Caltrops - Article Submissions





	[quote name="Ray, of Light"][quote name="Chairman Mao"][quote]Also, that 5% figure appears suspect: http://www.politechbot.com/p-04669.html[/quote] I'm not sure quoting a source that says the rates are vastly higher is working against me any here.[/quote] It doesn't. I also agree that health concerns trump economic concerns. What's more, I was in Toronto two weeks ago to do some work, and as much as I love clubbing and candy-striping, I'll assure you I did neither. I went from my hotel room to the site and back again, stopping along the way only to buy packaged food. Still, I think the only fair standard for advisories is: "does visiting Toronto increase your risk of infection, compared to staying at home?" The health people in T.O. say no, that they've eliminated "community" infections and that only health workers are at risk now. If that's true, then the advisory is undeserved and they're right to criticize it. See <a href=http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/04/25/sars.canada/>this CNN piece</a> for an elaboration on that position. Highlights: - "April 9 [is] the last day a case of community-acquired SARS was identified ... Tuesday [marks] two 10-day incubation periods from time of exposure to onset of symptoms" - CNN's spelling of "Premier" as "Premiere" - [Ontario's chief medical officer:] "We are not some rinky-dink Third World country, and I say that with respect, as somebody who grew up in the Third World." I'm really of two minds about this: on one, I sure as fuck don't want my internal organs liquefying; on the other, I don't want Toronto knocked on its economic ass without sufficient reason. Ray![/quote]