The zombie apocalypse would be gruesome but short. Of course, numerous people would be zombified and would die, but the problem with the movies is that they all view it in the wrong light. The zombie apocalypse is less of an "invasion" and more of a "plague." It is essentially a disease that is spread by biting, which kills the victim, but also leaves him a shambling human-shaped substitute with no purpose but to multiply, again through biting.
Movies always jump from the point of initial spread, then immediately jump to widespread infestation. But diseases don't work that way. Much of my commenting is based on arguably the best article ever written by Cracked, 7 Scientific Reasons a Zombie Outbreak Would Fail (Quickly), so my ideas aren't unique.
Compare zombies to ebola, which caused a stir, especially when it briefly appeared in the US. Althoug Ebola spreads quickly through body fluids, and even then not even coughing or sneezing, so when you come in direct contact with blood or body fluid, transmission is very high, but if you're not touching blood or sleeping with an infected person, it can be avoided. Zombiesm is even harder to spread, since it must come through a bite. It'll spread, but not like wildfire.
Another interesting point is that zombies, being dead walking human flesh, will deteriorate, will rot, will be subject to rigor mortis, and will be viewed as prey to animals from flies to mountain lions in a very short time. A zombie might get up from a stumble, but not from a broken leg. You don't have to kill the zombie to stop it: simply stop it's progression and you're golden.
Treat a zombie outbreak like a disease outbreak, and you'll be golden. Get your family out of town, obey quarantines, let the outbreak wear itself out.
Great read! And yeah, I don't see the zombie epidemic doing as much damage as they show in the movies simply because continuing to bite someone would be hard once people realized whats going on.
Well unless its evil dead style and magic based with the previously dead rising and animated limbs.
Even t-virus style where animals can be infected, the virus can mutate the hosts and the who thing is rather more dangerous.
We have to consider how to contain the outbreak, not getting biten isn't as easy as it sounds when you are trying to also treat and guard the outbreak. If the virus makes you crazy and or strong and or fast then it gets a bit more complicated.
Also its always people who are hiding their initial infection who are the downfall of any healthy group.
Look, you're mixing up various zombie ideas. Are we talking Haitian magic, Romero story-lines, Bruce Campbell black comedy, or infectious disease? None of these things have any real likelihood of turning into a zombie apocalypse! My point was that, even if the worst did somehow occur, the most realistic would almost certainly wear itself out in a matter of a few days. Therefore, act with wisdom and care, get away from the outbreak and you should be safe.
I'm not talking about mixed reasons, my point was there's many reasons that a zombie outbreak wouldn't behave like a regular disease situation.
And the only constant is healthy groups tend to be torn apart by scared people who try to hide their infection. Especially when the go-to way to deal with it is to kill the infected person. I think a true zombie outbreak (say something like 28 days rage or Planet Terror chemical leak) wouldn't be as easily contained as something like ebola.
Not least because we already are tainted by all these other ideas of zombie-ism and fantastical ideas on how it works and how to deal with it.
The zombie apocalypse would be gruesome but short. Of course, numerous people would be zombified and would die, but the problem with the movies is that they all view it in the wrong light. The zombie apocalypse is less of an "invasion" and more of a "plague." It is essentially a disease that is spread by biting, which kills the victim, but also leaves him a shambling human-shaped substitute with no purpose but to multiply, again through biting.
Movies always jump from the point of initial spread, then immediately jump to widespread infestation. But diseases don't work that way. Much of my commenting is based on arguably the best article ever written by Cracked, 7 Scientific Reasons a Zombie Outbreak Would Fail (Quickly), so my ideas aren't unique.
Compare zombies to ebola, which caused a stir, especially when it briefly appeared in the US. Althoug Ebola spreads quickly through body fluids, and even then not even coughing or sneezing, so when you come in direct contact with blood or body fluid, transmission is very high, but if you're not touching blood or sleeping with an infected person, it can be avoided. Zombiesm is even harder to spread, since it must come through a bite. It'll spread, but not like wildfire.
Another interesting point is that zombies, being dead walking human flesh, will deteriorate, will rot, will be subject to rigor mortis, and will be viewed as prey to animals from flies to mountain lions in a very short time. A zombie might get up from a stumble, but not from a broken leg. You don't have to kill the zombie to stop it: simply stop it's progression and you're golden.
Treat a zombie outbreak like a disease outbreak, and you'll be golden. Get your family out of town, obey quarantines, let the outbreak wear itself out.
Great read! And yeah, I don't see the zombie epidemic doing as much damage as they show in the movies simply because continuing to bite someone would be hard once people realized whats going on.
Well unless its evil dead style and magic based with the previously dead rising and animated limbs.
Even t-virus style where animals can be infected, the virus can mutate the hosts and the who thing is rather more dangerous.
We have to consider how to contain the outbreak, not getting biten isn't as easy as it sounds when you are trying to also treat and guard the outbreak. If the virus makes you crazy and or strong and or fast then it gets a bit more complicated.
Also its always people who are hiding their initial infection who are the downfall of any healthy group.
Look, you're mixing up various zombie ideas. Are we talking Haitian magic, Romero story-lines, Bruce Campbell black comedy, or infectious disease? None of these things have any real likelihood of turning into a zombie apocalypse! My point was that, even if the worst did somehow occur, the most realistic would almost certainly wear itself out in a matter of a few days. Therefore, act with wisdom and care, get away from the outbreak and you should be safe.
I'm not talking about mixed reasons, my point was there's many reasons that a zombie outbreak wouldn't behave like a regular disease situation.
And the only constant is healthy groups tend to be torn apart by scared people who try to hide their infection. Especially when the go-to way to deal with it is to kill the infected person. I think a true zombie outbreak (say something like 28 days rage or Planet Terror chemical leak) wouldn't be as easily contained as something like ebola.
Not least because we already are tainted by all these other ideas of zombie-ism and fantastical ideas on how it works and how to deal with it.