Imagine. You could hear about a new virus (or the "awakening" of an old one)

[skip fox]

on a Monday morning and be dead from it by the weekend.

I still think climate change will prove a far greater disaster than any but the most severe pandemic, but the realization of how quickly some new or renewed virus might change everything ("down to your socks," as they say) in the matter of days is another awareness of life's brevity.

Something old people like me have as a program running (ever more loudly) in the background.

[HooptieWagon]

1. One that fast killing likely won't cause a pandemic.

Since the infected persons won't be able to spread the disease as far before dying.
A worse case would be a virus where the infected person doesn't become sick immediately, but is contagious. The virus will be tough to control then.

[skip fox]

2. True.

Maybe a 2-3 week time. But that's still a radical shift: from living, playing Frisbee in the sun on one day and being infected within a few weeks, taken to bed and a swift, irrevocable decline.

That's less frightening to me now that I'm old (and had a heart attack this spring), but it's staggering to think of what a shock such a vulnerability must be for young people (even those who heroically try to treat others, though they were aware of the risks). Yet, such is the modern world. . . .

[Marrah_G]

4. The doctors and researchers for emerging contagious disease are heroes

I really admire them

[skip fox]

5. Me too. And to imagine Trump calling for them to be kept from being returned to America!!

As though his life is so much more valuable. . . . Geez.

[Marrah_G]

6. he is so slimy- makes my skin crawl

[Marrah_G]

3. Anything that kills that fast burns itself out.

One of the reasons AIDS is so good at spreading is that length of time it takes to kill, allowing it to infect others at a higher rate before they know they are sick.

[pansypoo53219]

7. i recommend highly a book i read years ago-the coming plague. disease made interesting.