People in Antarctica and isolated Pacific islands would survive a global pandemics?

If a deadly pandemics of a new super virus spreads worldwide, killing billions of people...

Do you think that people who are in the bases in Antarctica will survive, since the virus won't reach the place where they are?

And people in some isolated Pacific islands? Would them survive too?

I think it's almost impossible that a virus can kill *ALL* of the human species. I think there will be survivors in Antarctica and some Pacific islands, and they will eventually repopulate the world...

there would probably be some percentage of people who would be immune-and I reckon on an island somewhere if they didnt have contact maybe

There has never been any pandemic cause by microbes in the history of mankind. The "black death" and the "spanish flu" were toxic syndromes caused by ergot and vaccines respectively.

Bioweapons have never been used because any attempt at contagion is futile, they just don't work, people have immune systems that evolved for millions of years.

I don't know... depends how it spreads. If this disease in question could affect birds and fish and they could get to the island... or if it was transmittable by water would could it travel in rain clouds?

Anyone well fed and well excreted doesn't need to fear any infections. Give me 100,000 bucks and I inoculate myself with any virus/microbe you like, and nothing will happen to me.

IMO global means worldwide, you can run but you can't hide. If it is airborne it can get you anywhere. TPTB want to reduce the population to around 500million,if true, the best advice I can give, in my opinion, is to eat as healthy as you can, supplement with herbs and spices, stay away from vaccines...and pray like hell.

Antarctic would not survive a global pandemic.

The people there are dropped off for the summer by ship/plane.

They would need someone to come and get them off the ice.
-70C winters/ low food/ low resources

Originally posted by DaarkSyde2012If it is airborne it can get you anywhere.

Airborne transmission is a silly myth, a bedtime story from grandma.

Reality is no virus/microbe transmits that way. See this study:

www.phac-aspc.gc.ca...

Scientific Working Meeting on Occupational Influenza Prevention and Control in Health Care Settings. Meeting Summary Report

Mississauga, Ontario
October 26 – 27, 2006

Michael Gardam MD MSc FRCPC
University of Toronto

How is Influenza Transmitted in Humans? A Systematic Review

Dr Gardam's systematic review included much of the same literature on survival of influenza in the environment, on experimental infections in laboratory animals and in humans, and epidemiological studies of outbreaks as that reviewed by the Queen's University team. (This paper is now in press in Lancet Infectious Diseases)He concluded that:

* The literature supports the idea that close contact is required for transmission to occur. Whether this occurs through droplet, contact, or indirect contact is unknown.

* The literature does not support transmission over long distances. Although there is no evidence that long-distance (airborne) transmission occurs, this has not been conclusively ruled out in the current literature. It was further concluded that if this type of transmission occurs, it is rare.

* There are no data in the literature to define the conditions under which influenza might become opportunistically airborne, (i.e., during a bronchoscopy).

reply to post by Brasov


One little link from a few years back? Come on you can do a little better than this can"t you? Google is your friend, give it a try

Originally posted by DaarkSyde2012
One little link from a few years back? Come on you can do a little better than this can"t you? Google is your friend, give it a try

Now it's your turn to prove me wrong with a more recent study. What have you got? a big mouth only? case closed then.

All studies carried out on "airborne" transmission of the influenza virus were never able to prove such a way of transmission:

www.globalsecurity.org...

Flu Transmission

"Transmission via contaminated hands and fomites has been suggested as a contributing factor in some studies. However, there is insufficient data to determine the proportion of influenza transmission that is attributable to direct or indirect contact..."

There is no evidence that influenza transmission can occur across long distances (e.g., through ventilation systems)

Originally posted by aprilc1
there would probably be some percentage of people who would be immune-and I reckon on an island somewhere if they didnt have contact maybe

Just saying, I think the cold would also be a factor. Don't you? I also think the ones who will be immune will be those with strong immune systems. If you have taken the flu shots, as many people have now, I think they are already set up for the newest virus mutation, and may be the first to die. Sorry, we tried to warn you.

Airborne transmission means it can be transmitted without touching or eating/drinking right? Tons of stuff is transmitted that way. Why do you think people gown up in full hazmat suits when dealing with virus outbreaks?

reply to post by autowrench


yeah the cold would have an effect and its mostly scientists in antartica so likely it wouldnt spread up there.

reply to post by Brasov


You may want to read the full study conducted by Gardham, who you are quoting.

That can be found HERE

His presentation starts on page 91.

Despite this being one persons study, he does not state that influenza can't be transmitted by air, in fact several of his studies on mice and ferrets showed air borne contamination, such as this one on page 96:

Transmission of influenza occurs between
aerosol-infected animals and healthy animals

• Mice physically separated by a ¾ inch double
mesh-wire screen
• Ferrets housed in separate wire-meshed cages
• Ferrets separated by approximately 8 foot long
“S” and “U”-shaped closed ducts

Now, onto your second link...

You've cherry picked two sentences from 16 paragraphs, next time it might pay to read your sources before posting them in error.

If you continue on from the quote you used, this one:

Flu Transmission

"Transmission via contaminated hands and fomites has been suggested as a contributing factor in some studies. However, there is insufficient data to determine the proportion of influenza transmission that is attributable to direct or indirect contact..."

There is no evidence that influenza transmission can occur across long distances (e.g., through ventilation systems)

We discover this bombshell:

Droplet nuclei (airborne) transmission entails the production of infectious droplet nuclei, generally 5 micrometers or less in diameter. In contrast with larger droplets, these droplets can remain suspended in the air and be disseminated by air currents in a room or through a facility to be inhaled by a susceptible host. Small droplet nuclei and aerosols can remain suspended in the air for prolonged periods and travel significant distances. Small particles appear to be more infectious, with both the degree of infectivity and the severity of illness and is directly related to particle size. Aerosols smaller than 10 microns have been shown to cause more severe disease and require a smaller inoculum than large intranasal droplets.

Now, it seems you've taken statements of influenza not being transmitted over long distances as not being transmitted by air at all, this is an erroneous assumption.

This reminds me of a game I use to play called Pandemic 1 and 2. In short the game is shelf explanatory. I think that if we were to use germ warfair then no were on the planet would be safe. I don't think it would matter if you had a immune system created by the Gods themselves, pun intended. you would not be safe, with virus' mutating to stay alive, its survival of the fittest, even for them.

Originally posted by ChadwickusNow, it seems you've taken statements of influenza not being transmitted over long distances as not being transmitted by air at all, this is an erroneous assumption.

The existence of God and the existence of airborne transmission have never been proven. Of course this doesn't mean that God or airborne transmission don't exist, only that there's no evidence of such things.

But the important conclusion relevant to this thread is that a very improbable transmission path, such as airborne, can never lead to an epidemic. As simple as that.

You're still free to be afraid of ghosts, of course, I'm not pretending to deny you this right!

reply to post by Brasov


Your own source says it can....

Through 8 feet of ducting!

Can't be clearer than that mate.

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Brasov

 

Your own source says it can....

Through 8 feet of ducting!

Can't be clearer than that mate.

Read again, the authors are only speculating and admit their speculations have never been proven.

As I said, feel free to fear ghosts, please, don't let my remarks spoil your pandemic fun!

reply to post by Brasov


So how did a healthy ferret in one box get infected by an unhealthy ferret in another box with an air duct between them?

And I reiterate, the author of that study is talking about LONG DISTANCE transmission:

The literature does not support transmission over long distances. Although there is no evidence that long distance (airborne) transmission occurs, this has not been conclusively ruled out in the current literature. It was further concluded that if this type of transmission occurs, it is rare.

If you don't want to see what's in front of you, that's fine by me, I won't be responding any further to your troll posts.