To infect a large amount of people (like the population of a large US city) with a bio-weapon like the Ebola virus, drones could be used to spray over-head with ease. Because of the immediacy of infection, the population of cities affect would experience a dramatic reduction nearly instantly. In fact, it would take nearly a week for officials to even respond to this type of pandemic and by that time, thousands of Americans would be have succumbed to the Ebola virus.
Because of the effectiveness of the mortality rate of the Ebola virus, it is the perfect bio-weapon. And if combined with the recent implementation of drones in US skies, could this be a combination we should be concerned about?
13 comments
Another truther idiot commenting on things they know nothing about.
The point of bio-weapons is not to kill everything drawing breath. It is to kill tightly control groups. So the idea that Ebola is a great bio-weapon because it has a high lethality rate is nonsense, unless the point is some sort of doomsday scenario, in which case why bother taking over the world?
Perfect bioweapon... except that ebola is not an airborne virus. And we've had exactly 5 cases of ebola on American soil. Two of them were doctors in western Africa, one case came her accidentally, and the other two were nurses treating the guy who accidentally brought it here.
While ebola is a serious disease, I wish people would stop freaking out about it. You have a higher chance of dying from the flu.
No. Just NO. Ebola is one of the WORST candidates for a bio-weapon. The virus simply does NOT stay infectious for long enough after excretion from a human host (temperature and drying have major effects on infectivity) to be effective. Even as infectious droplets (e.g., from a cough or sneeze), one would have to be practically on top of the infected person to risk infection him-/herself.
As has been stated already, worry MUCH more about influenza than Ebola.
"it is the perfect bio-weapon."
I'm not sure how many more times I'm going to have to say this but Ebola would make an absolutely terrible bio weapon. If you think it would then you do not know anything about ebola or bio weapons.
Ebola is only spread through DIRECT contact with an infected persons bodily fluids. It cannot be spread in the air with drones in order to infect people. It does not live on surfaces for long like influenza and rhinovirus , you will not catch it from an infected persons cough or sneeze unless they stand directly in front of you and aim for your eyes or an open wound (sneezing and coughing aren't symptons anyway), it is remarkably hard to hide an infection so you aren't going to see very ill people walking around in public, and the average mortality rate for ebola is actually 50 percent. There have been higher rates in certain outbreaks but the majority of the time its around 50 percent.
There is a reason that the only people infected in the US have been healthcare workers. There is also a reason why the Liberian man, Eric Duncan, was surrounded by family in the same house after he became symptomatic and no one else was infected. IT is NOT an easy virus to catch and you should be ashamed of yourself for promoting fear, paranoia, and misinformation. Fear mongers who don't understand issues like this are the bane of society.
Ebola would make the worst bio weapon imaginable.
What about the people involved in putting the Ebola (or whatever it is the chemidiots think they're spraying) into the drones for dispersal?
Wouldn't they have some idea of what it is they're doing?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
