just involving technology doesn't make something dystopian; how technology is used does. (The tracking wrist band for lawbreakers, something we do in the USA for people under house arrest, is a bit greyer.)

  3. The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by purduephotog · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... and in reality is worn about the neck. It comes with a detonatable charge to sever the individual's neck should they attempt to go further than the 8' extension cord allows. Please hope they find an outlet in the bathroom

    Now, all dilbert joking aside, this is one disease that scares me... without a common vector identified.... we might all be in for it.

    1. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A virus with a mortality rate of just 4%? Come on... that's not that far above a normal influenza (a very common cause of death among the elderly). For once, this is one disease I have no fear of at all... wake me up when the Spanish Flu returns, or when one of the antibiotic resistant Tubercolosis strains that are killing off half of the third world suddenly becomes twice as virulent as normal.

    2. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by jgerman · · Score: 1

      Hell that's not a bad idea as far as I'm concerned. These people are under quarrantine for a reason. I see no problem with shooting them if they refuse to comply. We know that people who have it can spread it. These 9 people are putting the lives of too many at risk.

      --
      I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    3. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by jdiggans · · Score: 1, Informative

      And the 4% mortality rate is probably inflated from the true mortality rate given modern medicine: the majority of the deaths occurred in the rural Chinese province from which the bug first emerged. For the life of me I can't figure out why everyone worldwide is so concerned about SARS.

      That said, the CDC is doing a tremendous job of keeping the public informed about the state of the art where SARS is concerned.
      -j

    4. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by jo.cool · · Score: 1

      Nah, you don't get shot....

      just caned!

    5. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      They did identify a common vector. Cockroaches.

    6. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by Blaine+Hilton · · Score: 1

      That may be a bit extreme. However the news seems to be getting worse as they find out more about it. Perhaps they need something more like a lockdown facility, but that would be like jailing everybody. It's a lose/lose situation until this thing is all figured out.

    7. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by linzeal · · Score: 1

      Perhaps making anyone who violates the quarrantine pay for anyone they infect?

    8. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      "Perhaps making anyone who violates the quarrantine pay for anyone they infect?"

      So your life is worth less than the net worth of the average resident of Singapore? I think you'd better check on the economic situation there before you expect them to "pay".

      And if they could pay, what amount of money would that be? If someone shows up at your door and offers you a check for that amount, then you're ok with them infecting you with SARS?

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    9. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by JebusIsLord · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but the flu is already beyond containment. Tell me, if we had a reasonable chance of eliminating the flu through a few hundred quarantines for a few weeks, wouldn't you agree it was worth it? What about the common cold? I certainly would think thats a pretty good trade-off.

      --
      Jeremy
    10. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by the+Atomic+Rabbit · · Score: 4, Informative
      And the 4% mortality rate is probably inflated from the true mortality rate given modern medicine: the majority of the deaths occurred in the rural Chinese province from which the bug first emerged.

      Nope. Figures for infection (death) from the latest BBC story on SARS:

      Hong Kong 970 (27) 2.8%
      Singapore 118 (9) 7.6%
      Canada 91 (10) 11.0%

      These three countries have medical facilities on par with those in the United States. The numbers are too small to arrive at a precise mortality rate, but your hypothesis is clearly wrong.

    11. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The CDC and WHO are doing a poor job.

      I watched a congressional hearing last night where the CDC's Chief Epidemiologist did a rather pathetic song and dance. What the fuck have we been paying those guys for?

      Further, The NYTimes reports that Canada has around 250 cases. Yet the WHO website lists around 94. The number of deaths in Canada corresponds to the 250 cases number, suggesting that the WHO is wrong..

    12. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by Wraithlyn · · Score: 1

      It's highly contagious and airborne, much like the common cold. (In fact probably from the same family)

      Nobody has managed to ever stop the common cold.

      If SARS becomes widespread in the general population, it could kill tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions.

      Right now it looks like it is continuing to spread despite best efforts.. you think we know about every single infected person? No way. There are almost certainly infected carriers who are spreading it unknowingly right now, even though they haven't developed any symptoms yet.

      --
      "Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
    13. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 2, Informative
      "They did identify a common vector. Coclroaches"

      The cockroaches thing has no basis in scientific fact. (I am living in Toronto, a SARS hotspot, so the news keeps us VERY up to date on such things.)

    14. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by jdiggans · · Score: 2, Informative

      And of those numbers what percentage were immunocompromised in some way (elderly, etc.)? What percentage were impoverished? The BBC's summary counts tell us little about the true mortality rate given medical care and a healthy immune system.

      Frankly I'm not running for my surgical mask just yet.
      -j

    15. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by jdiggans · · Score: 1

      The problem with stopping the common cold is not that the cold is a single virus that's impossible to vaccinnate against. It's a collection of more than 200 viruses (so far) that all cause similiar symptoms. If SARS is indeed a single virus from the coronavirus family it should be possible to vaccinate against it.

      This is certainly a bug about which to be concerned; my confusion stems from the world-wide response to a condition that has yet to affect more than 3,000 people worldwide. It just seems like overkill.
      -j

    16. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by jdiggans · · Score: 1

      Latest WHO statistics.

      The global mortality rate is sitting at 0.9%. A poster in this thread intimated that China has yet to release data on their case/death counts but the WHO report linked above indeed has this data (though perhaps in error).
      -j

    17. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by mythr · · Score: 1

      Five million dollars is my price, and yes, go ahead. With SARS's apparent 5% kill rate (Oh no!) I'd have a 95% chance to survive, and a 100% chance that I'd enjoy the rest of my life.

    18. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by crapulent · · Score: 1

      Heh, that kind of reminds me of that crappy Rutger Hauer movie where he played a prisoner at a facility where everyone wore a neck collar thing that was packed with explosives and set to go off if they went past the perimeter. Hilarity ensues...

    19. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "These 9 people are putting the lives of too many at risk".

      Just like the American Government ... do they wear a wrist band?!
      (except the Fact, that the Amercian Government don't mess with risks. ;-))

    20. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh,

      1) The movie's called Fortress

      2) It's a Christopher Lambert (aka Highlander) movie, not Rutger Hauer

    21. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also see: Running Man.

    22. Re:The wrist band has an 8' extension cord... by crapulent · · Score: 1

      No, it was a Rutger Hauer movie. You may be thinking of Fortress, but I wasn't.

  4. x10 camera! by Limburgher · · Score: 4, Funny
    Mount inside doctors office! Spy on babysitter, kids, neighbors! Stops SARS!

    Failing that, meet in in Boulder. Mother Abigail said that The Dark Man is gathering his own on the other side of the mountains. . .

    --

    You are not the customer.

    1. Re:x10 camera! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're so cute when you're angry

    2. Re:x10 camera! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't normally respond to flamebait, but you didn't notice what his comment was modded UP to.

      Go find a copy of Stephen King's "The Stand," and you MIGHT see why the rest of us find it damned funny, little boy!

    3. Re:x10 camera! by unicron · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      You're so hard, posting as an AC. It's just karma dude, don't cry. Log in you cowardly bitch.

      Oh, and someone that uses that many homophobic slurs..is gay. Sorry bro, but you just seem like you have some issues with coming to grips with what you are. And don't worry about telling your dad..he's gay too.

      --
      Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
  5. Ewww by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The SARS online viewing network. Tap into these cams to see people dying of the latest virulent scourge the planet has to offer.

    Join now for a low fee of only $1600 Singapore dollars (US$14.95).

  6. selfish people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The people who break quarantine are selfish. They can't be bothered to prevent a deadly disease from spreading, they've got to get out and go see a movie. Screw everyone else.

    Sort of like how SUV drivers kill drivers of smaller cars with their behemoth vehicles.

  7. Click here! by dr_dank · · Score: 4, Funny

    The hottest sluts with mysterious respiratory diseases are waiting to chat with YOU!

    --
    Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
  8. What's the big deal? by Telastyn · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Why are we quarantining people over something with a 4% mortality rate? [thanks google]

    We don't put electronic trackers on people with measles. Yet more government knee-jerk reactions....

    1. Re:What's the big deal? by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      hey dickhead - if it truly has a 4% mortality rate, that will kill 1/25 people.

      thats at least one student in a highschool class.

      at least one person in your extended family.

      it does need to be quarantined, or we are all fscked.

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    2. Re:What's the big deal? by tetrad · · Score: 1
      You don't think 4% is a little high for something that is apparently as transmissible as the common cold?

      What's the mortality rate for measles, anyway?

    3. Re:What's the big deal? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Why are we quarantining people over something with a 4% mortality rate?

      Because it's Big! and Scary! and it has a catchy name!

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    4. Re:What's the big deal? by petronivs · · Score: 1

      Because it's new.

      Oh yeah, also because the voices in that shiny box tell me to care about it. The voices know everything

      --
      This is the real signature
      (Beats those shadows on the cave wall, don't it?)
    5. Re:What's the big deal? by Bloodshot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's only 4% because people are acting quickly to try and stop it from spreading. I live and work around Toronto (which is one of the places where SARS has shown up with a vengence in Canada), and believe me, it's a big freakin' deal. I had to go the doctor for treatment of strep throat and there was a form I had to fill out about SARS and every medical person there had a filter mask on and wouldn't go NEAR you until they determined you weren't a SARS risk.

      Like some others have said, how would YOU feel if someone you knew was one of those 4%. I think your knee would jerk pretty high.

    6. Re:What's the big deal? by DukeofURL · · Score: 0

      Damn those pesky gay martians.

    7. Re:What's the big deal? by cjpez · · Score: 1

      Correction: One person out of twenty-five will be fscked.

    8. Re:What's the big deal? by Azghoul · · Score: 1

      I had the exact same thought. However, I think it has more to do with the fact that it's brand new, people don't know (or didn't, I don't know the current state) what it is, and it has killed a few people.

      I think the excitement will die down in a little while... I don't know that it's "government" knee-jerk as much as it is human fear of the unknown.

    9. Re:What's the big deal? by Telastyn · · Score: 1

      Ahem. So what?

      Here's where I'm supposed to insert the twenty dozen things with a more common mortality rate that our society totally accepts, and even promotes, such as smoking and cars.

      Shit happens. People are unlucky. Why must governments insist on trying to stop the inevitable?

    10. Re:What's the big deal? by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Why are we quarantining people over something with a 4% mortality rate?

      The 4% mortality rate is before all of the hospitals are full and before the world's supply of available respirators is exhausted. If 1,000,000 people in one country catch this, things could be different.

      I'm just hoping that this virus mellows out a little bit as it goes through multiple generations in humans, as some viruses have been known to do. That might be the only way it will slow down.

    11. Re:What's the big deal? by stratjakt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      4% is a damn high mortality rate, especially considering we don't know how it's spread. And it could easily climb. Did you look up the remission/cure rate too? AFAIK, noone has 'got over' SARS.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    12. Re:What's the big deal? by Azghoul · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're pretty silly to be calling someone else names when you don't understand the statistics of disease.

      What the parent poster hinted at, and you completely missed, is that measles, among a number of other diseases, have higher mortality rates than just 4%.

      Google for it (something the parent poster also mentioned).

    13. Re:What's the big deal? by Telastyn · · Score: 1

      Wait... prevention of infection won't change the mortality rate. I can understand where vigilace to diagnose early would help in treatment, and thus mortality rates, but shouldn't health professionals be vigilant for other diseases as well?

    14. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe if they can keep if from spreading (by quarantine) they can keep 4% of the worlds people from dying. Are you so anti-government that you want to see 4% of the people you know die? Don't answer that. I can get that stuff from Rush if I need to.

    15. Re:What's the big deal? by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

      its also worth noting that measles has had a succesful vaccine for years.

      SARS does not. it is extremely contagious, and the proper course of action is a quarantine.

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    16. Re:What's the big deal? by whm · · Score: 4, Informative

      Perhaps because Measles has a mortality rate of only about 0.2%? CDC Reference. There is also a vaccine for measles (which I'm sure contributes to the mortality rate listed on that page)

      With SARS we're also dealing with something we don't entirely understand yet. I'm personally impressed with how serious it's being treated. If anything, it helps us practice in case of a more significant situation.

      Better safe than sorry, you know?

    17. Re:What's the big deal? by Telastyn · · Score: 1

      Indeed, perhaps my reference to government was... improper. [it's difficult to call one's own species, and by extension yourself, stupid]

    18. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      > Why are we quarantining people over something with a 4% mortality rate?

      Well, because 4% mortality rate is quite high. If a billion people got SARS worldwide, that would mean 40 million deaths. If a similar proportion of the U.S. population caught the disease (about 50 million people), one could expect one million deaths in the States alone. Not to mention the huge costs of hospitalizing large numbers of people.

      In addition, in case of a full-blown epidemic the mortality rate might and probably would be higher, because the health care systems of many countries (especially the poor ones) could get badly overloaded.

    19. Re:What's the big deal? by Telastyn · · Score: 1

      That's debatable. SARS is an extension of the common cold. It's likely [or if not likely at least very plausible] that a similar thing occured when the common cold developed. A number of humans died until we developed enough to make the common cold... common. Our reliance on medicines and sterile environments are only going to make us more susceptable to future diseases.

    20. Re:What's the big deal? by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

      We have a vaccien for measles.

    21. Re:What's the big deal? by rodrigo_braz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The mortality rate of driving a car is 4%?!? Maybe, maybe in a lifetime of driving, but even in that case 4% sounds too much. As for smoking, again in a lifetime and you can choose not to smoke. SARS spreads and kills much quicker than that. If it is let loose, without a cure, it will kill a LOT more than 4% of the population.

    22. Re:What's the big deal? by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      It's only 4% because people are acting quickly to try and stop it from spreading.

      What bunk! It's people like you who raise the fear factor for this disease. If we limit the disease to 25 people, and one dies, well that's 4%. If 25,000 get it, and 1,000 die, what do you know, it's still 4%. Limiting the spread of the disease reduces the absolute number of deaths, not the percentage mortality, which is still not a bad thing. What I'm curious about is if better treatment facilities reduces the mortality rate. That's far more important to me.

      Like some others have said, how would YOU feel if someone you knew was one of those 4%. I think your knee would jerk pretty high.

      My knee would jerk pretty high, and especially given the unknown vector, I would be limiting my contact with other people. If thery're quarantining people, and it's still spreading, that indicates that we don't know enough for quarantining the sick to be 100% effective. Not being sick myself (probably), I'd reduce my exposure risk if I was worried about getting it.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    23. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, you have a point. It would be beneficial to the future well-being of the human race to allow such an epidemic to spread unchecked. It would also greatly benefit mankind if we were to euthanize individuals afflicted with genetic disorders. Shall we enact these plans, or would that be going to far?

    24. Re:What's the big deal? by TheFlyingGoat · · Score: 1

      Actually, SARS is linked more closely with chlamydia than the common cold. They've found traces of chlamydia in the lungs of many of the people who have died in China.

      --
      You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
    25. Re:What's the big deal? by akmed · · Score: 2, Informative
      Did you bother checking out that 4% number you mention? I did. It's crap. http://www.cdc.gov/travel/diseases/measles.htm

      2 deaths per thousand cases does not make 4%. It makes 0.2%. That's a very different number. You're pretty silly to be correcting someone when you're willing to take one person's blind assertion over another's without any validation.

    26. Re:What's the big deal? by Telastyn · · Score: 1

      No, [assuming the mortality rates stay constant, which is false] 4% is about right.

      Sorry, the car and smoking reference were to 1 in 25 people I know. I've known far more than 1 in 25 people that died to liver cancer, lung cancer, aids, car accidents, crime a piece...

    27. Re:What's the big deal? by reinard · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're completely missing the point. Measels are understood, can be treated and even vaccinated against. They don't spread easily. This desease has infected tons of hospital staff and even killed WHO employees. These are people that are used to dealing with sick people, and still they are getting sick. That's a problem. It's not just a matter of the mortality rate, but also how infectious it is. And this one seems to be quite easily transmitted. If a single person with SARS goes in supermarket and sneezes nicely, infects 10 people, who infect 100 people and so on, then that one ass that broke the quarantine, could literally kill thousands by their (just like your) ignorance. Sure people die in much larger numbers of other deseases, but until we understand this virus or whatever it is better, this is exactly what should happen. The WHO and the CDC are doing a great job trying to tame this one.

      --
      Reinard
    28. Re:What's the big deal? by Bendy+Chief · · Score: 1

      Funny, given that chlamydia is bacterial, and SARS is viral. Well, you're the expert.

    29. Re:What's the big deal? by Telastyn · · Score: 1

      If it is that important [and I'm not going to argue that it is or is not, time will tell] then there should be a proper quarantine, not some half assed webcam solution.

    30. Re:What's the big deal? by TheFlyingGoat · · Score: 2

      Nobody's saying that doctors should ignore other diseases. They're just saying that SARS is a serious deal, and that we should focus on trying to stop it.

      4% mortality rate may not seem that high, but consider this... how many times have you had a cold in your life? Knowing that SARS is transmitted as easily as the common cold, how does that 4% mortality rate seem now? Think of it this way... there's very little chance that you'd live long enough to have 20 colds.

      --
      You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
    31. Re:What's the big deal? by theophilus00 · · Score: 1

      Four percent of five billion is two hundred million. 'Nuff said.

    32. Re:What's the big deal? by TheFlyingGoat · · Score: 1

      Sorry.. I should have said that SARS seems to be a coronavirus (like the common cold) along with some other agent, probably Chlamydia. How about a link?

      --
      You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
    33. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its important to remember, when dealing with statistical causes of death and mortality, that the current mortality rate for being human is right at 100%.

      Nobody gets out of here alive.

    34. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's only hard to admit you're wrong if you're an arrogant asshole.

    35. Re:What's the big deal? by reinard · · Score: 1
      Although your reply is somewhat off-topic to what this thread was about, the webcam solution IS an enhancement of a normal quarantine - an additional way to ensure people are sticking to it. The only other way is really to put these people in jail or prision, neither of which are really designed to hold potentially highly infectious people in large quantities, aside from the enormous cost factor.

      Secondly until we know what's going on it definitely is that important. The only other option could result in: "Oops, a million people died, maybe we should have taken this more seriously." And .. obviously that's what the WHO is trying to prevent.

      --
      Reinard
    36. Re:What's the big deal? by SourceHammer · · Score: 1

      I graphed the World Health Organization data. At 4% mortality expect 1800 deaths the first year. Nothing to panic over.

      WHO SARs data

      --



      Open source development is my way of competing with the low-cost programmers in India...
    37. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then comes round two when everyone gets infected again, say NEXT YEAR, and we lose another 4%. Perhaps you survive the first round of infection, does that mean you're safe for life?

    38. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in the Toronto area also and people are making it to be a bigger deal than it really is. Sure it'll kill some people, but so will the common cold. Out of the people who died most of them were older and had other problems that they could've died from without help from SARS.

    39. Re:What's the big deal? by fishbowl · · Score: 1
      4% mortality rate means that 4% of those who developed the disease have died. Different people probably have different natural immunities.

      Maybe a plague that can reduce an overpopulation is nature's idea of a practical solution...

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    40. Re:What's the big deal? by betis70 · · Score: 1

      >>Nothing to panic over.

      Unless you have family that lives in Singapore (like I do) and have someone in quarantine right now there because she went to China during the time of the outbreak.

      --
      I forget...are we at war with Eurasia or East Asia?
    41. Re:What's the big deal? by Rudy+Rodarte · · Score: 1

      Lets say 7,000,000,000 people on earth. If everyone got SARS, 280,000,000 would die(thats if everyone got it.)

      If 1% of the population got it, thats 2,800,000 deaths. Not good times...

      Unless you are the pharmacutical company that invented this to wipe out the world and start a new earth, while you hold the only antidotes!

    42. Re:What's the big deal? by uberdave · · Score: 1

      Nice try. Of all of the people ever born, half of them are still alive.

    43. Re:What's the big deal? by Naikrovek · · Score: 1

      of all the people ever born, 1/5 are still alive. 30 billion people have been born, and 6 are still around.

    44. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That really is scary isn't it. This explosive population growth is really disgusting.

    45. Re:What's the big deal? by t0ny · · Score: 1

      If we ignore SARS, maybe it will just go away, right?

      --

      Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

    46. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      how does that 4% mortality rate seem now? Think of it this way... there's very little chance that you'd live long enough to have 20 colds


      Your chance of surviving 20 tries at 96% success rate is .96^20 = 44.2%. This isn't good, but it is much more than very little chance. Also, how often do later infections kill when the first did not?

    47. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I graphed the World Health Organization data. At 4% mortality expect 1800 deaths the first year. Nothing to panic over.


      And the second year?

    48. Re:What's the big deal? by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      This 4% mortality rate has nothing to do whether it spread or not. The total number of cases do.

    49. Re:What's the big deal? by Thing+1 · · Score: 1
      Maybe a plague that can reduce an overpopulation is nature's idea of a practical solution...

      This is actually very true. I remember reading many years ago that deer which overpopulate an island will develop an immune-system disease which wipes out a large portion of their population, prior to running out of food.

      (I just did a Google search for it and couldn't find anything so I'm not sure how valid this idea is, but I do remember reading about it.)

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    50. Re:What's the big deal? by maliabu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      i thought "About four per cent of patients with SARS die."

      so it doesn't kill 1 in 25 people. it kills 1 in 25 SARS-infected people.

      with estimated 6,302,309,691 population at the moment, your chance of catching it is 0.00476% (currently around 3000 people infected)

      so your chance of dying of SARS should be 0.00017%

      probably one in a small town will die, or one extended family member in my whole family generations (dated back to 2000BC) will also die.

    51. Re:What's the big deal? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      We don't know.

      A virus can either strengthen you against subsequent attacks, weaken you, or leave you unchanged. It can also go dormant and wait for your immune system to weaken (say when you've been working for two weeks on a rush project).

      We don't know the modes of this one. So people worry.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    52. Re:What's the big deal? by Herkum01 · · Score: 1

      Uhm, your math is slightly off as well as your statement. It is 1 in 25 people who have reported HAD the disease that have died. My your numbers 250,000 people would be dead in Hong Kong. Also the numbers don't include people who get infected but DO NOT GET SICK! Noone really knows how many people are carrying the disease but are not affected by it. You have have 100,000 who are carriers but have no symptoms! You don't think that people who are around other people with the flu did not get any germs do you? They just were not affected at all.

      This is all along the same path of the West Nile virus, the previous PLAGUE that was roving through the US. It was little worse than the common cold and killed people who were older and already had health problems. It did not stop local government from scare-mongering, asking for millions so that they could spray every inch of their counties with pesticide even though noone in their district had even contracted the disease.

      It is like that Simpsons episode where a bear gets spotted in town. So they organized dedicated Bear Patrols to keep the town safe from roving bears.

    53. Re:What's the big deal? by bigsteve@dstc · · Score: 1
      Even 2 deaths in 1000 sounds a lot more than I thought. The page you found says this:
      The disease can be severe, with bronchopneumonia or brain inflammation leading to death in about 2 of every 1,000 cases.
      This could be read as 2 in 1000 deaths for measles, OR 2 in 1000 deaths for measles with complications.
    54. Re:What's the big deal? by kartiknarayan · · Score: 1

      Incorrect - if 25,000 get it, there's much more chance that not all of those 25,000 are going to get the treatment they need. The treatment that has kept the mortality rate to 4%.

      Remember that the number of cases in most affected countries is still under 200 - a number that's much more easily manageable under the public health system than 25,000.

      If the mortality rate now goes up to 10% because they haven't got the required treatment, that's 2,500 people. Or worse.

      That puts a different perspective on things.

    55. Re:What's the big deal? by ttimothy · · Score: 1

      I'll tell you what the problem is. Ordinary flu kills the old and infirm. This one has killed young and healthy people. A few doctors and nurses have died treating others. It's not just the mortality rate. It's who has succumbed to it.

    56. Re:What's the big deal? by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Hence my curiosity about whether treatment has reduced the mortality rate. For instance, it doesn't have much affect on the common cold, but it does for ebola. Having read more, if they have to use respirators, then I'd guess it does, and the question becomes, "how much"?

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
  9. War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Singapore has always been at war with Eurasia!
    Singapore has always been at war with East Asia!
    Singapore has always been at war with Oceania!

    1. Re:War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on, there has to be some alliance there...

  10. Waah, my rights! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fine, let's not monitor people who have a serious contagion that we presently have no real ability to fight.

    Let's the shoot the motherfuckers who are vile enough to endager the safety of everyone around them by not staying in quarentine.

    1. Re:Waah, my rights! by Accord+MT · · Score: 1


      Yea? Wait until you're "quarantined" and monitored, with a "disease" that has a 4% fatality rate.

      This so-called "disease" is just a government tracking program designed to weed out undesirables and set them up with forced monitoring "for the health of the people". We're seeing the test phase. Wait until Ashcroft and corp deploy this "virus" to their target customers....

    2. Re:Waah, my rights! by thejot · · Score: 1

      wow, can someone say paranoid?

    3. Re:Waah, my rights! by FroMan · · Score: 1

      You have a hard time getting out of bed in the morning, huh?

      Its a pretty scarey, big, bad world out there isn't it?

      Check these guys out for a nice tinfoil hat.

      --
      Norris/Palin 2012
      Fact: We deserve leaders who can kick your ass and field dress your carcass.
    4. Re:Waah, my rights! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have anyone in your family in quarantine? I do and you are full of shit.

      This is fucking serious.

  11. reality TV? by AbdullahHaydar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So, who wants to take bets on how soon people will hack into these government quarantine webcams and then blackmail people to keep their private lives from being publicly displayed?

    --


    Suicide Booth: You are now dead! Thank you for using Stop and Drop, America's favorite since 2008.
    1. Re:reality TV? by Psiren · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because its really difficult to put something over the lens, or turn it off, right? Geez...

    2. Re:reality TV? by catbutt · · Score: 1

      Well if they cover the lens the authorities will show up quickly (and they'll probably get a fine). Presumably it is not optional.

      Also, if someone blackmails you, I'd imagine that it would be with video that they recorded, not the live video feed. So by that time covering the lens is a little late.

      (not that i think its likely to be done...i think it would be easier to just hide a camera)

    3. Re:reality TV? by PhatKat · · Score: 1

      Who would really want to watch someone sitting around coughing in bed all day watching tv? This sounds like the least sexy reality tv ever.

  12. urls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    any url's

  13. This is Singapore... by sco08y · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Before you start on about 1984, this is happening in Singapore, not the US.

    And to head off the inevitable Ashcroft / Patriot Act recriminations, please offer actual *proof* of claims that our civil liberties are being eroded.

    1. Re:This is Singapore... by mgs1000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't forget that even though Singapore is wealty, it is still not a democracy.

    2. Re:This is Singapore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/04/09/padilla.ruling/

    3. Re:This is Singapore... by Photon01 · · Score: 1

      What has it not being the US got to do with anything ... 1984 was set in london

    4. Re:This is Singapore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CRIMETHINK!!!

    5. Re:This is Singapore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Untrue. Singapore is a democracy. It's a parliamentary republic with a president elected to a 6 year team (last election was August 1999, next to be held in August 2005).

      However, Singapore does not have an equivalent to the US Bill of Rights. Civil liberties are not guaranteed. Reduced civil rights is something that their society (as a whole) accepts in exchange for (what they regard as) a peaceful and orderly country.

    6. Re:This is Singapore... by thelexx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Since you brought it up and apparently missed yesterday's thread with FIFTEEN HUNDRED FSCKING MESSAGES on why Ashcroft/Patriot are bad, here's my favorite:

      Re:Not A Joke (Score:5, Informative)
      by bricriu (184334) on Wednesday April 09, @03:39PM (#5695030)
      (http://slashdot.org/)
      You can be detained, without being charged, indefinitely, having been investigated under a sealed warrant, an unsigned warrant, or no warrant at all, and then be denied access to a lawyer.

      And that is un-American. Period.

      --
      "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
    7. Re:This is Singapore... by robbo · · Score: 1

      And you don't think that people exposed to SARS in the US are being quarantined? You don't think US public health officials would seek legal action against someone who knowingly violated their quarantine. Damm right they would, and they should. This isn't a question of civil liberties, this is a question of public health.

      While you were busy watching GulfWar II on CNN, SARS was spreading around the globe. The fact that it hasn't spread into the general population in the states is because of the CDC's containment strategy, which is to quarantine everyone who comes into contact with it. Next to the war, though, it's not very exciting news..

      --
      So long, and thanks for all the Phish
    8. Re:This is Singapore... by M.C.+Hampster · · Score: 1

      Your favorite huh?

      Are you quite sure that "bricriu" is a lawyer? Are you quite sure he has actually read the law? Did he provide a citation or proof of his statement? Here, maybe I should try something to change your mind:

      Without the Patriot Act, 45% of people in the U.S. will die by 2010.

      There, did you believe that? Have I changed your mind by making a completely unsubstantiated statement?

      --
      Forget the whales - save the babies.
    9. Re:This is Singapore... by Zoop · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Singapore is to authoritarianism as Sweden is to Socialism. It makes it look very nice and attractive and proves that it's a viable way to run a country. Singapore is Ashcroftism taken to a whole new level. Before you dismiss it, you have to deal with Singapore.

      That being said, there's much to criticize in either example, and of course just because one place gets it right; a) doesn't mean it will work everywhere, and b) doesn't mean you would personally want that offal where you live.

      NB, I am not saying that Sweden and Singapore are completely comperable, just that they are the standout "see, it's not so bad" exemplars of their respective political philosophies. Although both are well-kempt and relatively free of gum on the sidewalks. And both have controls on the content of movies and television. And both allow gun-running if you're rich en--ok, I'll stop.

    10. Re:This is Singapore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do some research on the Denver, CO police department and their seriously questionable spying activities. This started _prior_ to 9/11!

      I don't know about you but I sure as hell don't see _any_ reason to give law enforcement _more_ power. They've already proven they can't handle the data (9/11) they have, nor can they control their own officers (Denver PD).

      Besides, they already ignore a large portion of the law anyway. Who's going to call them on it? If it's not relevant to a prosecution it'll likely never be brought to light.

    11. Re:This is Singapore... by thelexx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm quite sure it was my favorite because it was concise. Are you quite sure he is not a lawyer? Are you quite sure he has not read the law? And realize that everything the original poster of that message said has already happened to people. No, it isn't widespread. That doesn't make it right.

      --
      "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
    12. Re:This is Singapore... by Fastolfe · · Score: 1

      Yah, that's good, let's eliminate all powers that have the potential to be abused. That leaves us with.. erm, what, exactly?

      What you're probably more interested in is a better system of checks and balances and oversight. That could still mean a change in the way the Patriot Act was written, but it's really a different goal than what most people here are advocating.

      And in any event, this has absolutely nothing to do with Singapore's quarantine enforcement steps.

    13. Re:This is Singapore... by eht · · Score: 1

      And this is the way it's always been, pre patriot act or not, you've always been able to be held as a witness or questioning or for your own safety. Japanese internment camps in WW2 questionable police tactics and other things have shown this to be true and legal, it's just not always a good idea to enforce them, and they could always start enforcing maximum sentances on you for each of your copyright violation, or for touching your wife's breasts in florida is one example someone gave, just because you don't know you're breaking the law just means you probably are.

    14. Re:This is Singapore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wot, are you trying to say that London isn't part of the US?

    15. Re:This is Singapore... by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

      i'm quite content with the powers granted by the constitution and bill of rights.

      unless you think that those are irrelevant?

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    16. Re:This is Singapore... by wing.app · · Score: 1

      well I think I will believe the ACLU, which said the same thing.

    17. Re:This is Singapore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yah, that's good, let's eliminate all powers that have the potential to be abused.

      That's not what he said. Invest in some comprehension lessons, you'll be surprised at how less often you'll make a prick of yourself.

      He said law enforcement dont need MORE power. Notice that MORE is not spelt the same as ANY.

    18. Re:This is Singapore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "And to head off the inevitable Ashcroft / Patriot Act recriminations, please offer actual *proof* of claims that our civil liberties are being eroded."

      So, now we have to prove that our liberties are being eroded in order to retain them? This is great stuff! Thanks alot! Next on the list is proving you're innocent to retain your freedom.

    19. Re:This is Singapore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the ACLU and EFF websites contain quite a good deal of information on the subject. Maybe next time you might actually check the facts before berating someone else about not checking the facts. You might even be able to post a relevant comment next time.

    20. Re:This is Singapore... by Malcontent · · Score: 1

      This time around though we have concentration camps set up outside the US boundries. Nobody knows what is going on in those places.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    21. Re:This is Singapore... by sco08y · · Score: 1

      Riiight:

      `(5) COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS- The Attorney General shall place an alien detained under paragraph (1) in removal proceedings, or shall charge the alien with a criminal offense, not later than 7 days after the commencement of such detention. If the requirement of the preceding sentence is not satisfied, the Attorney General shall release the alien.

      `(6) LIMITATION ON INDEFINITE DETENTION- An alien detained solely under paragraph (1) who has not been removed under section 241(a)(1)(A), and whose removal is unlikely in the reasonably foreseeable future, may be detained for additional periods of up to six months only if the release of the alien will threaten the national security of the United States or the safety of the community or any person.

    22. Re:This is Singapore... by Slack3r78 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and if you recall, Ashcroft and Co. were pushing hard a while back for the power to strip anyone who was an accused terrorist of their citizenship. If you're not a citizen, you're an alien. How convenient.

    23. Re:This is Singapore... by Fastolfe · · Score: 1

      The emphasis on 'more' implies a suggestion of 'less'.

      Invest in some tact, and stop calling people names. You'll be surprised at how often you'll have a constructive conversation and not be immediately killfiled. Or is that why you were posting as an AC?

    24. Re:This is Singapore... by Fastolfe · · Score: 1

      What makes you think I think those are irrelevant?

      Due process is very much a good thing. I just have issues with people willing to strip certain powers from our executive branch without looking for ways to fix the real problem.

      If your authorities are not trustworthy, you either replace them with someone you think you can trust more, or you fix the system so they are less likely to abuse your trust (e.g. more oversight, more checks and balances). Whether or not they should be granted certain powers is a separate issue meant for other branches of the government to decide.

      My point is there will always be people willing to abuse your trust, if they think they can get away with it. Some people are more likely to abuse your trust than others, and if you can identify those people (unfortunately, some are only identified after they're caught), you can replace them. But for the others, the best you can do is try to fix the system so that they're unable or unwilling to abuse your trust in the first place.

      If you have a beef with the powers granted to your local authorities, and believe that those exceed the powers granted in the founding documents (including those that are granted through legislation or judicial interpretation), by all means take them to court. The ACLU might even be willing to back you if they think you have a valid case.

    25. Re:This is Singapore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The most frustrating thing about you is that you probably think that you make sense.

    26. Re:This is Singapore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The emphasis on 'more' implies a suggestion of 'less'.

      No, it doesn't. This is why I suggested comprehension lessons. The emphasis on more implies they have ENOUGH powers.

      Invest in some tact, and stop calling people names.

      If you refuse to invest in understanding your language, I don't see why I should coddle you.
      You read what he said, misinterpreted it AND took it to a ridiculous extreme. That makes you an idiot.

      And I post AC because I don't want to create an account.

    27. Re:This is Singapore... by Fastolfe · · Score: 1

      I can't believe I'm arguing with a belligerent AC here (and believe me, this will be my last posting), but I hate to see people going through life this confused.

      The emphasis on more implies they have ENOUGH powers.

      Emphasis is not required to make that point. "They do not need more powers" is sufficient to make it. When someone says, "They do not need MORE powers," it implies that the operative word quoted in the original statement is INCORRECT. Here, emphasis is used as an informal, emphasized quotation. The logical correction would be to use "less" instead of "more". Thus, "They need more powers" becomes "They need less powers."

      I can't fathom where you get your knowledge of the English language, but I suggest you take this thread and go ask your high school english teacher before you go off and start making personal attacks against complete strangers (who just might know more than you do). It's highly tactless and will neither earn you friends nor respect. It has nothing to do with "coddling" and everything to do with maturity. Grow the fuck up. Goodbye.

    28. Re:This is Singapore... by Fastolfe · · Score: 1

      And you are absolutely correct that I did take this to a ridiculous extreme. That was kind of the point. I think they call that "hyperbole." It was the exaggarated conclusion to frequent use of the "they abuse this power, let's eliminate it" statements made every day.

      I get annoyed at people who want to "fix" something entirely the wrong way. If someone abuses their power, do you eliminate the power, or do you fix things so the power cannot be abused? Generally this is dependent on the situation, and needs an unbiased examination of the benefits and consequences of each option (which few, if any Slashdot posters are remotely qualified to do). Frequently people suggest the elimination of a power even though it's clearly not the best option, but their tunnel vision prevents them from seeing any other solution.

      I'm sorry this point was lost on you, and I hope this explains it better. If you still don't understand my point (whether or not you agree with it), consult your sociology or government instructor. I'm not going to "coddle you" any further.

  14. One day a killer one will come along... by weave · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Humans can be so stupid. Sometimes I think maybe evolution shouldn't just wipe us all out and start over again. In a few million years, who'll care that the human race had a forced reboot in the 21st Century?

    Looks like we may get lucky this time -- hopefully. If a real killer virus hits, we're all doomed. :(

    1. Re:One day a killer one will come along... by John+Harrison · · Score: 1
      Humans can be so stupid. Sometimes I think maybe evolution shouldn't just wipe us all out and start over again.

      Yes we can be stupid. In fact sometime we use the word "shouldn't" when we mean exactly the opposite.

    2. Re:One day a killer one will come along... by John+Harrison · · Score: 1
      In fact sometime we use

      Note to self: When mocking the grammar errors of others, always hit the Preview button.

    3. Re:One day a killer one will come along... by josephgrossberg · · Score: 1

      You mean like this ? (After Man, by Dougal Dixon)

    4. Re:One day a killer one will come along... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Touche. I consider myself properly chastised.

    5. Re:One day a killer one will come along... by Naikrovek · · Score: 1

      if you haven't seen or read 'The Stand', by Stephen King, you should. Superflu wipes the world out, except for about 500 people who wind up being naturally immune. Great story, widely regarded as King's best work.

      "If there is any race on the planet that needs some thinning out, its us." - Stephen King.

    6. Re:One day a killer one will come along... by Wraithlyn · · Score: 1

      Great book, but there's a helluva lot more than 500 that are immune. The fatality is quoted as 99.7%, and they estimate in the book there may be as many as a million people left in the United States alone.

      --
      "Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
    7. Re:One day a killer one will come along... by coupland · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree, I'm all for the complete extinction of the human race. But I'm still a big believer in common courtesy, so...

      You first.

    8. Re:One day a killer one will come along... by Naikrovek · · Score: 1

      i didn't read that far. ;)

  15. Not quite as bad as summary makes it sound.... by ERJ · · Score: 5, Informative

    The people will be called randomly during the day and asked to turn on the camera to confirm that they are really there. The camera will not always be on. Just an extra precaution to make sure people don't just have someone else answer their phone.

    1. Re:Not quite as bad as summary makes it sound.... by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

      The people will be called randomly during the day and asked to turn on the camera to confirm that they are really there

      That must be a lot of fun when you've got a raging fever and hacking cough, trying to get some sleep.

    2. Re:Not quite as bad as summary makes it sound.... by pyrrho · · Score: 1

      at first I thought that was a joke post... because in 1984 the cameras were also not on all the time, so you still had sufficient "privacy" (you just didn't know when)

      --

      -pyrrho

    3. Re:Not quite as bad as summary makes it sound.... by ttimothy · · Score: 1

      Erm, no. If you've already got the raging fever & hacking cough, you'd be in the hospital already. The quarantine is for those who have been exposed but don't yet show the symptoms.

  16. Re:If this is not the first post... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are sooooo lucky..

    next time...

  17. This just goes to show... by b.foster · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    ...that despite one (maybe two soon) PATRIOT acts, Terry v. Ohio, the DMCA, Microsoft, military tribunals, and John Ashcroft, this is still a better place to live than 95% of the other countries in the world. At least here we don't lock people up and invade the privacy of their homes just because they're sick.

    $DEITY Bless America!

    1. Re:This just goes to show... by louissypher · · Score: 1

      I am very afraid to tell you that, yes we do... Bush approves quarantine for mystery illness

      --
      www.bleepyou.com
    2. Re:This just goes to show... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you sure... or are you being sarcastic?

      http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/sars/executiveorder040 40 3.htm

      enables the "regulations providing for the apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals".

    3. Re:This just goes to show... by robbo · · Score: 1

      If SARS was spreading in the states as fast as it's spreading in SE Asia, then you can bet you'd see mandatory quarantines imposed, and if people violated it, to hell with the constitution, they'd be locked up for the duration (or longer).

      There's a good reason for this too. If your mere presense in a room full of people represented a threat to their lives, I think they'd want you out of the room pretty fast.

      I do agree that web-cams are a bit extreme, but the bottom line is that people can be total assholes when they're inconvenienced for a few days, and if they're going to flaunt the law (particularly one that is just and designed to prevent unneccessary deaths), they should expect to forfeit at least some of their rights.

      --
      So long, and thanks for all the Phish
    4. Re:This just goes to show... by Kredal · · Score: 1
      Actually, the President just gave health workers the authority to quarantine SARS victims... So ya, we can lock ppl up... but not install webcams.

      http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030405-9682133 5.htm

      --
      Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
  18. Bold Measures... by HedRat · · Score: 1

    ...need to be taken until we learn more about this disease. It's not like you're in prison. You can lay on your couch naked, watch Jerry Springer and eat a block of cheese as big as a truck battery.

    1. Re:Bold Measures... by Capt.+DrunkenBum · · Score: 1

      How do you know what I did last night? Thats it! I am smashing that web cam.

      --

      Not everyone deserves a 320i

  19. Fetish, anyone? by TheBrownShow · · Score: 1

    They could more than pay for that fine by just selling subscriptions. I'm sure there are some perverts that love checking out people with surgical masks on... maybe there's a SARS Fetish newsgroup somewhere?

  20. Wow that was lame... by FatSean · · Score: 1

    Yeah, like everyone didn't know about Singapore. I wouldn't call this 'Big Brother', I'd call it protecting the people from the illness. Of course, I also think steel chastity belts for those with AIDS might have some merit...

    --
    Blar.
  21. SARS = Deadly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What makes SARS scary is the fact that we really don't know how it spreads. Also, the quickness with which the disease is spreading is also another reason to scare people. Like someone said in an above comment...it's just a common cold really. I would like to see the tracking system for a common cold and how that spreads around the world.

  22. Next big reality series is on it's way.... by ChaseTec · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is the story of 490 strangers forced to live in a quarantine block together and find out what happens when people stop being polite and start getting SARS...

    --
    My Hello World is 512 bytes. But it's also a valid Fat12 boot sector, Fat12 file reader, and Pmode routine.
    1. Re:Next big reality series is on it's way.... by DukeofURL · · Score: 0

      Damn, I sprayed mountain dew out my nose reading that. Funny...

  23. If they're using Microsoft Webcams... by GeneralEmergency · · Score: 4, Funny


    ...then MS's ad campain slogan of "Where Do you Want to Go Today?" must really be stinging right about now.

    --
    "A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
    GeneralEmergency
  24. SARS by philovivero · · Score: 5, Informative

    For those, like me, who didn't know a whole lot about SARS, someone typed up a real nice Wikipedia entry on SARS, including a nice table of diagnosed cases per country.

    1. Re:SARS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great link...thanks!

    2. Re:SARS by Phwoar · · Score: 2, Funny

      Currently, 1337 people have recovered according to that page.

      I suspect foul play.

  25. It's not that BAD by jeeryg_flashaccess · · Score: 4, Informative

    A 60 minutes segment yesterday reminded views that SARS is far less dangerous than Malaria.

    Malaria kills almost 1 million world wide per year.

    It is also important to mention that SARS could just be a wake up call, one which prods the public to pursue these deadly diseases. If anything, SARS will establish guidelines to prevent future disease outbreaks.

    http://www.cbsnews. com/stories/1998/08/01/48hours/main22761.shtml

    --
    Life is like pants... fit in or you don't fit in.
    1. Re:It's not that BAD by robbo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, it is that bad. Malaria isn't contagious. If SARS isn't contained, then a lot more than a million people could die. Consider what could happen if SARS spread to Africa, where a significant percentage of the population is infected with an immune-suppressing virus (HIV).

      --
      So long, and thanks for all the Phish
    2. Re:It's not that BAD by josephgrossberg · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but is Malaria transmitted from person-to-person, through the air?

      IIRC, it's transmitted by mosquitos.

      AFAIK, if you don't live in a hot, swampy, infested area, you won't get malaria from someone sitting next to you on the metro. ANd that is a risk with SARS.

    3. Re:It's not that BAD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consider what could happen if SARS spread to Africa, where a significant percentage of the population is infected with an immune-suppressing virus (HIV)

      Or San Francisco!

    4. Re:It's not that BAD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think of the devastation at the local Linux users group!

    5. Re:It's not that BAD by ADRA · · Score: 1

      Let me elaborate on the parents post this way: SARS is only a big deal because it could potentially effect everyone, instead of just poor 3rd world countries who cannot afford the medicines to cure their illnesses. I mean come on, how many people die from influenza every year?

      --
      Bye!
    6. Re:It's not that BAD by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      Malaria kills almost 1 million world wide per year.

      Yes, and at current fatality rates then SARS should kill right around 240 million people if it becomes a pandemic.

      That's nearly the population of the US.

      The "far less dangerous" bit ignores communicability . Malaria is a non-issue unless you're near mosquitos. SARS appears to be an issue if you're near other humans.

    7. Re:It's not that BAD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is also a big deal because they don't know exactly how to stop it or what medicines might cure it.

      Malaria? Pass the Tonic Water (w/ Quinine).

    8. Re:It's not that BAD by eht · · Score: 1

      Many many people, quite a few just from getting the flu shot.

      And even more die from cancer, but that's quite back burner to the AIDS "epidemic".

      I have yet to ever meet a person who has AIDS, I know many people who have or had cancer.

    9. Re:It's not that BAD by josephgrossberg · · Score: 1

      I have yet to ever meet a person who has AIDS, I know many people who have or had cancer.

      You mean you have yet to meet a person that you *know* has AIDS. Yeah, that might be hair-splitting, but this sort of attitude is a huge part of the AIDS problem. Unless you're a hermit, you *do* know people who have the disease.

      My cousin is HIV+ and *he* didn't know he had it for years. How would you have known, had you met him? I wasn't wearing a t-shirt that said, "Hey everyone, I have a deadly virus in my bloodstreem!" Hell, if it was that obvious who had AIDS, he wouldn't have gotten it.

      Your analogy is cancer is also bogus, because it's not an infectious disease like AIDS or SARS. You're not going to catch cancer (per se) from a sex partner, much less a passerby.

    10. Re:It's not that BAD by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      ** Think of the devastation at the local Linux users group!**

      they're safe, they don't go out.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    11. Re:It's not that BAD by geekoid · · Score: 1

      If what you say about 60 minutes is true(i'm assuming it is), then 60 minutes is wrong.

      SARS can spread everywhere, and if it was a s wide spread as malaria, it would kill 8 million people in the US alone.
      Sars has no treatment other then lots of fluids, beds rest and hope.

      I have been paying attention since the first time the hong kong staff was not allowed to go home. that act told me 2 things at the time:
      1)this is a serious problem
      2)the medical facility is take the proper steps.

      that said, they are making progress in treatment. certian drug cocktails seem to be working, and the CDC and WHO are doing a great job of getting information out to slow the spread.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    12. Re:It's not that BAD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and at current fatality rates then SARS should kill right around 240 million people if it becomes a pandemic. That's nearly the population of the US.

      Hey, when you say it like that, it doesn't sound half bad.

      [attention, crack-smoking moderators: the above is called a joke... you may not understand, but that doesn't mean it's a troll or flamebait]

    13. Re:It's not that BAD by sloth+jr · · Score: 1

      Well, you're right, of course. Many more than a million people could die, even with the present mortality rate of 3 to 4%. To keep it in perspective, however, as I mentioned in an earlier post, only 3% of men can autofellatiate.

    14. Re:It's not that BAD by robbo · · Score: 1

      I guess we have to take the bad w/ the good..

      --
      So long, and thanks for all the Phish
    15. Re:It's not that BAD by mesocyclone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Malaria requires a mosquito vector to spread. SARS does not. A CDC official recently said that SARS wasn't [soon] contained, everybody on earth will get it. Nobody is likely to have natural immunity because is it is a recombinant or (less likely) mutation of a coronavirus - thus a new organism.

      If it has an animal host, we are screwed. We either all get it, or we get immunization.

      If not, it may be able to cause it to burn out through quarantine and other infection control measures.

      One thing not shown in the statistics is the number of people with SARS who do not get sick enough to get treatment. That is a two-sided issue...

      If there are none or only a few, then we may still be able to contain the disease, but the morbidity (for example, 40% of patients needing respirators) and mortality (around 4%) remain high.

      If there are a lot, we will probably not be able to contain the disease, but the serious illness and fatality rates will (by definition) be significantly lower.

      --

      The only good weather is bad weather.

    16. Re:It's not that BAD by regen · · Score: 1
      SARS seems to kill about 3% of the population infected by it. If SARS spread around the world and and everyone became infected by it, you could expect approximately 180 million people to be killed by it.

      Now, granted, that not the entire world will be infected but even if only 10% of the world became infected, you would expect around 18 million deaths.

  26. Shock And Arrrrr Syndrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The subject says it all...

  27. many uses by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Wife been cheating on you? Annoying stalker on your nerves? Just call in that they have SARS, and let Big Brother control your problems!

    Or for a more serious solution, just call in that they're a terrorist, and let the PATRIOT act have it's way!

    So many great ways to accuse people and have their rights taken away, yay!

    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
  28. If s/Singapore/US ... by EZmagz · · Score: 0
    Would it be legal? I mean this is basically the Singaporian way of putting lojacks on SARS victims.

    Honestly, I don't see what the huge uproar is about with SARS. I'm not trying to be insensitive, but this isn't exactly the Black Plague (yet). When new varients of diseases break out like this FUD runs rampant and people lose scope on how succeptible (or lack of) they really are to something like this.

    --

    "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for SEGA. ..."

    1. Re:If s/Singapore/US ... by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      If you are deemed a public health hazard (and the CDC has the authority to declare you such), you can be forced into quarantine.

      People are quarantined regularly for TB.

      We wouldnt use webcams to enforce it, more likely the leg transmitters that cons use.

      In short, yes it would be legal.

      And I'd rather have FUD run rampant than those who are infected, at least when we dont know how the disease is spread.

      A 4% or so mortality rate on a grand scale would indeed be of Black Plague proportions.

      The film "outbreak" is over-the-top hollywood, but pretty accurate so far as how the government is prepared to handle something like this.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:If s/Singapore/US ... by mythr · · Score: 1

      A 4% or so mortality rate on a grand scale would indeed be of Black Plague proportions.

      Really? IIRC, the Black Plague was actually one of the biggest catalysts for the Renaissance in Europe. Yes, that's right. We may get Farscape back after all! ;)

  29. Please, don't be so ignorant by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 2, Informative

    Come on, this isn't a Big Brother issue. These people could be isolated in a high security quaratine wing of a hospital or they could be self-quarantined at home, which is a much better option for the patients concerned, emotionally and psychologically. As someone who's had to have life-saving surgery, I can tell you that recovering at home in familiar surroundings and with all the comforts of your own home (your own bed, TV, PlayStation, PC, internet access, books, etc) is far more preferable than recovering in hospital.

    These people are carrying a highly contageous, deadly, virus. They have a responsibility, to other members of society as well as themselves, to behave responsibly until they have fully recovered and pose no further threat to the people around them. All it takes is for the situation in Singapore to deteriorate to one of near anarchy is for one of these individuals to act irresponsibly and go for a walk to the local supermarket.

    Containment is the only thing that is stopping that society from breaking down right now. As it is, their hospitals are struggling to cope with the existing SARS cases that they already have.

    Remember what happened in the US when everyone was paranoid about anthrax? Remember how people greeted people at their doors with surgical masks? Now do you see why they've taken these basic measures to protect the general public?

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    1. Re:Please, don't be so ignorant by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      These people are carrying a highly contageous, deadly, virus.

      Why don't we ship all the people infected with AIDS off to some island then? Some other guy said it was OK to shoot people that might put other people at risk for getting a deadly disease. When's the next big AIDs killing rally?

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    2. Re:Please, don't be so ignorant by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 1

      Please. These SARS carriers aren't being asked to do anything more than sit out their quarantine period in their own homes. Let's not analogise that with creating a leper colony.

      I'll ask you the question that you seem to be ignoring: If you had to be quarantined for a couple of weeks, where would you rather spend that fortnight; in hospital or at home?

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    3. Re:Please, don't be so ignorant by robbo · · Score: 1

      I agree, with one small correction. SARS quarantines extend to anyone who's had contact with a potential SARS case, not just confirmed carriers. In Canada, that has included anyone who set foot in Hospitals X,Y or Z in some time period. That translates to thousands of potential, but low-probability, carriers under quarantine. It's these people, who probably aren't infected, that end up being assholes and violating the quarantine. They don't realize that the non-zero probability can lead to thousands more infected if it turns out by some fluke that they have it.

      --
      So long, and thanks for all the Phish
    4. Re:Please, don't be so ignorant by Chundra · · Score: 1

      My best friend was quarantined in Hong Kong a few weeks ago because a woman he worked with was diagnosed with SARS. He said pretty much the same thing, and yeah, he was relieved to be staying at home.

    5. Re:Please, don't be so ignorant by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      I'm just saying, this disease doesn't seem very bad. Not much worse than any of the particularly bad flu strains that hit every few years. When people say things like "We should shoot them if they leave their houses", it's an overreaction based on fear, not on logic.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    6. Re:Please, don't be so ignorant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am glad that there are rational people on this site who are able to get past whatever bullshit hipster paranoid phase that's all the rage now to see what a rational government response this is. If you have the option of completely eradicating the spread of a disease that has the potential to kill ANYONE, why the hell wouldn't you? Sure, there are other more deadly diseases out there but that doesn't mean we should ignore one that we can potentially control.

    7. Re:Please, don't be so ignorant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't we ship all the people infected with AIDS off to some island then?

      AIDS is a disease of stupidity and lack of education (except of course for the few unfortunates who received it through transfusions). There is no logical reason for it to continue to proliferate.

    8. Re:Please, don't be so ignorant by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 1

      When did I mention shooting anyone? About the most scathing thing that I said in either of my two above posts was that the people quarantined in this way have a responsibility to take their situation seriously and to respect the reasons why there's a need for them to avoid the temptation to go for a walk.

      How you got from "don't go outside" to "let's shoot them" is beyond me. But then, you did manage to equate having to stay at home for a couple of weeks to being forcefully displaced to a deserted island and/or shot. so I shouldn't be entirely surprised.

      Seriously though, if you have issues with how other people view the situation, then don't waste your time telling me that their views are too extreme. Tell them instead.

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
  30. In Other News by jetkust · · Score: 4, Funny

    Law enforcement agencies all over America are in the process of laying off 85% of their police force in favor of 100 strategically placed web cams across the United States.

    1. Re:In Other News by MicroBerto · · Score: 1
      Only 85%? Hell, that's almost as much as IT!

      But now maybe the IT guys will get hired back to admin those webcams!

      --
      Berto
  31. Doesn't matter, they're ignoring the quarantine... by kiwimate · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...in Toronto, causing Ontario public health officials to order 197 people into isolation.

    And, by the way, it's now been discovered to be a relative of one of the many viruses that cause the common cold. But that kind of got overshadowed by all the war news.

    As did the anti-war protest database being kept by the NYPD. But ignore this, it's off topic.

  32. Dave, I'm seeing SARS by Helpadingoatemybaby · · Score: 3, Insightful
    SARS isn't the threat that we have to worry about. If it's true that Beijing has been concealing cases of this disease (and in one case supposedly driving a person into Hong Kong to die there) then with the growing density of population we'll see more of these cases from all over.

    This would mean, for example, that in a few years we may have airborne varient strains of other viruses. Now, should an airborne strain of some slow infection cycle be created (like HIV/AIDS, or a pneumonia with a very slow cycle), then most of the world will be infected before the first casualty occurs. Obviously this is fatal situation for mankind. It's not the quick diseases like ebola that we have to fear, it's the slow ones.

    Hope it doesn't happen, but with population densities growing I expect that it will.

    Comments?

    --

    The baby's fine -- please stop sending business cards.

    1. Re:Dave, I'm seeing SARS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Far as I know HIV is too erm something to go airborne. A biologist explained it to me once but it went waaay over my head.

    2. Re:Dave, I'm seeing SARS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That's why people should have diseases. And why you should *not* protect your children about every virus/bacteria out there. If we all stick to our clean sterile houses, when the big one comes, we'll just be wiped. On the other hand, if everybody gets many variants of many disease often, chances are that as soon as a virus/bacteria appears, a percentage of the population will just be exposed enough to develop some resistance.

      Compare this to the banana culture. Presently *one* banana specie is used worldwide. All the bananas at your supermarket are siblings. A few years ago, they had a big scare, a virus was coming along that threatened the whole worldwide banana production. If they had many species as with oranges and apples, there would be no such risk. Not a perfect analogy but still, it is plainly better to develop a good immune system.

      The common cold would be equally dangerous than SARS if we were not used to it. I'll let other posters comment about antibiotics, now. ;-)

    3. Re:Dave, I'm seeing SARS by aardwolf64 · · Score: 1

      It's the same situation with computer viruses. The ones that disable your machine immediately never make it past the first computer. It's the ones that lie dormant that become so widespread.

    4. Re:Dave, I'm seeing SARS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a perfect analogy but still, it is plainly better to develop a good immune system.

      Not even a useful analogy. The tree that you get your ordinary store bananas from is genetically identical to every other banana tree. They aren't siblings, they are *clones*. The tree is incapable of reproducing so it is grown from a cutting of another tree (not technically a cutting in reality, but I can't remember the right word for it). That's why the trees are precariously balanced; if a disease is fatal to one of the trees, it is fatal to EVERY tree.

      Contrast with humans (or most normal species). We aren't clones, nor are we all genetically identical. We aren't even comparable to banana trees.

      Now for the second part of your statement: developing resistences to diseases by way of fighting them off does NOTHING to increase genetic diversity, so not only are the targets of your analogy incomparable but the analogy itself is completely meaningless in your argument.

  33. Forced Confinement by csguy314 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's what they're doing here in Toronto. People that are refusing to obey the voluntary isolation are being forcibly confined. Some are also being changed by police.
    In fact one school and an office (HP in markham) have been closed because people refused to obey the voluntary isolation.
    I even have family that works in one of the hospitals downtown. There's a lot of FUD about SARS on the news, but I'm not worried. I don't know anyone who's sick and while there are a few new cases being announced, the spread isn't rapid. So I'll just keep reading /. uhh, I mean working.

    --
    This is left as an exercise for the reader.
  34. Re:many uses - mod that troll down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Go home, troll. This isn't happening in the U.S.

    And your assertion is wrong. I've e-mailed the FBI to report a certain militant environmental economic-terrorist group's activities in vandalizing SUVs and burning down new housing projects and got no satisfaction.

  35. New X2 Ads... by LilGuy · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Now we're gonna get new X2 cam pop-ups.. "Someone you love quarantined with a virus outbreak? Install an X2 cam to make sure they don't infect anyone else! Also install another one to subtly watch them undress... even if its your blood family..."

    --

    You're nothing; like me.
    1. Re:New X2 Ads... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does anyone have any mod points to mod this with -1, Disgusting?

  36. US Quarantine Foresight Exchange Claim by Baldrson · · Score: 1
    The QRNTN claim at the Foresight Exchange, predicting an enforced US quarantine of at least 500 individuals within the same metro area for the same disease by 2004, was created a couple of days before news of SARS hit the wires. It is currently trading at less than 40% but that could change if the US SARS data out of the Centers for Disease Control sustains the trends of the last couple of weeks which is to double every 7-8 days.

    Another SARS claim predicting SARS is a pandemic, will start trading this evening.

    1. Re:US Quarantine Foresight Exchange Claim by cruachan · · Score: 1

      "double every 7-8 days"

      eejit. If you look at the figures the rate of increase is pretty constant, and in fact has been dropping over the last few days. Also don't forget that the WHO's figures are culmulative. At the moment there's only about half the total actually sick (1333 as of today), the rest have recovered or are dead.

      Actually the constant rate of increase is the *hopeful* sign in the stats. If it was flu or something similar then the increase would be exponential. As it is it continues to be health staff predominantly infected, which imples a slow rate of transmission

    2. Re:US Quarantine Foresight Exchange Claim by Baldrson · · Score: 1
      eejit. If you look at the figures the rate of increase is pretty constant.

      45, March 27

      85, April 3

      154, today April 10

      Now you can come back with the argument about cumulative vs current cases but you have to deal with the problem that a polynomial increase (which is all you can get out of going from current to cumulative) is applied against an exponential -- which the above 3 data points, separated by 7 days show. A polynomial increase discounts back to a mere decrease in the exponent applied to figure the doubling time so for instance if you try to say there is a squared law at work all you can do is double the doubling time from just over a week to a little over 2 weeks -- still an epidemic.

      In other words, your hope of a very strange constant growth, while a possibility, is hardly a conclusion to be drawn from the present day to day fluctuations of reporting data.

      The only diseases I know of that follow such linear patterns (after doing some searches a while ago to see what might produce such an optimistic scenario) are some very obscure blights appearing in agriculture.

      We can hope.

    3. Re:US Quarantine Foresight Exchange Claim by cruachan · · Score: 1

      Using the WHO figures and knocking out those from China (which were unreliable and up to now somewhat sporadic)

      Date Reported Infected Increase per day
      17/03/2003 0
      18/03/2003 52
      19/03/2003 45
      20/03/2003 42
      21/03/2003 44
      22/03/2003 36
      24/03/2003 35
      25/03/2003 31
      26/03/2003 44
      27/03/2003 71
      28/03/2003 77
      29/03/2003 65
      31/03/2003 36
      01/04/2003 182
      02/04/2003 35
      03/04/2003 47
      04/04/2003 52
      05/04/2003 64
      07/04/2003 68
      08/04/2003 59
      09/04/2003 50
      10/04/2003 49

      What's remarkable about these is that the rate of increase is pretty constant. This implies that the disease is generally not that infectious and the average rate of infection (the number of people that an infected person infects) is currently hovering around 1.0

      Obviously this is complicated by the discovery that there seems to be superinfectors (some people have been traced as infecting a dozen or more new people) whilst others don't seem to pass on the infection at all. However the critical number is the overall rate of infection. Obviously if this is greater than 1.0 the infection increases exponentially, at 1.0 it's linear and at less than 1.0 it just dies out.

      The aim of any epidemic control task is to reduce the infection rate below 1.0. Humans are not fields of wheat and can modify their behaviour to do this. For example take the other scary outbreak disease Ebola. Experience shows that when an outbreak of this occurs initially infection rates are high - 5 or 6 or more - as tribal practises for cleaning dead bodies result in numerous infections. However once the outbreak is identified and people given correct instructions infection rates fall dramatically to well below 1.0 and the disease burns out.

      Obviously the nature of how the disease is spread influences how effective behaviour modification can be. For Ebola it's stunningly effective as the disease only passes by direct blood contact. With SARS it's more difficult, but it's not going to be impossible. Diseases like flu and measles are so infectious that they cannot be effectively controlled.

    4. Re:US Quarantine Foresight Exchange Claim by Baldrson · · Score: 1
      Using the WHO figures and knocking out those from China (which were unreliable and up to now somewhat sporadic)

      I was interested in the US rate of increase for the obvious reason that I live in the US and that was the topic under discussion, but also that the early stages of the epidemic require extra care in reporting and interpreting data. Mixing together different reporting systems from all over the globe creates severe problems in the early figures, as you needed to compensate for in excluding China. Did you do enough? Who knows? While the US system of reporting is far from perfect it is at least standardized to a far greater degree than the "system" upon which your composite figures are based.

      That relatively low-noise measurement instrument (CDC) registered an exponential increase. I don't know how to explain the CDC's composite figures and don't particularly see the need to since it is so unlikely that a reproductive rate so near to 1.0 is going to be found in a contageous disease -- combined with the fact that reporting standards are potentially varied quite a bit from country to country.

      Ebola is a poor model for the obvious reasons that there are no known "super spreaders" and when outbreaks are contained they are contained locally to a far greater degree than with SARS.

    5. Re:US Quarantine Foresight Exchange Claim by cruachan · · Score: 1

      Well taking the US figures are a bit misleading as so far the US is reporting no local transmission of SARS. Indeed the WHO is to date reporting no local transmission anywhere outside those countries where the disease was endemic before it was recognised as such. That's not to say it won't occur, but the fact that it's not been reported so far a month on from the WHO declaring the disease a global threat to health should tell you something. Excellent review article on the WHO site at http://www.who.int/csr/sarsarchive/2003_04_11/en/

      The infection rate for any disease is a combination of how infectious it actually is and how effective isolation measures are. Of course SARS has a 'natural' infection rate of much greater than 1.0, but so far it seems to be being kept at a level around 1.0 by containment measures. Of course that's an average - that WHO report goes into considerable detail.

      Obviously SARS is a major and serious problem with the potential to kill millions, but it's too early to call yet as to what the eventual situation will be and a global pandemic is by no means inevitable - or indeed I would suggest the most likely outcome at this stage.

    6. Re:US Quarantine Foresight Exchange Claim by Baldrson · · Score: 1
      April 14 data from WHO indicates a slow-down in the rate of growth of SARS in the US coupled with the appearance of local chains of transmission. This could be good news if the quarantine efforts thus far have been less than energetic, since they appear to have been partially successful and can therefore be ramped up to meet the threat. However if this is the best quarantine effort we can expect in the US then it appears the disease has taken root with a doubling time of no more than a month.
      1. 69 (4/1)
      2. 144 (4/7)
      3. 174 (4/14)
  37. P/I kills 65000 a year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    look it up

    1. Re:P/I kills 65000 a year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm

      Pneumonia/Influenza: 65,313

  38. Norton Update Anyone? by RyansPrivates · · Score: 1

    Great! Another Internet spread virus! Is it possible for my computer to become infected with this SARS virus? ;-)

    --
    If at first you don't succeed... How does that go again? Ah, forget it.
    1. Re:Norton Update Anyone? by legojenn · · Score: 1

      Can this virus be spread by Outlook?

      --
      I make a reasonable middle-class wage by going to work and not spamming blogs with scams.
    2. Re:Norton Update Anyone? by Capt.+DrunkenBum · · Score: 1

      Yes, but MS es expecting to release a patch sometime early in 2004.

      Unfortunately the patch will not be available for versions of Outbreak prior too Outbreak 2000.

      Time for an ungrade. :)

      --

      Not everyone deserves a 320i

  39. Re:If this is not the first post... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oh go ahead anyway

    you know you want to

  40. OMG! by Uber+Banker · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    The WHO fail to tackle the spread of AIDS in the world, they fail to tackle TB Hepatitus or Lepracy (YES!) in the third world, they fail to tackle malnutrition in the third world, obesity in the first world or CJD at all. These dieases kill millions a year... AIDS has a 100% quick-kill rate you know???? The others are well in double (%) figures and all lead to premature death. ...and they make the headlines calling SARS a world wide health threat! SARS is a nasty disease, don't get me wrong, it is a nasty nasty disease... but it a cold-type virus (read long complex DNA structure). A cold-type virus mutates quickly (hence inability for a vaccine) but this mutation includes mutation from being so lethal (survival rate has climbed significantly, because of good care and because of this mutation).

    SARS is a worldwide threat, but AIDS and others are already here, are already a lot more lethal, and what does the WHO and world governments do to prevent them?

    Pure hypocracy, it makes me sick.

    1. Re:OMG! by bigbadwlf · · Score: 1

      SARS is far more contagious than the other diseases you mention.
      Last I heard they still weren't sure if SARS is airborne or not.

      I'm pretty sure that's a factor.

    2. Re:OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I understand SARS is not air bourne, rather droplet bourne, and droplets can stay in the air for several hours after release (like a sneeze). So no, but effectively yes.

      AIDS is different... if you swap blood with someone with AIDS you _will_ get AIDS and you _will_ die (bodily fluids have some probability of being absorbed through sex etc), if someone with AIDS sneezes, you won't get AIDS, but you may with SARS, but you may not die, and death is the killer man.

      But the WHO are a joke in their action against AIDS, disregarding SARS.

    3. Re:OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ooo, if we quarantine all the people with aids, or have been exposed, can we make them wear pink triangles too?

    4. Re:OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well you know those third-world countries you refer to are generally unable to stop disesases due to lack of money and infastructure. Besides the fact that some of them just don't care. And for those who get AIDS (especially in Africa), I hate to say it, but its their own damn fault 99% of the time.

    5. Re:OMG! by shepd · · Score: 1

      Yes, but you can virtually guarantee you won't get AIDS if you engage brain before putting jewels in motion. Considering how often geeks get lucky, I'd suggest the possibility getting AIDS for most people on slashdot is... 0.0001%? :)

      The same argument also applies to CJD. Leprosy is somewhat more contagious, as is TB, but AFAIK, these are treatable.

      SARS isn't exactly like that, unless you walk about with a gas mask on.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    6. Re:OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Tackling anything in the third world can be extremely difficult. Between warlords extorting money for drugs, high-levels of mysticism discouraging western medicine, and overall lack of education I am not sure how anybody expected them to suceed. Something like SARS however can be contained and extinquished quickly and relatively cheaply.

      I would also point out that HIV does not have a 100% mortality rate.

    7. Re:OMG! by packeteer · · Score: 1

      Your saying that if you use your brain you can avoid CJD? What about the fact it cant be tested for and even though the govt. claims in not here there are people who have died of it in the US.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    8. Re:OMG! by shepd · · Score: 1

      >Your saying that if you use your brain you can avoid CJD?

      Yes, if you're deathly afraid of it don't eat beef (or at least be sure of it's source).

      Problem solved. Methinks you and I can live with a little less beef. :)

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    9. Re:OMG! by packeteer · · Score: 1

      If only it was that simple you moron. Mad cow disease is spread through fish too. Want to stop eating fish? You would be surprised what has fish in it that you dont think about. There are many ways for it to be spread, its called mad cow becuase the media got some nice clips of cows twitching and dying but the disease really just comes from sheep.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    10. Re:OMG! by shepd · · Score: 1

      Okay, well, since you don't list anything else (moron) I'll have to assume your "list" is inclusive. In that case avoid sheep, fish and beef from unknown sources. Still not a hard life, really. Even if it does include all meat products, again, being selective of _what_ meat products you eat will reduce the risk. It isn't rocket science, and it isn't particularly difficult.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    11. Re:OMG! by packeteer · · Score: 1

      It is extremely difficult... mayeb more so than rocket science. How will avoiding "unknown" sources save you? Mad cow disease has been found all over the place. Yes it has been found in America and yes it has KILLED people in America. There is no way to know how much more there is here. There is no test you can just get at the doctor to tell if you have it or not. You also cant test your meat AND it cant be cooked out. CJD will infect you if ingested even after being cooked to hundreds of degrees.

      Also the type of meat product doesn't matter. You might think that ground beef would have the most chance of effecting you since it is a combination of many cows but this doesn't matter. If one cow has mad cow disease then other do too. If a cow gets infected through tained feed then many other cows have it also and were screwed anyway.

      Personally i dont stop eating beef becasue of mad cow disease because there are many worse things about eating beef than the possibility of CJD. If you really want to avoid mad cow disease then quit eating. There isn't really anything you can do to avoid the disease so getting worked up wont do any good. This is why we dont talk about it more. The CDC cant come out in a news conferance and give the plan to every house wife about how to protect her family and outline the actions she needs to take. All they know is you either have it or you dont and if you dont then you either will or wont get it. Its out of our control and only they have control. Of course getting worked up and messing with our fickle economy would cause much worse problems than a few people dying of a disease.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    12. Re:OMG! by shepd · · Score: 1

      Anyways, incidences of CJD are 1 in 1 million, so don't worry about it anyways. You're much more likely to die from exiting your home. :)

      That and I do still think that by being selective about your meat you can avoid mad cow disease or anything similar. Up to now the FDA hasn't found a single case of Mad Cow Disease in any tested cows in the US (AFAIK).

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    13. Re:OMG! by packeteer · · Score: 1

      Too bad you cant safely test very many cows for this disease. Oh and the article talks about how nobody has died of this disease but thats not true. Many people in america have died by this disease yet nobody seems to notice.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  41. don't know the mortality rate yet by mbrubeck · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Why are we quarantining people over something with a 4% mortality rate?

    It's too early to state a mortality rate for SARS. Most of the people who have the syndrome were diagnosed much more recently than the first batch of victims, and we don't know how many of the current patients will survive. Simply looking at the number of people who have already died compared to the number of current cases (like some reporters have tried) does not give you reliable statistics in this case.

    Also, the seriousness of an epidemic is determined by communicability as well as mortality. A disease that infects half the world population with 4% mortality is much more serious than one that infects just a few people with 50% mortality.

  42. Flu Pandemic of 1918 - 3 % mortality. by MightyTribble · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...which killed upwards of 20 MILLION people, had a mortality rate of 3%.

    SARS seems to be *at least* as transmissible as the 1918 flu was.

    That's why.

    1. Re:Flu Pandemic of 1918 - 3 % mortality. by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

      well at least we dont have hundreds of thousand of vectors fighting a war in a foreign land this time... because if that happened, it would be bad.

      well, at least they'll be home for christmas.

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    2. Re:Flu Pandemic of 1918 - 3 % mortality. by Raiford · · Score: 1
      The parallels of the nature of SARS and the 1918 flu are a little scary too. Although the virus that causes SARS is not believed to be a flu virus, the 1918 flu was distinctly different than other flus. The 1918 flu virus also caused awful pneumonia where the victums suffocated. The 1918 flu affected people between 20 and 40 and SARS is killing people at mid age. The 1918 flu started in China and SARS started in China. Here's the scariest part. In 1918 the flu spread around the world without the aid of passenger air travel. With the early statistics the mortality rate of SARS is higher than the 1918 flu that may change with time but living in a portal of entry state like California raises my concerns.

      I wonder what level facility to CDC handles the blood samples collected from SARS patients (Level 3 or Level 4 ?) Has anyone heard ?

      --
      "player 4 hit player 1 with 0 stroms"
    3. Re:Flu Pandemic of 1918 - 3 % mortality. by betis70 · · Score: 2, Informative
      Huh, the 1918 flu started in China? I wonder why it is often called the "Spanish" flu?

      Google here I come ...

      #4 on the hit chart -

      The Spanish Flu actually originated in Tibet in 1917. As the armies of various nations moved across the continents the flu spread with them. Before long cases were showing up in Europe. When it hit France, it changed its character, becoming malignant as it was contracted by African soldiers who had been recruited into the French army. After establishing a stronghold in France, the flu moved into Spain. Spain was a neutral player in the First World War. For that reason it had no need to censor the illness from its people in order to keep them focused on the war effort. The Spanish press, then, fully documented the illness, along with it's terrible life taking effects on the human body.
      --
      I forget...are we at war with Eurasia or East Asia?
    4. Re:Flu Pandemic of 1918 - 3 % mortality. by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      "In 1918 the flu spread around the world without the aid of passenger air travel. "

      Passenger air travel though, might not be as effective a vector as the crowded ships of the early 1900s. They spent weeks or months on those boats.

      I realize that air travel means people can be more places faster, but I wonder if "more people infected" in the same busy port cities might be more effective that "a person here, a person there?"

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    5. Re:Flu Pandemic of 1918 - 3 % mortality. by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

      you missed another scary parallel that i alluded to earlier.

      The 1918 flu epidemic was spread massively due to the large number of troops involved in WWI. If you pick up that many people, move them into a foreign country, and have them move through many different countries, you are creating one helluva disease vector.

      wars are not especially hygenic, and ww1 was particularly horrific.

      The parallel is that the US has hundreds of thousands of troops in iraq, and afghanistan. big old vector there.

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    6. Re:Flu Pandemic of 1918 - 3 % mortality. by cronian · · Score: 1

      About 4% of reported cases have lead to mortality. However, I would assume most of the mild cases go unreported so the actual infection rate could be much higher, which would mean the mortality rate is relatively low.

    7. Re:Flu Pandemic of 1918 - 3 % mortality. by mfrank · · Score: 1

      And the world population was less than two billion back then. We're packed in tighter now, with much more travel.

    8. Re:Flu Pandemic of 1918 - 3 % mortality. by Raiford · · Score: 1
      sometimes I wonder if I am just an alarmist. I have to look around and see if other people are really that concerned and if I don't see it I figure I am just overreacting. Perhaps we are not hearing the closed door version of possible projections that would alarm the public. Anyway, anyone out there feeling sick ?

      --
      "player 4 hit player 1 with 0 stroms"
    9. Re:Flu Pandemic of 1918 - 3 % mortality. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The CDC folks are generally some of the most knowledgeable out there. If they're not *exactly* sure of how it spreads, or if it can change vectors, they'll do the utmost to make sure it can't do any harm. After all, there's quite a lot of personal interest there too. Nobody (sane) wants to "catch" ebola. So if it seems (as it does) that people are unsure of the transmission vector, it's probably at the deep end of the containment spectrum.

    10. Re:Flu Pandemic of 1918 - 3 % mortality. by JDWTopGuy · · Score: 1
      Anyway, anyone out there feeling sick?

      I have a cold, you insensetive clod!
      --
      Ron Paul 2012
    11. Re:Flu Pandemic of 1918 - 3 % mortality. by betis70 · · Score: 1

      Yeah I wonder if I am too alarmist as well.

      I usually go to the Ranch plaza in Milpitas to stock up on Chinese foods (a big Asian food market, plus lots of Asian businesses, in case you don't know the area). As soon as I heard about SARS about 2 weeks ago I stopped going. There are a lot of people 'fresh off the boat' (so to speak) from Hong Kong, Singapore, and such places so I was worried about being exposed.

      But my hairdresser is over in that plaza and my hair is in need of a cut ... so I am going to have to go. No one else seems to be worried here, so I am going to take my chances this weekend.

      --
      I forget...are we at war with Eurasia or East Asia?
    12. Re:Flu Pandemic of 1918 - 3 % mortality. by Raiford · · Score: 1
      I heard there were about 9 cases in Santa Clara county and that Stanford had isolated one group of cottages for suspected cases. I live in Sacramento county and there have not been any reported cases yet.

      --
      "player 4 hit player 1 with 0 stroms"
  43. the goal is eradication, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The whole plan, as far as I can see, is to eradicate the disease. It's in a very early stage right now, and if we can completely stop its spread and cure those who have it, then we will have no carriers of the disease at all. Do you know how many lives will be saved and how much work would become completely unnecessary if it's eradicated? We will not have to develop treatment for it. We will not have to develop a vaccine. We will not have to educate the public about it. Millions of people (or even hundreds of millions or billions of people) will never get sick.

    If eradication can be accomplished through extremely vigilant quarantine, etc., then all the resources that might be spent fighting SARS can be spent fighting other diseases, like say AIDS.

    For a bit of info on the benefits / feasibility of eradication, see here.

    1. Re:the goal is eradication, right? by vondo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I agree with most of what you say, but I think you are missing something. If the SARS virus came from nature somehow (say from other mammals or, like West Nile, is carried in birds) then eradication is impossible, at least permanently.

      Even having no humans infected at any given time doesn't guarantee it doesn't pop up from time to time (like Ebola).

      The unique thing about smallpox (the example you gave) is that it had no carrier and no host. (Malaria for instance has a carrier; I don't know if it infects other mammals too).

      So far they have no idea where it comes from, so quarantining people and trying to stamp out the infection is very important, but it may not be the end of the story.

  44. The Who? by Flabby+Boohoo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Did they come out of retirement?

    1. Re:The Who? by Uber+Banker · · Score: 1

      Pete Townsend [http://www.petetownshend.co.uk/] is still at it...

      kinda...

      but hopefully not "at it", so to speak.

    2. Re:The Who? by DansnBear · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Yet another time I wish I didn't squander my mod points all at once. I should have listened to my mother and saved some for later. . . Oh well, sombody should mod the parent up. . .

      --

      -= Who are The Headlocks? =-
  45. Clean up your countries by Znonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

    From a Yahoo message board...

    "maybe if other countries start some sanitary guildlines the rest of the world wouldnt have to suffer cause some Asian dude for got to wash his hands, after dropping one on the floor."

    --

    Karma: The shiznight, mostly because I am the Drizzle.

    1. Re:Clean up your countries by nochops · · Score: 3, Informative

      Evidently this is not your quote, but I wonder if the author has ever been to Singapore. It's one of the cleanest countries in the world. I know, I've been there, and many other SE Asian countries.

      Put it this way, they're so concerned about keeping the city clean, that even chewing gum is banned.

      --
      "A terrorist is someone who has a bomb but doesn't have an air force." -William Blum
    2. Re:Clean up your countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Faggots are about the "cleanest" men around, but they spread aids and hepetitis like wildfire.

      SARS probably came from some dink fucking wild pandas out in the woods, or eating dogs, or some other such "cultural" practices.

      Theres more to being clean than just putting your trash in the can.

      BTW singapore is a fucking slum, you're on crack.

    3. Re:Clean up your countries by Noofus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Part of the problem is out over-reliance on anti-bacterial soaps|sponges|cuttingboard|etc.

      The more we 'sanitize' our society the more susceptible we all are when a big bad bug comes along. Personally, I keep myself clean and all, but I will not use anti-bacterial products, with the excpetions of neosporin when I cut myself. The minute amounts of bactieria, firuses, molds, etc that I probably ingest build my immune system.

      Its not a statistically good sampling, but of my friends that are anti-bacterial everything, and my friends that are more like me. The ones that dont use anti-bacterial products tend to get sick less often, and are sick for shorter durations than the people I know that are nuts about anti-bacterial products.

      So I think we need to watch out for these sanitary guidelines - too much is a bad thing.

    4. Re:Clean up your countries by The+Cydonian · · Score: 1

      Just to clarify, chewing gum is not banned per se, but sale of chewing gum is. Also, mainly because some retards jammed the doors of the subway system with spit chewing gum.

      A better example of Singapore's obession with cleanliness would be the S$2000 fine for not flushing public toilets after use.

    5. Re:Clean up your countries by Znonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Indeed, Singapore is a big pile of doo.

      --

      Karma: The shiznight, mostly because I am the Drizzle.

    6. Re:Clean up your countries by Dr.Zong · · Score: 1

      I completely agree. It's not like I am the *cleanest* person. Hell, I eat whatever is in the fridge and scrape off the green stuff. I'm also from the country (which, statistically makes me healthier overall than a city kid - and also gives less chance for alergies [http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/09/18/dust020918]) . I don't have a single anti-bacterial anything in my house. Except the polysporin, that is pretty much mandatory. My friends as well who are similar in habits, are less sick. Those who are clean-freaks and rely on that stuff seem to get sicker much more often. Be it the common cold. I've been around sick people all winter and have barely caught a snuffle. Seeing as how everybody is so gung-ho for these products, I think it will eventually go the way of the anti-biotic resistance to bugs we're now seeing [http://www.nature.com/nature/links/020613/020613- 3.html] this world is becoming a scary place. In other news. Some asshole went to work in Markham, Ontario after becoming infected with SARS [http://www.pulse24.com/News/Top_Story/20030410-00 8/page.asp] - I hope they charge/"fine the hell out of" this fuckup and others like him, assuming he doesn't die. Seriously. That's just stupid.

      --

      Party?!? What kind of party is this? Where's the damn keg?
      Virtus Junxit Mors Non Separabit
    7. Re:Clean up your countries by Retief65 · · Score: 1

      Yes but it's only a short bridge away from Malaysia, which is, well, less than organized.

    8. Re:Clean up your countries by frankthechicken · · Score: 1

      Just to clarify, chewing gum is not banned per se, but sale of chewing gum is. Also, mainly because some retards jammed the doors of the subway system with spit chewing gum.

      I seem to remember it was because one the untouchables(PAP member) was demonstrating the MRT to some important foreign minister and sat on a piece of gum, and surprise, surprise, the very next day the sale of gum was banned.

      Singapore's very form of democracy has always amused me, one of the districts unwisely decided to vote against the PAP, and so they had all of their money for upgrading the council apartments removed. Democratic dictatorship at its very best.

    9. Re:Clean up your countries by schnitzi · · Score: 1

      SARS is a virus, not a bacteria. Whatever decreased resistance to bacteria (if any) we have due to anti-bacterial agents has NO effect on our resistance to viruses.

      If you KNEW your friend survey wasn't a statistically good sampling, how can you use it to support your argument?

      --



      I object to that article, and to the next reply.
    10. Re:Clean up your countries by marpheus · · Score: 1

      Well, at least more than 50% of the poeple actually voted for the current president, unlike a few other countries I know...

    11. Re:Clean up your countries by The+Cydonian · · Score: 1

      True, although I wouldn't call it a democratic 'dictatorship'. More like, 'democratic patriarchy'. Always thought Singapore was one of those places that couldn't decide whether it was in the East or whether it was in the West (as in, western liberal society).

    12. Re:Clean up your countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt you've ever been out of your own country as your ignorance of other parts of the world shines through. Do us all a favor and eliminate yourself from the gene pool.

      kthx

    13. Re:Clean up your countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, you mean like the USA in 1992 when Clinton 'won'?

  46. Cable Guy! by UselessTrivia · · Score: 1

    Thats right sir and or madam, please wait at home and one of our top-notch webcam installation experts will be around sometime between the hours of 7 and 5, on Thursday, sometime in June.

    They couldnt come up with a simpler, less (dare I say, pathetic use of the internet technologies) costly solution? Crap, try the phone T-Netix

  47. Re:Doesn't matter, they're ignoring the quarantine by Telastyn · · Score: 1

    the OT link is actually pretty interesting. I'm glad that they destroyed it. :]

  48. Re:Chinese Support Invading People's Privacy by mr.+roboto · · Score: 2, Informative

    I read the full article about how the Chinese government in Singapore is violating people's right to privacy by placing a webcam in people's homes.

    China != Singapore. Singapore is an independant state with its own (authoritarian) government. A majority of Singaporeans are ethnically Chinese, but there are also large Malay and Indian ethnic groups.

  49. Important Announcement! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Opera Software has announced that the award winning browser Opera version 7.10 final for Windows has been released.

    It is available for download here!

  50. Logical by Outland+Traveller · · Score: 1

    Of course it makes sense to quarantine people who are ill with SARS. No one knows many hard facts about it yet, except that it can spread really fast and it can kill. Quarantine is perfectly logical at this stage. In my opinion, anyone who knowingly breaks quarantine and recklessly puts other people in danger should be treated as a criminal.

  51. Internet from where? by terbo · · Score: 1

    Will they be given free internet access, so they have something to do?

    --
    If you're interested in facts I'll tell you what they are and I'll give you sources - Chomsky on The Big Idea
  52. Re:Chinese Support Invading People's Privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really wish that people in the West would wake up. We should stop thinking that, somehow, the Chinese people are like us in the West.
    Actually, we are becoming more like China on a daily basis in the name of terrorism. Currently, a large number of interesting hardware is going in that will allow total monitoring of all US communications. That includes voice and data. The patriot act removed all public oversight of what is happening. Patriot act II would allow Ashcroft unlimited monitoring of whoever and whenever he wishes with no oversight.
    The current W. is making sure that nearly all contracts for iraqi re-build goes back to Texas.
    There is all sorts of coruption in this current admin. Before we start looking overseas, we need to do a through cleaning of ourselves first.
    As to the fact that normal chinese support their government that is normal. Overall, I support the US. I just hate what the current admin is doing (killing our economy; creating a deficit that made raegan look like an ametuer; stiring up all sorts of unrest in the name of patriotism )
    Oh, BTW, have you tuned into to the anthrax investigation or has that quietly disappeared. Did you not notice that our government did not investigate the DOD connection for nearly a year and then comes up with a "person of interest" . Do you really think that the FBI is so inept that they would look through literally millions of people who have the capability to grow it and spore it (easy and very cheap to do), but ignore the While I do not know why they ignored the 100, I do know that the FBI is not stupid.

  53. The difference between measles and SARS by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

    Is that there is a vaccine for measles and people are routinely vaccinated against it.

    Same for polio and many of the other worst nasties. Same for smallpox before it was considered near-extinct to the point where it wasn't a threat. (Damn the shitty security at Russia's storage facility...)

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  54. HOLY FUCK YOU ARE DUMB. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is Singapore. Where people get caned. Where the People's Action Party runs the show and doesn't let you forget it. NOT the US, home of PATRIOT act.

  55. FYI by Uber+Banker · · Score: 5, Informative

    Singapore does not have a Chinese government. SIngapore is a seperate country.

    Your opinions are severly prejudice.

    Singapore is a western country, with a high GDP, a less corrupt government than the US (read corporate influence). The racial mix of SG is Malay, Chinese and others, christian, muslim and buddhist in strong numbers. There is no clear majority [do all people with 'slitty eyes' look the same to you?].

    Take Hawaii for example, a mix of Pacific Islanders, Japanese, Chinese White and African Americans - would you like to call that an East Asian country full of people "_NOT_ like us"???

    Your numbered points are laughable - take point 2 for some crass idiocy "most Taiwanese want Tibet to be in one China" - Taiwanese believe China is an occupied country and Taiwan should take control of it!!! Totally opposite!

    I hope you are as unsuccessful as you are stupid, you surely deserve it.

    1. Re:FYI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All I know is that I like the ones with slutty eyes...

    2. Re:FYI by schnitzi · · Score: 1

      Singapore is a western country, with a high GDP, a less corrupt government than the US (read corporate influence). The racial mix of SG is Malay, Chinese and others, christian, muslim and buddhist in strong numbers. There is no clear majority [do all people with 'slitty eyes' look the same to you?].

      Oh really. Funny, the references I come across seem to indicate that 75% of the population is of Chinese descent. Is that not a clear enough majority to you? Don't counter the original poster's misinformation with more misinformation.

      An American in Singapore

      --



      I object to that article, and to the next reply.
    3. Re:FYI by Shanoyu · · Score: 1

      No, singapore is not a western country. They are pourposefully closed from the rest of the western world. You are not westerners, we ostracise singapore and we do it for a reason.

      If you do not understand why America is fundamentally different from Singapore and our opposition to your policies, then quite frankly you simply know nothing about America.

    4. Re:FYI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh... how is a city-state populated almost entirely by Indians and Chinese and is located on the tip of Malaysia in ANY WAY a Western city? And yes, I'm sure your rigid dictatorship government is very uncorrupt. Me, I'll take my chances.

  56. Re:Chinese Support Invading People's Privacy by netsharc · · Score: 1

    Heh, the Chinese Government doesn't run Singapore,Mr. Troll.

    --
    What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
  57. World War I Flu epidemic by tie_guy_matt · · Score: 1

    No one talks about the Flu epidemic of (I think) around 1910-1920. Killed people in towns so fast they had trouble burying them all. When the US sent troops to Europe in WWI I believe they were worried about spreading the flu virus (though they didn't know it was a virus) to everyone stuck on the small ships for the trip over seas. Not to scare people too much but this could happen again. We use our antibiotics way too much and aren't making new ones fast enough. And every year we get a new mutation on the flu. Most of the time it just makes you pretty sick maybe one of these days we will get another deadly mutation. Then again SARS and other deadly germs may be scary but in reality you are probably much more likely to get hit by a bus than to die of one of these things.

    1. Re:World War I Flu epidemic by robbo · · Score: 1


      IANAE (I am not an epidemiologist) but iirc, antibiotics treat bacterial infection, not viral infections.

      --
      So long, and thanks for all the Phish
    2. Re:World War I Flu epidemic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Antibiotics won't help us aginst a viral agent.

    3. Re:World War I Flu epidemic by tie_guy_matt · · Score: 1

      True, antibiotics won't help with virsuses. But if they become inefective against some nasty strains of bacteria we could easily have an epidemic on our hands.

    4. Re:World War I Flu epidemic by silentbozo · · Score: 1

      Antibiotics are sometimes needed to treat secondary infections caused by a weakened immune system (like one trying to fight off or recover from a viral infection.) If you're already fighting off a viral pneumonia, and in your weakened state you manage to catch a bacterial pneumonia that's resistant to drugs, your chances of survival drop quite a bit...

  58. What the hell is a deuce? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    1. Re:What the hell is a deuce? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its more than a once and less than a trice

    2. Re:What the hell is a deuce? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's what came out of your mother's ass when you were born.

  59. +1, spooky by namespan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hell that's not a bad idea as far as I'm concerned. These people are under quarrantine for a reason. I see no problem with shooting them if they refuse to comply. We know that people who have it can spread it. These 9 people are putting the lives of too many at risk.

    You're not sufficiently paranoid. OK, maybe you are, in a sort of Howard Huges microbial way, but if you'll turn your creative anxieties a different direction for a moment -- to the powers of the state -- maybe you'll understand why death penalties for violating quarantine are a bad plan. What's to keep a state from indefinitely detaining someone in their house -- or hell, just shooting them -- by arbitrarily declaring them quarantined? Who's going to check on them and keep the state honest? By keeping the penalty for breaking a quarantine lower (say, monetary, a few hundred/thousand dollars), you get a safety valve for such problems.

    (And this leaves aside the moral problems with shooting someone breaking a quarantine, real or supposed... especially with SARS. Not particularly more deadly than the flu. There might be a case to be made for Ebola, which'll kill 90% of its victims, but killing someone who is a vector for a 5% fatal illness, even a virulent one, is trading a probable death for a certain one).

    --
    Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
    1. Re:+1, spooky by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      "but killing someone who is a vector for a 5% fatal illness, even a virulent one, is trading a probable death for a certain one"

      Actually, it is trading an exponentially many probable deaths for one certain one. And your state-power slippery slope argument is a little silly, too. But that doesn't make your couclusion wrong.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  60. the details and the problem by frovingslosh · · Score: 1
    Since clearly few are bothering to read the article: Those quarantined "will be called at random intervals daily and requested to turn on the camera and present themselves in front of the camera to show their presence," the ministry said.

    Talk about pointless ways to use the technology. Clearly the wristband (or legband) would be better. Let me suggest one obvious flaw to this:

    Hmm..., I feel like going out and infecting a few thousand people with this deadly disease. If I do they might catch me and fine me. What do I do? Oh yea, I can leave the phone off the hook and if they do call they will get a busy signal and think I'm home!.

    It wouldn't even matter if this would work or not, as long as some one might think it would work and try it. And it likely would work.

    here's another:

    Hmm..., I feel like going out and infecting a few thousand people with this deadly disease. If I do they might catch me and fine me. What do I do? Oh yea, I have a deadly disease and don't really give a rats ass about a fine if they do catch me (only used if I feel really, really sick).

    Then again, these are the same people who knew about the disease for six months before warning the rest of the world, and didn't do a thing to restrict it's spread then.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:the details and the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'these are the same people who knew about the disease for six months before warning the rest of the world'

      erm... if you're talking about China, Singapore is quite a distance away from it... get your geography right.

  61. On the plus side by lysium · · Score: 2, Funny

    That will replenish the world's supply of fossil fuel -- us!

    --
    Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
    1. Re:On the plus side by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      Soylent oil.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  62. Yep... sort of like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...how all conservative lapdogs lick bush's balls.

    1. Re:Yep... sort of like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      conservatives don't lick balls...faggots do that..they're abominations to god..aka lefties/liberals/commies/the losers in life

  63. Kudos to the Government of Singapore by randall_burns · · Score: 1
    I really appreciate that the government and corporate leadership of Singapore is taking this epidemic seriously and acting responsibly-more responsibly IMHO than governmental and corporate leaders in my own country of residence, the United States, which has more cases of SARS than Singapore--and which is moving to slow on putting quarentine measures in place. I'm surprised that Singapore has such a low fine for endangering public health by breaking quarentine though--I suspect they'll soon correct that.

    1. Re:Kudos to the Government of Singapore by The+Cydonian · · Score: 1

      From the back of my head, I think the fine is S$10,000. But yes, I agree; gov.sg's response has been rather timely.

    2. Re:Kudos to the Government of Singapore by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 1
      From your link:

      1. Due to differences in the case definitions being used at a national level, probable cases are reported by all countries except the United States of America, which is reporting suspected cases under investigation.

  64. Can we have some perspective, please? by GordoTheGeek · · Score: 1

    Holy cow, people. This has got to stop. The panic that's being spread here in Canada and the rest of the world is ore than a little ridiculous. Are we trying to make up for the world's lack of response to AIDS and other epidemics? Think about this: the virus has been known for a couple of months and it's killed 100 people. Not 100,000, not 100,000,000, but 100. Worldwide. The vast majority of these people have had weakened immune systems or were otherwise already sick. 100,000 people die each and every year in the US alone from pneumonia. 10,000 or so from influenza. Yet, the entire freaking world is panicking over a mutant cold virus that has kill 100 people in a couple of months. PLEASE, can we all calm down now? My god, feed me beans for a couple of months and I could kill 100 people.

    1. Re:Can we have some perspective, please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah you are right.

      lets wait for more people to die. this is a highly contagious disease that has spread to MANY countries.

      the point is that it is extremely contagious. by the way, many of those 10000 people that die from influenza are already elderly people (which have weaker systems, ie not much can be done)

      this disease kills people and spreads in a very efficient manner. AIDS doesnt spread by being in the same room like SARS does.

      its calling preventing a million deaths.

    2. Re:Can we have some perspective, please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "lets wait for more people to die."

      It's not a question of "waiting" and doing nothing -- it is a matter of allocating finite resources. There are certainly health issues killing just as many people just as quickly, that CAN be dealt with effectively, but not if every health worker has been ordered to panic over SARS.

    3. Re:Can we have some perspective, please? by cruachan · · Score: 1

      Jeez. It's not highly contagious in the same way flu or measles is, but it's pretty contagious and the only way to handle it is by an intensive response NOW.

      Fortunatly at the moment it's *just* being contained. Indications are that carriers are only contagious when they visibly have the disease, so by intervention it can be controlled. But if it gets out into the teeming masses of India, Nigeria or the like within the next 6 months then expect to see hundreds of thousands infected, several tens of thousands of deaths and travel restrictions in the first world like you would not believe.

      Also viruses like this that has just jumped the species barrier tend to be unstable. Fortunatly experience shows that the tendency is towards mutation to less lethal strains, but it ain't necessarily so and it's prudent no to give it hundreds of thousands of hosts in which to experiment with potential mutations.

      Bottom line is that this is not the next Spanish Flu yet, but it has to be treated very seriously indeed. As WHO say it's unlikely now to go away completely and until there's a vaccine (read 3 to 5 years) the world will need to keep on top of it wherever it strikes or else there will be a lot of dead people and striken economies around the planet.

    4. Re:Can we have some perspective, please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but it's been killing rich people. 100 dead people in a first world country >> 100,000 dead people in a third world country.
      That's just the way it is.

    5. Re:Can we have some perspective, please? by GordoTheGeek · · Score: 1

      No, this is not a "highly contagious disease". It's a virus. Best information sofar points to it being a mutation of the corona virus, similar to that which causes the common cold.

      Perhaps you missed the part about 80% of the deaths so far being elderly and others with weakened immune systems.

      Yes, it's contagious and requires some sort of management, but the reaction this is way out of line. It requires close contact to be spread. You're not going to catch it walking down the street or riding a bus with an infected person! It's spread through droplet transmission. This literally requires someone spitting on you to pass it on.

      Again, Jeez.

    6. Re:Can we have some perspective, please? by GordoTheGeek · · Score: 1

      It's amazing how people make assumptions about things, isn't it: SARS did not "just jumped the species barrier". All of the credible research thus far has it being a mutation of the corona virus. The common cold on a rampage.

      Now, if you've been listening to the reports that are still being given daily up here, you'd know that the progression isn't anaything approaching geometric and it is slowing down.

      At the risk of repeating myself ad nauseaum, the vast majority of deaths (something in the 80% range) have occured among the elderly and those under treatment for other infections.

    7. Re:Can we have some perspective, please? by qinglong · · Score: 1

      errr, the people who died in Singapore, the youngest was 27 !!!!! A doc who was treating another person. In the prime of health i would say.

    8. Re:Can we have some perspective, please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's quite contagious in fact. if you were to sneeze into your palms and touch a handle bar on a public bus with it, it has the potential to spread uncontrollably... in fact, in HongKong, a whole building is infected with the virus, and they suspect roaches are the medium...

    9. Re:Can we have some perspective, please? by cruachan · · Score: 1

      I've posted a detailed comment under another thread about reinfection rates, but I don't think I'm disagreeing with you. SARS is not particularly infectious, and with a reasonably ordered society and health system then measures can be taken to reduce the infection rate to below 1.0 and the disease can be controlled.

      My point is that it is sufficiently infectious that if it gets into a population where these are not available then infection rates will soar and we will have serious problems. For example imagine a superinfector walking around Baghdad at the moment.

  65. IN SOVIET SINGAPORE ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    webcam quarantines YOU!

  66. What about... by ldesegur · · Score: 1

    a bluetooth device embedded in a handcuff wristband that would fire an email on the host when the device is out of range from the PC.

  67. You all forgot to ask the most important question. by Sexy+Commando · · Score: 1

    Are those Linux based webcams?

  68. this is the subject blah blah by lightningscorcho · · Score: 1

    they should put webcams in prisoner cells and prisons, so we can sit there and watch them rot

  69. 60 minutes is sensationalistic CRAP! by swordgeek · · Score: 1

    Or in this case, anti-sensationalistic which amounts to the same thing.

    How many people will be dead by the time this virus is a year old? If we don't jump on it now, how many people will die annually from it five years from now?

    How many people catch Malaria by sitting in the same room as someone else with Malaria?

    Drawing stats on this (six month old) disease and comparing it to something that's established in the population and is transmitted by a completely different (and known) vector is the ultimate non sequitor. There's no connect. There's no line to draw. It's bullshit.

    --

    "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  70. Why webcams? by mdielmann · · Score: 1

    I can accept the quarantine, given a fairly high mortality rate and a significant mortality rate, but why webcams? It's bad in so many ways: invasion of privacy, huge monitoring costs (need >1 webcam per quarantined house), human error. Why not use the tracking device, with automated alert if they go out of range. If it can be set to a reasonable distance that the quarantine is still effective (or at least as effective as it has been so far), then at least some gov. official doesn't have to be subjected to watching someone sit at home scratching his ass all day...

    --
    Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    1. Re:Why webcams? by generic · · Score: 1

      108 deaths / 2,888 cases * 100 = 3.7% kill rate.
      Thats not high at all.

      --
      Microsoft aggravates my tourettes syndrome.
    2. Re:Why webcams? by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I used mortality twice. I meant martality rate and risk of infection...

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
  71. Our firewall blocked the article... by Dave21212 · · Score: 1



    I guess it saw "Singapore" near "Webcam" and just assumed the worst ;)

    --
    "Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin
  72. Thats not funny at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try this one... One day a gorilla walks in to a bar...

    1. Re:Thats not funny at all by SmackCrackandPot · · Score: 1

      And sues the zoo for not placing a warning sign where it could be seen...

  73. And someone has to watch!?! by mdielmann · · Score: 1

    Still more reasons why this is such a bad idea!!

    --
    Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
  74. Sorry couldn't resist by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 0, Redundant

    MORTICIAN: Bring out your dead!
    [clang]
    Bring out your dead!
    [clang]
    Bring out your dead!
    CUSTOMER: Here's one -- nine pence.
    DEAD PERSON: I'm not dead!
    MORTICIAN: What?
    CUSTOMER: Nothing -- here's your nine pence.
    DEAD PERSON: I'm not dead!
    MORTICIAN: Here -- he says he's not dead!
    CUSTOMER: Yes, he is.
    DEAD PERSON: I'm not!
    DEAD PERSON: I'm getting better!
    CUSTOMER: No, you're not -- you'll be stone dead in a moment.
    MORTICIAN: Oh, I can't take him like that -- it's against regulations.
    DEAD PERSON: I don't want to go in the cart!
    CUSTOMER: Oh, don't be such a baby.
    MORTICIAN: I can't take him...
    DEAD PERSON: I feel fine!
    CUSTOMER: Oh, do us a favor...
    MORTICIAN: I can't.
    CUSTOMER: Well, can you hang around a couple of minutes? He won't be long.
    MORTICIAN: Naaah, I got to go on to Robinson's -- they've lost nine today.
    CUSTOMER: Well, when is your next round?
    MORTICIAN: Thursday.
    DEAD PERSON: I think I'll go for a walk.
    CUSTOMER: You're not fooling anyone y'know. Look, isn't there something
    you can do?
    DEAD PERSON: I feel happy... I feel happy.
    [whop]
    CUSTOMER: Ah, thanks very much.
    MORTICIAN: Not at all. See you on Thursday.
    CUSTOMER: Right.

    --
    for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
    1. Re:Sorry couldn't resist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the heck moderated one of Monty Python's funniest skits as a troll?

  75. SARS fears.. by Havokmon · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Now, all dilbert joking aside, this is one disease that scares me... without a common vector identified.... we might all be in for it.

    No kidding. This thing is being reported as the kiss of death. This is the first time I've seen ANYTHING like the following in ANY news report:
    Around two-thirds of people diagnosed with SARS in Singapore have recovered.

    I wish someone would have said that earlier. It's the last line in the linked article, and it almost seems like an afterthought.
    Why is it just like the media to never say "Oh, yeah, and people really ARE surviving this disease."

    --
    "I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
    1. Re:SARS fears.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Only 4% dies of the disease, BUT almost everyone ill has to spend about two weeks hacking his lungs up and generally being very ill. Only 4%, but just take a look at your family. Count 25 people or more ? Siblings, parents, grand parents, nephews, nieces etc... Well one of those will probably die of it if it becomes a pandemic and hits your country too. The fact that only 4% die is a major contributing factor to the spread of the disease. Really lethal virusses like Ebola literally kill themselves off by rapidly killing most hosts BEFORE they can spread further. On top of everything, just the necessary measures like quarantines and diminished international travel really hurt the already poor world economy. This may not be the apocalypse, but it's certainly more worrying than you'd think.

  76. Re:Oddly enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't understand why this is a troll. it is hardly an outragous comment. he just wrote what i just thought!

  77. Re:Doesn't matter, they're ignoring the quarantine by Havokmon · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    As did the anti-war protest database [yahoo.com] being kept by the NYPD.

    God damn protesters spending all the other New Yorker's tax dollars again...

    --
    "I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
  78. Re:Oddly enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, but are they all police?

  79. Oops... by mdielmann · · Score: 1

    ...given a fairly high mortality rate and a significant infection rate...

    --
    Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
  80. Mortality Rate, do the math... by Omestes · · Score: 1

    I'm sick of this 4% number, anyone with a calculator and an internet connection can do the math...

    Goto http://www.who.int/csr/sarscountry/2003_04_10/en/ and look at the numbers...

    2781 cases, 111 deaths... 111/2781= 3% mortality rate... Though this is wrong, since this is not including people who are sick, but not recovered or dead... For this we take the 1337 (r0x0r!) number of recovered cases, and do the same high school level math; which is 8%. Much worse than 4% (though I managed to suprise myself, expecting lower)

    Further breaking it down, because most of these cases are from developing countries:

    Canada 10%
    China 4%
    Hong Kong 3%
    Malasia 33% (I death, skewed)
    Singapore 7%
    Thailand 28%
    Vietnam 6%

    Please notice that DEVELOPED countries have no deaths, besides Canada. Canada has had 97 cases and 10 deaths, while the US has had 154 cases and no deaths. UK 5/0; Germany 6/0; France 4/0. Actually among developed nations the mortality rate is only 3%, and is 0% ignoring Canada. (271 cases, 10 Canadian deaths.)

    So as an America, I'm not worried, but would be if I was in East Asia, or Canada.

    [note, please check my math... Not my strong point]

    --
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    1. Re:Mortality Rate, do the math... by Nerant · · Score: 1

      "Please notice that DEVELOPED countries have no deaths, besides Canada."

      And pray tell, why isn't Singapore a developed country? Or do you mean "any country in the west" when you say "developed country"?

      --
      Be kind. There are too many mean people out there already.
    2. Re:Mortality Rate, do the math... by praksys · · Score: 1

      while the US has had 154 cases and no deaths

      So long as good quality medical care is available the death rate will be lower in developed countries. If the US gets 10's of thousands of cases (let alone millions) good quality medical care will not be available, and you can expect a much higher death rate as a result.

      The very high death rates in some countries probably indicate that those countries are failing to detect a large number of cases that are less severe. Doctors are only seeing people who are on death's door, and are not seeing the vast majority of cases where the disease does not become life threatening. Which of course suggests that the disease is spreading unchecked in those countries.

    3. Re:Mortality Rate, do the math... by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Good point, never though to list the possible foils to the numbers... Such as flaws in reporting, due either poor incidence reports, or bad social mojo, like China now discloseing that they didn't quite report ALL of their cases, only one hospital .

      But this is a problem when deriving statistics from anything, you can never know the whole truth, especially if your using someone else's numbers. The further one is from the source of the numbers, the higher number of confounding variables there will be.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  81. A First by PhxDave · · Score: 1

    This must be the first virus not spread by microsoft outlook

  82. Re:If they're using Microsoft Webcams... by betis70 · · Score: 1

    Not as bad as the poorly timed Hong Kong ads - "Hong Kong ... it will take your breath away"

    --
    I forget...are we at war with Eurasia or East Asia?
  83. Re:Chinese Support Invading People's Privacy by nitekrow · · Score: 1

    Hey mods, this exact same offtopic, inflammatory, inappropriate and offensive crap has been recycled and posted nearly word-for-word on slashdot several times already (5691909, 5688688, 5705020, list goes on if you do a search) presumabily by the same racist/ignorant Anonymous Coward. Anonymous Coward, whoever you are, I don't know whether to laugh or feel sorry for how misguided you are.

  84. Mortality Rate only 4% Huh? since when? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Where is this 4% mortality rate coming from anyway?

    Based on the numbers on the wikipedia link (I'll assume they are recently valid).

    1448 RESOLVED cases. 111 Deaths. (1337 live)
    Thats 7.67% mortality rate.

  85. SARS is not to be trifled with by Orne · · Score: 1

    This disease kills 1 in 25, in industrialized asian nations. Worldwide, that's 200+ million people, should it spread.

    The government of Singapore is trying to minimize the spread of the virus, and if those infected are not willing to cooperate by remaining in their homes waiting out the sickness, what else are they supposed to do? If they quarantine them in the hospitals, the doctors become infected (don't forget the disease killed its discoverer) and it will just spread. Quarantine is supposed to bottle up the infected, until their bodies defeat the virus.

    Instead, those infected keep breaking quarantine, and keep going out into public where they can infect more people. I don't feel sorry for those that can't be trusted... after all, knowing that they are sick, can this be equated to attempted murder via infection?

  86. Re:Doesn't matter, they're ignoring the quarantine by hazem · · Score: 2, Informative

    I wouldn't discount it just because it's related to a more benign virus.

    In the world of cats, there is a disease called FIP (Feline Infectious Peritonitis). It's caused by a corona virus. Some cats survive it fine (like a cold), but most (I think around 90% at least) die because their immune system starts to break down the lining of their abdomen and their nervous system. Their bellies swell up terribly (with pus) and they start to have seizures.

    It sucks. If your cat gets it, I hihgly recommend giving them a merciful end. I wish I had for my two cats who got it.

    So, just because it's a corona virus, and many corona virii are mostly harmless, don't assume that all corona virii are.

  87. they are just trying to keep... by caino59 · · Score: 1

    this from happening.

    can they really be blamed?

  88. Or... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...you could just eat an ex-lax bar and forego the blender. ;)

  89. forced quarantine is bad idea by cronian · · Score: 1

    The problem with a forced quarantine is that people may decide to leave their cases unreported for fear of quarantine. They will then go around spreading the virus without seeking medical treatement until it is absolutely neccessary. While a quarantinemaybe jutified, I am not sure if it is a great idea.

  90. Is it that bad? by sharkey · · Score: 0

    Is SARS really that bad? It is a long way from here. A long way from Singapore, too.

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  91. ...picked up from a telephone handset by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    since we sent off those telephone sanitizers.


    But it will be something stupid like the percent of people who don't wash their hands is just enough to cause SARS to spread like wildfire.


    On the other hand, I plan to short Disney stock and book a vacation in Disney World in about a month. There won't be any lines.

  92. With proper medical care by dachshund · · Score: 1
    bout 4% of reported cases have lead to mortality.

    4% given advanced medical care. Approximately 10-20% of the cases so far require the aid of a mechanical respirator. If SARS spread sufficiently that we ran out of respirators, I assume the mortality rate would be higher.

  93. Here's your big deal by siskbc · · Score: 1
    Because 4% mortality is damned high for any contagious disease, that's why. Because it's more contagious than the clap in Tijuana, that's why. Combine those two and you have the potential (yes I said POTENTIAL) for this to be the biggest killing virus (among otherwise healthy people) since polio.

    As I said, it's one of the more contagious viruses (yes, that's the correct plural, asshole, you know who you are), and we have no idea how it is spread. I'm not sure, but I'm guessing that for each person who has gotten it, they've given it to 2-3 people (I'm guessing from the speed of symtom development as well as the growth of the disease, and case studies). That, given your 4% mortality, means that if they have 500 people with the disease, NOT quarantining them will kill about 50 people. Not much fun, eh? And that's just in the first generation of spread.

    Glad you're not in charge of the CDC. To sum up, this thing is incredibly acute, has a currently unknown vector other than general proximity/air, has no real cure, and is contagious. If there were ever a case for quarantine, you just found it.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  94. Statistics for 2002 for some perspective by SourceHammer · · Score: 1
    No offense meant to anyone suffering from SARS.

    Annual Deaths 2002

    Heart Disease 724,915

    Malignant Neoplasms (Cancer) 549,787

    Stroke (cerebrovascular disease) 167,340

    Chronic Lower Respiratory disease 124,153

    Accidents (Car Accidents* - 42,437) 97,298

    Diabetes Mellitus 68,379

    Pneumonia & Influenza 63,686

    Alzheimer's Disease 44,507

    Kidney disease (Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, & nephrosis) 35,524

    Septicemia (toxins in the blood - known as "blood poisoning") 30,670

    I estimate that SARS may cause 1800 deaths the per year, a layman's view.

    --



    Open source development is my way of competing with the low-cost programmers in India...
    1. Re:Statistics for 2002 for some perspective by MightyTribble · · Score: 1

      No offense, but your layman's estimate is just that: a layman's estimate.

      My wife's a doctor with a strong background in immunology. She's worried about SARS, based on two suppositions:

      1. It's about as transmissible as influenza.
      2. It's about twice as fatal as influenza (3+% vs. 1.5%)

      So far, the limited evidence suggests that both are true. The one ray of hope is that the disease appears to weaken as it moves away from patient zero (flu doesn't - it just mutates). Again, not quite enough evidence to go on, but if both these suppositions bear out, then you can expect SARS to easily kill more than three times the number of influenza cases, should it become endemic in the population like the rhinoviruses are.

      That's 180,000 annual fatalities. Worried yet?

      We're all hoping that SARS weakens as it moves from host to host. Otherwise we're *screwed*.

  95. Re:Chinese Support Invading People's Privacy by The+Cydonian · · Score: 1

    He's not alone. A friend of mine once pointed to an MIT paper that quoted one of its sources as "National University of Singapore, Singapore, China".

    Yup, you read that right. A paper from MIT.

  96. How do you know it's live? by riedquat · · Score: 1

    Moral issues aside, this seems like a poor way to monitor people. What's to stop you recording some video of you in the house, and playing it back while you're out? Didn't the designers watch Speed?

  97. How these countries handle it by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
    More interesting than the disese itself would be how the govenments handle the situation. Singapore is known for being very strict--They seem to be trying to do the right thing without being too "Big Brotherly". Canada is our [US] nearest neighbor and they seem to be handling it with fairness as well. This is a scary thing,and they're doing their best to keep it from spreading. If that means confining people to their homes, that's far better than carting them off to "Leper" colonies or the like--people need to play along with the rules they set!


    This is where a little media action [propaganda?] could actually be helpful! The CDC needs to get on CNN and Newspapers and start explaining to people what is expected should SARS land in their community! For the most part, it's not scary, they just want you to go home and stay home. There is an opportunity here to get people up to speed with dangerous disese controlls--masks, cleaning supplies, and procedures to follow. Just cause your kid brings it home from school doesn't mean the whole house will get it. BUT.. they need to get the word out Before they start locking people down, not after they start. It would reduce the fear in the public--and the public's fear of a thing is often worse than the thing itself! If it only kills one out of 25 that get it, but we have to arrest and threaten everyone who might come in contact, then our fears end up killing more people than the disease! Now is the time to inform people calmly, logically, and fairly before there is the need for more "drastic" measures.


    Who knows, maybe they could get cable hooked up or at least a stay on the utilities untill the people are deemed healthy again. Non-disease considerations are as much a part of the problem as the actual quarintine. People need assurance they won't loose their jobs, utilities, food, and contact with the outside world as well as being safe for the community. Those considerations should be addressed as well!

  98. Woohoo! Paid sick leave! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems to me that being quarantined isn't so bad. For those of us lucky enough to have jobs with benefits, its a paid sick leave! Of course, I'd probably be expected to work from home ;-(

  99. Oooh, we hit triple digits by jkabbe · · Score: 1

    Scary. But not quite so scary when you consider that the current WHO estimate is that 250,000-500,000 people die every year world-wide from influenza.

  100. Cause and affect / effect confusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which is the cause and which is the effect, if either?
    A major difficulty with this observation is that maybe your friends are just sickly people and thus are much more concerned with trying to stay sanitary.Remember that not that long ago and currently not that far away, there are / were huge child / infant mortality rates due to sickness.
    (Though, to an extent I am inclined to agree with your assessment.)

  101. CDC by PotatoHead · · Score: 1

    Too bad they did not do the same for AIDS...

  102. More context - flu killed 64,000 in US in '99 by MightyTribble · · Score: 2, Informative


    That's right - Influenza killed 63,730 people in the US in 1999, according to the CDC. Flu has a mortality rate of around 1.5%.

    If you want to make a *very* rough extrapolation of the data, assuming that SARS is about as virulent and becomes as prevelent as influenza, you might expect it to kill *at least* 130,000 people in the US per year. Bear in mind that the widespread use of an influenza vaccine reduces 'flu deaths considerably... we don't yet have a vaccine for SARS.

    That would conservatively put SARS as the third or fourth leading cause of death in the country (yes, above accidents and car crashes, too).

    So yes, SARS is a point of concern, should it become endemic in the population.

    1. Re:More context - flu killed 64,000 in US in '99 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Bear in mind that the widespread use of an influenza vaccine reduces 'flu deaths considerably...

      Where did you get THAT idea?

      Flu vaccines are made from a couple popular strains from the flu that was going around the year BEFORE. A year is a looong time for a virus to change. So out of the 20 or so main strains, what are the odds that you are only exposed to the two contained in the vaccine, and that they have changed so little during millions of intervening generations that you will be immune?

      Despite the widespread usage of the vaccine, there are 64k deaths a year from the flu. All the vaccine is likely to give you is a moderate case of whatever strain gets pumped into your bloodstream.

      No thanks.

    2. Re:More context - flu killed 64,000 in US in '99 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, ignorance in action.

    3. Re:More context - flu killed 64,000 in US in '99 by MightyTribble · · Score: 1

      >> Bear in mind that the widespread use of an influenza vaccine reduces 'flu deaths considerably...
      > Where did you get THAT idea?

      From my wife, who happens to be a doctor with a strong research background in immunology, and also from my own readings of the sixty gazillion issues of JAMA and NEJM lying around the house.

      Thanks for playing!

  103. SARS Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go here.

  104. Tricky Part about SARS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    It isn't clear that the numbers accurately reflect the total numbers-some health officials think the number of folks that are affected is larger-and some folks just don't need hospital care. It will take a while to figure out what is really happening here-but we'll know quite a bit more in 60 days.


    In the US, SARS is at this point, confined to some specific populations--basically folks that travel to East Asia. If SARS gets into the US prison population or illegal Mexican immigrants-watch out. Those populations have limited access to medical care-and limited ability to modify their vulnerabilty.


    Even if the US can contain spread of SARS from Asia, how long until SARS spreads to Mexico? At that point, illegal immigration becomes a major public health concern.

  105. who's gonna pay my bills? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If i get SARS, who's gonna pay my rent, my bills, my food, my car payment, my car insurance, my healthcare... oh wait, i can't afford that, my taxes?
    stay confined? lol, i'm an american citizen and i can't afford it.

  106. ...Asian Webcams by greenhide · · Score: 1

    Uh, insert something funny here.

    No seriously, I was searching through all of the comments to make sure I wouldn't be redundant.

    I must have been the only one to read this and think "Asian webcams. Huh huh."

    Okay, joke #2.

    If they ever want to go out, they can always just put the webcam on a loop, just like in Speed!

    *sigh*

    I should probably stop posting now.

    --
    Karma: Chevy Kavalierma.
  107. More perspective by zackbar · · Score: 1

    The figures are just for the first year. Figure on it escalating logarithmically until everyone has been infected, or some kind of solution is found.

    1800 the first year, half a million the second year, etc. Fortunately, heart disease doesn't work the same way.

    1. Re:More perspective by SourceHammer · · Score: 1

      Do you mean geometrically? I graphed it; so far it looks linear. More data will tell. I based my analysis on data from:

      the World Health Organization

      --



      Open source development is my way of competing with the low-cost programmers in India...
    2. Re:More perspective by zackbar · · Score: 1

      I did mean logarithmically, but I think you are correct.

      1 person infects 10, each of those 10 would infect 10 more, etc. That makes a lot more sense than 1 person infecting 10, and each of those 10 infecting 20 more. So you are right, and it is geometrical.

      In fact, it will probably turn into a parabola at the point where most people have already been infected. When that happens, and all who will die from it has, it will just be another cold.

      But as we're still on the beginning edge, it looks linear still.

  108. Stephen, my cube-neighbor suggests... by GeneralEmergency · · Score: 1

    ...that Microsoft change it's slogan to "Where the Hell do you Think you're Going Today?"

    --
    "A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
    GeneralEmergency
  109. Outbreak... by SJ · · Score: 1

    Has anyone considered the posibility that SARS is actually an engineered virus? It would surpise me if it was created by North Korea to wipe out the South. Hell, we get enough of that theme from movies and video games to discount it. Think of the public hysteria if it came out that this was actually the case.

    Then again, it could be good-ol' Mother Nature bringing the population down to managable levels.

  110. And in other news... by thynk · · Score: 1

    Slashdot moderators still have not found a sense of humor.

    Offtopic maybe (like 90% of slashdot posts), but a troll?

    sigh, sometimes it's hard to be an alpha...

    --

    Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
  111. SARS massively overhyped by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    These people are carrying a highly contageous, deadly, virus.

    Ridiculous. SARS is massively overhyped. Somewhere, someone is making money off of selling it as way more dangerous than it is. Could be normal media alarmism, maybe some government wants to discourage tourism somewhere, or maybe it's just plain bad luck where doctors want to get their names in the paper.

    SARS has a lower mortality rate than the goddamn *flu*, folks. It's not particularly widespread. It's caused fewer deaths than the regular old cold does in a year (only a hundred people worldwide, total!), and several orders of magnitude less than the flu does every year.

    Even *diseases* aren't that much of an issue among most of the people panicking. For a citizen of a prosperous nation, obesity-induced heart attacks or car crashes are far, far, more likely to be a cause of death.

    Nor are hospitals particularly "overwhelmed". There have been a few thousand SARS cases worldwide. Hong Kong has a lot of worried people because the climate and cramped conditions with a huge population results in major health problems every year. Hong Kong has far, far worse flu problems than the United States does, year round.

    Don't believe me? Look at the World Health Organization or CDC websites. They have SARS information up, and aren't particularly upset about it. "If someone on my cruise ship comes down with SARS, should I seek medical attention or leave the boat?" "Naw, it's fine."

  112. When calculating mortality rates... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    ...keep in mind that not all non-fatal cases are reported.

    Incidently, you're right in criticizing the grandparent post, though for the wrong reason -- China has not released the health data.

  113. Still possible by GunFodder · · Score: 1

    Because we can. It's too late to limit the spread of the cold, or influenza, or AIDS, but SARS is new enough that we still have a chance to slow it down.

  114. Re:Mortality Rate, do the math... again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Please notice that DEVELOPED countries have no deaths, besides Canada

    I see that you have never been to Singapore or HongKong! They ARE developed! Much more so that you think. Do your homework!

    > So as an America, I'm not worried, but would be if I was in East Asia, or Canada.

    Good for you! Stay in you safe bubble, America is best, America is safe, poor you!

    Look at the numbers again, China is better at curing SARS than Canada? and HongKong? US do not even publish how many have recovered! (who said developed?)
    and see "United States of America, which is reporting suspected cases under investigation" not real cases, so US have not had 154 cases! But since it is so developed maybe you can tell us how many REAL cases it has had?

    You can prove everything with statistics, even that US is best :-) take care, eat your vitamines and live long!

  115. So what other quarantine measures can be taken? by jraf · · Score: 1
    I am in Singapore right now, and I'm pretty much disturbed that there have been cases of quarantine orders being broken here. Knowing that not everyone will be sensible enough to just obey the quarantine orders, I think the webcam move is appropriate. However, it seems that using the webcam to ensure home quarantine isn't too popular with the /. crowd. The CDC's SARS information page doesn't seem to clearly state how quarantine will be done in the US. It just says:
    Quarantine, in contrast, applies to people who have been exposed and may be infected but are not yet ill. Separating exposed people and restricting their movements is intended to stop the spread of that illness. Quarantine is medically very effective in protecting the public from disease.
    My question is this, what better way is there to enforce home quarantine? How will the US CDC do it? Cos offhand, I can't think of any other convenient way to monitor and enforce a home quarantine.
  116. Your finger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



  117. Am I getting this right? by fdamstra · · Score: 1

    I get sick? So people install video cameras in my house?

    Spring's coming, thank God I don't get hayfever. Oh, damn, I do. Guess I'd better get used to masturbating in front of a webcam.

  118. Why this matters by dkhoo · · Score: 2, Informative

    SARS is a big deal. It has a mortality rate of about 4% and this is with suspected patients rushed to hospital, pumped full of advanced antiviral drugs and kept in the best intensive care money can buy. Its mortality rate is much higher in untreated cases. It seems to be at least as virulent as the flu.

    Do the math. The flu, which has a mortality rate of only 1-2%, kills hundreds of thousands around the world each year. If SARS is not successfully contained, millions will die, mostly in the third world which does not have the kind of medical care available in Singapore.

    SARS is still spreading. The outbreak is not over yet. If it reaches densely populated poor urban centres like Calcutta, Rio de Janeiro, or the projects in LA, Chicago or New York, all hell will break loose. This is bigger than some minor conflict in Iraq. This is serious shit.

    You should be thankful that cities like Singapore, Hong Kong and Toronto are trying so hard to keep SARS under control. Singapore and Hong Kong are the world's two busiest seaports and both are major air transport hubs. They are now the world's bulwark against contagion and if they fail millions will die.

    Singapore is the best equipped city in the world to weather the storm. She is a first world country, with per capita GDP equal to the UK. She has the best health care system in the world.

    The country is highly controlled and regulated. I am all for civil rights and freedom, but this is one of those times that strong authority is needed to enforce quarantines and stop people acting stupidly. The government is on the ball, among other things shutting down schools, imposing mandatory screening at the airport, and even deploying the army to stop SARS. Honestly, if Singapore cannot contain SARS, the world is fucked.

    As an aside, most of the SARS deaths in Singapore are health care workers working with those infected with SARS at the hospital where they are all being concentrated in. I salute the duty, bravery and valor of these men and women.

    1. Re:Why this matters by cruachan · · Score: 1

      Most of your comments are excellent, EXCEPT that SARS is nowhere near as virulent as flu.

      If it was there would be several million cases by now. SARS is actually down the lower end of the spectrum for infectious diseases, which gives hope that it can be controlled.

      By way of example take measles and smallpox. If a lecturer with measles walks into a lecture theatre with 100 students at then end of the lecture all 100 students will have measles. The virus is airborne and shed from the skin and is *that* infectious.

      By contrast to pass on smallpox he'd need direct skin contact. SARS is down the lower end of this spectrum too - less infectious than smallpox by the look of it and certainly much less infectious than flu (which is nearer the measles level).

      Another helpful factor is that indications are that SARS is only infectious when symptoms are being displayed.

      As WHO point out, since the infection was recognised there has been no cases of uncontrolled outbreaks in any country where it wasn't present beforehand. Vietnam has also effectively controlled it's outbreak and almost ended it (they though they had but one vector got through).

      In all probability the HK and China outbreaks will be controlled and it's unlikely to cause an uncontrollable problem in the first world thereafter. The danger lies if it gets into a third world population and becomes endemic, which will result in permanant draconian measures in the first world to catch infections until a vaccine is developed,

  119. sure beats being locked up somewhere by g4dget · · Score: 1
    The traditional way of quarantining people is to lock them up somewhere. Frankly, I'd prefer a wrist band and staying at home any day.

    And if you think that this is Singapore-only, think again. Every nation, including the US, has public health regulations in place to quarantine people when there is a medical emergency.

  120. Why the big hype about SARS? by Zerbey · · Score: 1

    OK, I know over 100 people have died of this desease and I feel for the families, I really do but why is the media hyping up this desease so much?

    Yes, 100+ people died for SARS but what about the THOUSANDS of people who die EVERY SINGLE DAY in poor countries because of either famine, war or poverty?

    All this hype is doing is creating mass panic.

    1. Re:Why the big hype about SARS? by praksys · · Score: 1

      Obviously the problem is not the number of people who have died so far. Other sorts of pneumonia have killed, and are still killing, far more people. The problem is that this disease is quite contagious and has the potential to spread very rapidly to a large number of people. Unlike other recent plauges it does not appear to require an animal vector (like west nile) or sexual contact (like AIDS) and (you wouldn't think this is a bad thing, but it is) it doesn't kill enough of its victims to burn out quickly (like Ebola).

      If the number of cases went high enough then the death rate per case would also climb because of a lack of medical resources to go around. If it spread out of control so that, let's say, 50% of the US population was infected, and if 5% of those people died as a result, then that would mean about 7 million dead. In a very short space of time. That would be a pretty serious problem.

      World wide a pandemic could easily kill 100 million people. Similar events have happened before. In 1918-19 influenza killed 13-30 million people (depending on who you ask). Travel and increased population density would only make such an pandemic more severe today. Advances in medical technology are unlikely to make a difference once a pandemic gets under way.

      A little panic in advance might be good if it motivates the authorities to deal with this disease effectively (as opposed to the decidedly half hearted measures that have been taken so far).

    2. Re:Why the big hype about SARS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very true. Anything new is hyped because it sells newspapers and magazines.

      I don't remember reading about West Nile Virus lately, but it was all the rage last summer.

  121. Re:Mortality Rate, do the math... again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "But since it is so developed maybe you can tell us how many REAL cases it has had?"

    Three confirmed travelers from Canada are verified in the US, all are responding well to the mixed treatment approach that is also being used in Canada and eleswhere.

  122. Chinese Lack of Ethics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The big deal is that the Chinese in Singapore have again violated human rights. Placing a government-controlled video camera in your home to monitor your every move violates your human rights. However, most Chinese support this nonsense. Read "Why the Chinese are Different from Westerners".

    The Chinese have supported various bizarre acts of human-rights abuses. In Singapore, the Chinese use caning to discipline lawbreakers. The Chinese also have banned, on various occasions, "The Economist" magazine.

    The Chinese are very different from Westerners.

    1. Re:Chinese Lack of Ethics by marpheus · · Score: 1

      Have you even been to Singapore? Have you ever met, and TALKED TO a singaporean chinese? No, but you READ ABOUT them in The Economist, so they HAVE to be retards... I see... I've lived in Singapore for about a year now. First of all, chinese is far from the only race here (in fact, the president isn't even chinese). Most chinese do NOT support this nonsense. And obviously you don't even know what you're talking about since the camera is NOT there to monitor your every move, it's there to be turned on for a short while a few times every day by the user to confirm that you're not off spreading the disease outside your home.

    2. Re:Chinese Lack of Ethics by ObiBhuan · · Score: 1

      Singapore president : Indian
      Many of the top ministers : Indian and Malay

      Human-rights violations are not an issue in Singapore. Please back up your accusations with evidence. Twisting caning (a form of capital punishment which has proved extremely effective) into something worse than it is has been overdone.

  123. Re:Mortality Rate, do the math... again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Three confirmed travelers from Canada are verified in the US

    So US have 3 cases and no deaths. Can not be considered in the statistics! What was so great about US again? SARS is a threat to all countries, hopefully US and other 'developed' countries can learn from Singapore/HK and deal with it better.

  124. The Chinese are Different from Westerners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The Chinese in Singapore and elsewhere are very different from Westerners. Most Chinese support violating human rights and, specifically, placing a government-controlled video camera in your home to monitor your every move. This sort of sick nonsense would never be approved in the West. Other examples of sick Chinese behavior is (1) using caning to discipline law breakers and (2) banning journals like "The Economist" when it publishes something that the Chinese do not like.

    The use of caning in Singapore exploded into the front pages of "The Washington Post" and the like when an American youngster was caned in Singapore for crime of spray-painting a car. A Chinese hired by the Singaporean government wacked the American youth 3 times with a cane.

    Please read "Why Chinese are Different from Westerners".

  125. Chinese Technique of Quarantine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Nonetheless, using this unique method of quarantine is not appropriate. Putting a government-controlled video camera inside the home of a person in order to monitor her is a grave violation of her privacy -- and her human rights. What right does the government have to snoop inside of your house?

    By the way, most Chinese support violating the human rights of people. Read "Why are Chinese Different from Westerners".

    A good example is the caning incident about 10 years ago. At that time, an American younster was caught in the act of spray painting a car. The government of Singapore, of whom the majority of its citizens are Chinese, punished the youngster by caning him violently. The story made its way to the front pages of newspapers like "The New York Times". Most Chinese support caning.

    Another example is the Chinese in Singapore periodically banning journals like "The Economist" because it prints articles that offend the Chinese. Most Chinese support such abridgments of free speech.

    In short, the Chinese are very different from Westerners. The Chinese lack any notion of modern ethics.

  126. Lock them up! by billcopc · · Score: 1

    If someone's going to force me to stay indoors all the time, or else face a hefty fine, then I'd rather live at the government's expense in an isolated building and receive proper treatment. If they want to protect lives it shouldn't be at the detriment of the current victims. It's already hell enough to suffer from SARS anyways.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  127. Chinese Lack of Ethics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    But that is not even the biggest problem. The biggest problem is the violation of human rights. What right does the government have to monitor my activities within my own home?

    Most Chinese support the government violating your privacy and fully support the atrocious attempt by the Singaporean government to violate human rights -- specifically, the right to your own privacy. The Singaporean government is, in fact, a Chinese government since most of the people in the government and in Singapore itself are Chinese. They have supported numerous human-rights-violating policies in addition to the current atrocious policy of placing a video camera inside your home.

    Some examples are using violent caning (i. e. with beating with a real cane) to discipline lawbreakers and periodically banning journals like "The Economist" when it publishes articles that the Chinese dislike. These examples are just the tip of the iceberg in Singapore.

    For more information and analysis, please read "Why the Chinese are Different from Westerners".

  128. Chinese-style Nation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    All these abuses are common in nations run by Chinese. Singapore is an example of a Chinese nation.

    In Singapore, the Chinese frequently cane (i. e. violently beat with a cane) lawbreakers. The Chinese periodically ban distribution of reputable journals like "The Economist" when they publish articles that offend the Chinese. Now, we have the latest twist in Chinese-style government. The Chinese put a government-operated video camera in your house in order to monitor your every move.

    The Chinese are very different from Westerners. Please read "Why Chinese are Different from Westerners".

  129. Think on the bright side! by MacFury · · Score: 1

    Look at it this way. It will be great for keeping the world's population under control! I wonder if there are places setup that just sit in quaruntee waiting for this kind of thing to decimate mankind before they come out of hiding and repopulate the earth.

  130. Quarantines - 2/3 recover vs 0/3 recover by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1

    SARS isn't so bad, yet there are quarantines, as well there should be for harmful diseases. If the world were interested in preventive medicine rather than reactive hype, then more quarantines should be made for MDR TBC which is real bad. Unlike the kinder, gentler SARS, MDR TBC is usually a death sentence which takes years of physical wasting until drowning/suffocation can occur. The exception is if rigorous attention to treatment and medical supervision is given.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
  131. Middle path by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1
    NB, I am not saying that Sweden and Singapore are completely comperable, just that they are the standout "see, it's not so bad" exemplars of their respective political philosophies. Although both are well-kempt and relatively free of gum on the sidewalks. A minor correction, then a ramble:

    Actually, Sweden used to follow the middle path between free market and socialism, using the best where it applied. In the late 1980's early 1990's there was an ideological shift manifested as a hard swing to the right and a mania for privitization, even in situations where it doesn't fit or even causes harm.

    There's hard data should you care to look, but national debt, dirty sidewalks, street crime, bad grades, even bad teeth, rise in direct proportion to the imbalance.

    There's also hard data should you care to look, showing that some of the controls really increased quality of life. Clean water was one of them. Stockholm, once, was the Calcutta of Europe but now the water is clean enough, for the time being, to swim and fish in. There's not a city in the U.S. that couldn't benefit from cleaning up their regional water ways. As an example, the Huron River, or any river connected to the Great Lakes, had been used for salmon and trout fishing for literally 1000's of years, prior to industrialization. It or any other river in the U.S., with effort and time, could be usable again.

    Likewise with proper sick leave and health care. In the U.S. and many other countries it is difficult or impossible economically to take sick leave. To add damage, it is often considered status to show up sick at work and spread it to others.

    To bring this back to topic, it's a variation of "your right to swing your fist ends at my face": your right to go 'round coughing up a lung ends at the point before it could spread to others.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
  132. Webcams are cheaper and on subscription basis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You just need to connect the webcam to the phone socket, and it works (embedded linux, i believe)

  133. humbug, talk about panic merchants by DABANSHEE · · Score: 1

    Only 100 people out of 6 billion have died from SARS.

    Also World wide infection are easily way less than 10,000.

    Meaning the fact is that statistically (taking error rates into account) the world wide rate of SARS is no different than if it never existed.

    Even comparing Chinese effection rates to the Chinese population, the stats work out as within the error rate of not existing too.

    These things are always blown out of proportion simply by panic merchants, hack journos trying to sell more newspapers, bureaucrats/health officials/polies who expect the world to 100% totally safe to the point that doctors will get sued if someones grany dies before doing a century, & health bureaucrats trying to justify budget increases for their dept.

  134. Silver Lining by cruachan · · Score: 1

    There is a good side to this.

    SARS is has a mortality high enough that it's serious, and is infectious enough that while it can be controlled, it's a challenge to do so.

    It therefore gives WHO, CDC etc. a dry run. Better to find out what's wrong with their epedemic control procedures now rather than if something really nasty pops up later.

  135. 5% fatality by Firehawk · · Score: 1

    The usual annual influenza outbreaks have a mortality of less than 1%, typically 0.1%. The 1918 Influenza Pandemic was a particularly virulent strain that had a mortality rate of somewhere between 1 and 1.5%.

    Now we have an extremely contagious disease that has a mortality rate of 5% and it seems to have a preponderance to take out the medical people first and you have a potentially big problem on your hands.

    Please take back your statement about SARS being "not particularly more deadly than the flu".

  136. the real mortality rate by Firehawk · · Score: 1

    Singapore has a first rate hospital system. Before you ask, yes, I do know. I work there. I also did my medical training and a year's work in Australia so I can compare the health systems.

    The mortality rate in Singapore is likely to be higher than 5% by the time this is over. If everyone *currently* in ICU with SARS dies, that's going to be a mortality rate of close to 10%.

    Mind you, amongst the deaths so far in Singapore there's an otherwise healthy 29 year old woman whose only contact was travelling to Hong Kong, a previously very healthy (I knew him) 27 year old doctor and a couple of 50-something year old people (parents of the first index case).

    I'm a doctor and I don't like these odds. I agree you shouldn't be running for your mask just yet but if SARS comes to your city, well ...

    btw, surgical masks aren't sufficient, you should get at least N95 certified masks ...

  137. Webcam quarantine is fodder for comedy by frankejames · · Score: 1

    Those "authorities" actions are just more grist for the comedy mill. Whoohoo! Better to laugh than cry. See our cartoon spoof on SARS, renamed "SALS", severe acute limb syndrome: http://www.officepolitics.com

    --
    ~ Backstab or kiss-ass to get to the top? www.OfficePolitics.com
  138. too soft by mlong · · Score: 1

    Sounds to me like that need to get out the good ole' Singapore whip. 15 slashes ought to make them stay inside.

    --
    //m
  139. incentives--Re:forced quarantine is bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a valid point, but can be addressed by incentives. If this is a pandemic, we'll see various resources get scarce fast--like ventilators. Folks that delay reporting their symptoms should go at the bottom of the list for scarce resources.

    Also, quarentine should be more "coarse grained". Any city in which SARS is appearing in the US should be immediately quarentined until SARS has run its course there. I happen to live in a state that has SARS here now. If those specific states were quarentined until the disease has run its course, the rest of the US would be _much_ safer.

  140. Re:Mortality Rate, do the math... again! by Omestes · · Score: 1

    Perhaps you miss my point, Herr AC, I'm not lauding the benefits of the US, I'm just saying that developed countries have better medical treatment. Not sure on Canada though, mayhap they just got caught with their proverbial pants down.

    Hong Kong ain't a country, BTW, it is a provence of China, which I would call Developing. Mayhap the whole Developed/Non was a bad choice of classification, perhaps Medically Apt would have been better.

    --
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  141. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 0

    In a minimum-phase system there is an inextricable link between
    frequency response, phase response and transient response, as they
    are all merely transforms of one another. This combined with
    minimalization of open-loop errors in output amplifiers and correct
    compensation for non-linear passive crossover network loading can
    lead to a significant decrease in system resolution lost. However,
    this all means jack when you listen to Pink Floyd.

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...