LogFAQs > #943284908

Ballinari posted...

Maybe I'm a dummy here but wouldn't a deadlier disease often times slow down infection rates since the disease will kill their hosts generally before they can spread it to other people? Like in your Ebola example, it kills things far too quickly for it to spread all that much. That's a main reason why it's not too widespread atm

But if there were a godlike disease that's able to be both being extremely infectious (like an R0 of 20) and deadly (like a 50% kill rate) then humanity as we know it would be extremely fucked. It's every person for themselves at that point

Maybe, i guess it would depend how long it took to kill the host and how contagious it was.

But the bubonic plague could kill in a day or two and still spread through most of Europe, but they were far more ignorant as to how disease spread back then as well. So something that could make it's host sick longer, or even worse sit dormant for a period of time would probably be a bigger threat in modern times

---

"People incapable of guilt usually do have a good time"
-Detective Rust Cohle