Science ponders 'zombie attack'

I happen to come across this article on BBC in which scientists theorize about any "future zombie attacks".

As per the article:

If zombies actually existed, an attack by them would lead to the collapse of civilisation unless dealt with quickly and aggressively.

That is the conclusion of a mathematical exercise carried out by researchers in Canada.

They say only frequent counter-attacks with increasing force would eradicate the fictional creatures.

Source:news.bbc.co.uk...

What is interesting to note is they are calling it fictional but also listing it under Disease:

"The scientific paper is published in a book - Infectious Diseases Modelling Research Progress. "

So there has to be some proof that his disease exist. Also note the Professor's remark on the article

My understanding of zombie biology is that if you manage to decapitate a zombie then it's dead forever

How does he know that and what biology is he talking about if it's only fiction?

Also note these remarks:

According to the researchers, the key difference between the zombies and the spread of real infections is that "zombies can come back to life".

Professor Neil Ferguson, who is one of the UK government's chief advisers on controlling the spread of swine flu, said the study did have parallels with some infectious diseases.

"None of them actually cause large-scale death or disease, but certainly there are some fungal infections which are difficult to eradicate," said Professor Ferguson, from Imperial College London.

Richard Nielson at the Social Science Statistics Blog alerts us to new research on the matter from Blake Messer:

The latter problem may be less intuitive so I'll explain my reasoning: Humans who survive the initial outbreak survive for a reason. Disproportionately, they were faster, smarter, and stronger to begin with than their fallen peers. Even if they weren't, they were luckier and have probably been able to, at least, find a more defensible location than where they started at round zero of the outbreak, increasing their chances of survival simply by virtue of having survived the early rounds of the outbreak.

So, I constructed a computational agent-based zombie outbreak model to test how my assumptions might alter the solution.

His result seems pretty encouraging:

[T]he [Carelton University] team's model leaves something more profound out the equation: human capacity for ex-post organization and response. When accounting for these things, I can find scenarios of large initial zombie outbreaks that, when followed by quick adoption of strong anti-zombie defense policies may help pockets, or even large fractions of civilization to ward off the impending doom of mass zombie infection! How exciting!

Except that then we get to Gabriel Rossman's sociological take:

If] the Romero movies have taught us anything, it’s that the defensive resources are only effective if they aren’t sabotaged by the internal squabbles of humans. (If you’re not familiar with Romero’s movies, think of what Newman from Seinfeld did in “Jurassic Park”). Thus you’d have to add another parameter, which is the probability in any given period that some jackass sabotages the defensive perimeter, steals the battle bus, etc. If such sabotage eliminates or even appreciably reduces the “safe area” efficacy then human survival in the “safe areas” is contingent on the act of sabotage not occurring....

So a more elaborated model would not only have to add in parameters for spatial heterogeneity, but also human sabotage.

As more zombie enthusiast have pointed out

[T]he prospect of a zombie apocalypse actually represents a chance to throw off the constrictive fetters of society, shoot your neighbours in the face, steal some guns and a car, and drive off into the sunrise, taking along only those friends and family you trust and care about the most. As such, it represents a simplifying of life.

But the question remains what prompted the scientists to research this in first place and why place it under "Disease" category. What about his "biological tests"?

[edit on 16-3-2010 by December_Rain]

Latelt, believe it or not, I have been adding credence to the zombie outbreak theory. "Dry bone becoming as flesh"? Sounds like an outbreak to me...

I actually have a vague idea of my plans in case of a zombie attack. Also, for reference, zombie traps. I recommend digging down to basement floor level on a random, unused house, knocking out a wall, putting in a wood chipper, and stand on the other side of the pit to lure zombies. They fall in... And you have a very quickly reducing zombie population. When the life-challenged attack, be smart. Zombie traps.

Wow, scientists actually get paid to theorise this stuff?

But do they have a plan for rabbud unicorns?

Has anybody seen "28 Days Later"? Sounds like the good doctor is a fan. Also, it's not a stretch, in the least, to think that governments have a plan for this.

I enjoy the Zombie Apocalypse Genre from Romero to Brooks, it's fun entertainment for me. If you are prepared for World War Z , there is really nothing that FEMA covers that you can't handle. Just Remember ... HEAD SHOTS!!! No.... Seriously Head Shots.

Lots of people, err I mean sheeple, already have Etreme Zombie Sychosis (EZS) thoughout the globe. They have the follow the herd mentality. The only thing these zombies do right/wrong is follow and believe whatever the other zombies are doing. Hence the age old saying, "When in doubt zombie about."

The only thing our century's zombies don't do yet is eat and bite other people, but in future generations of zombies this will eventually happen once we pollute our world enough to cause a mass-distinction of the plant and animal species. This is where all of the obese people come into play. Slow, fat, and helpless would make you a prime-rib canidiates for zombie hordes.

You need to be prepared too.

Everyone always thinks you have to destroy the brain of the zombie, but this is not true. Zombies don't use their brains, why would that stop them? That is just what Hollywood and TPTB want you to think, so you'll waste your ammo and become a zombie yourself. You have to be smart and conservative when fighting against zombie hordes because they can be almost never ending. You must make your shots count.

The real place you would shoot a zombie would be in the heart. Because lets face it, zombies need fresh human flesh to circulate the blood stricken EZS throughout their body to be able sustain their active lifestyle.
You can also gouge-out or shoot-out their eyes because unlike bats and vampires, zombies do not have ultrasound. Zombies need to be able to see what the other zombies are doing to successfully imitate their peers. This will kill them within a few hours, and you would also safe from a blind zombie.

GLHF!

There's a reason me and several friends have incredibly intricate plans in the case of a zombie outbreak. It's gunna happen people. Have your shotty and shovels ready.

reply to post by SpectreDC


Well imo, if zombies cannot die, since they probably will not need brains to move, then why dont we sever them to the point that they can not do anything. That way when we see them they are not as much of a threat.

Hopefully they can be domesticated... any of you remember Day of the Dead?

sound's like one of the scientist's xbox broke and needed funding to play left 4 dead

the only zombies we need worry about is heroin and drug users and bush piddled

I have seen a documentary a few years ago about a guy that have been poisoned by Shamans / voodoo people for work.

Another (controversial) explanation is that in the past evil sorcerers would poison someone with a brew so that the victim appeared dead and was buried. However, the person in question was only in a coma, so they could rob the "corpse". The intoxication damaged the brain,but left the body intect so that the victim was then used as a will-less robot-like worker for hard farm work.

This is most likely where it all started.

[edit on 28-3-2010 by sc4venger]