Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Yosemite Expands Scope of Hantavirus Warning: More than 20,000 At Risk

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the wasn't-that-a-diet-soda? dept.

Medicine 76

redletterdave writes "In response to a recent outbreak of a deadly pulmonary disease commonly carried by mice and other rodents, Yosemite National Park has doubled the scope of those likely infected by hantavirus. Given the rising number of confirmed cases (currently eight) and deaths (three), U.S. officials have effectively sounded a worldwide alert for more than 22,000 local and international visitors that may have been exposed to the deadly virus. Health officials initially believed as many as 10,000 people were at risk to contracting the hantavirus after staying in Yosemite's popular Curry Village lodging area between the months of June and August.; unfortunately, that 10,000 'at risk' estimate was low. Officials expanded the warning this week to an additional 12,000 visitors to Yosemite's High Sierra camps, now that the eighth case of hantavirus was confirmed in a man who stayed in those camp areas. Furthermore, more than 2,500 of those individuals currently live outside the United States."

cancel ×

76 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

What do Seoul and Sudan have in common? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281029)

Both start with an S...

How many times do folks have to be told? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281035)

Don't sniff the mouse poop!

Re:How many times do folks have to be told? (2)

Spy Handler (822350) | about 2 years ago | (#41282681)

I thought it had something to do with tentacle porn, but upon closer reading it didn't say hentai virus, it's hanta virus

Hanta Virus, Ebola Virus, Nipah Virus .... (1)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 2 years ago | (#41283913)

All these viruses (virii??), like Hanta Virus, Ebola Virus, Nipah Virus, and so on ... are they new?

If they are not new - that is, they already existed for a long time, it's just that they have been accurately been identified recently - then I'll imagine that hundreds of years ago, or even thousands of years ago human populations must had had "contacts" with them and were infected as well ...

My question is: If humans did suffered past epidemics of those viruses, how come there wasn't any record on it?

Or is it a case of human evolution - or recent changes to human environments (much more hygienic) - that resulted in a decline of human immunological response to many types of viruses?
 

Re:Hanta Virus, Ebola Virus, Nipah Virus .... (3, Informative)

SydShamino (547793) | about 2 years ago | (#41284811)

There were fewer people in any given area, and most people never traveled at all. Thus a given outbreak likely wouldn't spread and could only at most kill the people in a few small farming communities, i.e. a few hundred people at most.

Obviously there are exceptions for outbreaks of various things in cities like London. There are records of those.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=london+disease+history [lmgtfy.com]

For everywhere else, records don't really exist because people didn't keep many written records of their dead.

For the specific viruses you list, some of them could be new. Viruses replicate hundreds or thousands of times a year, and thus their rate of mutation is hence faster than that of humans. If beneficial (to the viruses) mutations occur and propagate, then, evolution is also faster. Ebola, for example, either existed for a long time but wasn't able to infect humans with a written history due to the remote nature of the sub-Saharan Africa jungle, or it only evolved the ability to cross infect from other primates to humans in the last 50 years.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ebola+history [lmgtfy.com]

Re:Hanta Virus, Ebola Virus, Nipah Virus .... (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | about 2 years ago | (#41284967)

All these viruses (virii??), like Hanta Virus, Ebola Virus, Nipah Virus, and so on ... are they new?

If they are not new - that is, they already existed for a long time, it's just that they have been accurately been identified recently - then I'll imagine that hundreds of years ago, or even thousands of years ago human populations must had had "contacts" with them and were infected as well ...

My question is: If humans did suffered past epidemics of those viruses, how come there wasn't any record on it?

Or is it a case of human evolution - or recent changes to human environments (much more hygienic) - that resulted in a decline of human immunological response to many types of viruses?

The Indians were aware of conditions that caused an irruption of mice, and they knew to burn clothes that a mouse walked on. The name comes from the Han Ten river in Korea.

Some scientists think hantavirus killed the Aztecs (1)

PeterM from Berkeley (15510) | about 2 years ago | (#41285193)

Not smallpox or some other European disease, but rather hantavirus, that mutated to become person-to-person contagious.

Per their theory, it was deadlier to the Aztecs than to the Europeans because Europeans had larger genetic variability than the native american populace.

The documentary I saw on the topic made a pretty convincing case for it being something unknown to Europeans, because the missionaries who were there at the time didn't recognise it as smallpox. Their term for it translates to English as "the Great Pest".

They also made the case that it was hantavirus, because weather conditions in the two years previous were conducive to an explosion of rodents that were carriers: a long drought followed by several wet years, leading to a rodent population explosion.

--PM

Re:Hanta Virus, Ebola Virus, Nipah Virus .... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41286221)

My question is: If humans did suffered past epidemics of those viruses, how come there wasn't any record on it?

For starters, until recently no one was around who could write to leave a record. And until very recently a few deaths in some remote village went unnoticed. During the first round of Hanta virus, it was discovered that many of the elderly people of the Navajo tribe had antibodies to it, indicating that they had been exposed to it at some time in their lives.

Second, the tools to identify the cause of disease have only been around for the past couple of decades. Before that, someone dying of Hanta virus just died "of a fever" or "pneumonia".

Third, these are "outbreaks", not "epidemics". These are "zoonoses" - primarily diseases of wild animals - and only sporadically infect people who come into contact with the animals or their urine or feces. Hanta is from mice, Nipah is normally in bats (spread to humans via pigs, somehow) and they still do not know what the reservoir of Ebola is, although primates have been ruled out and bats are suspected.

There are other zoonoses ... dozens of them, each affecting a few to a few thousands each year. It's what keeps virologists in buisness.

Re:Hanta Virus, Ebola Virus, Nipah Virus .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41295597)

These viruses are not new. They've always been around but their natural hosts are animals: Ebola virus in bats or maybe monkeys, AIDS in apes, Hanta virus in the mice, Hendra virus in bats. In their natural host they either don't cause disease or only cause mild disease, because from an evolutionary perspective it's not good for viruses to kill their hosts because then all the viruses infecting that individual also die. When humans come in contact with viruses that haven't evolved in humans, often they can't be infected, but if they can, there can be very high fatality rates. Often, like Hanta virus, they aren't infectious between people.

Humans have always been getting infected by these animal viruses and dying. What's changed is that now we want to find out why people get sick and die. Until relatively recently nobody wondered why people suddenly got sick and died. It was normal. In the 19th century 40% of children died before they turned 5. The 3 people who've died of Hanta virus in this outbreak wouldn't have stood out as exceptional and there was no way of knowing they hadn't died of "normal" pneumonia.

Ebola is a bit different since it is infectious between people, but it's so deadly that it would have been self limiting before people could travel quickly from place to place. Once it had taken hold in an isolated village it would have wiped out the entire population and then the virus itself would have died out.

Go to California for vacation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281057)

I'm glad I picked Yellowstone instead.

Re:Go to California for vacation? (1, Offtopic)

JackieBrown (987087) | about 2 years ago | (#41281445)

Yellowstone is beutiful. I went there a few yeard sgo when my brother moved from San Antonio to Bozeman. Last year, we drove through it to the Grand Tetons.

When I retire, I would love to live out my summers there.

Re:Go to California for vacation? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41283585)

I've been there. It's a fucking hole in the ground. I bet you couldn't tell it apart from your own ass. You are a fucking douchebag.

Re:Go to California for vacation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41284941)

Clearly you've never been there. The next time you refuse to go on a family vacation with Mom and Dad, try ignoring your feelings of teenage rebellion and go along with them to see real nature. You might actually like it.

Or just sit in the basement, smoking pot and acting like a wigger on XBL like you do now.

THREE DEATH !! SKULL AND CROSSBONES !! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281073)

To put that into perspective, three junkies just went to see their maker in the last hour !! And for each hour of every day, of every week, of every month, year after year !!

Not that that's bad, mind you !!

Re:THREE DEATH !! SKULL AND CROSSBONES !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281225)

It is bad because the hantavirus pulmonary disorder has a 60% mortality rate and it takes several weeks to incubate. People who might have been exposed recently need to know now.

Re:THREE DEATH !! SKULL AND CROSSBONES !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281263)

Why? So they can write their last will?

Re:THREE DEATH !! SKULL AND CROSSBONES !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281503)

The mortality rate is only true for HPS, which doesn't develop for all cases. In most cases a lesser disorder occurs which can damage the kidneys and the heart. But the virus present in the US is the most lethal type (the Sin Nombre virus), which does have an extremely high mortality rate (it was considered for use as a biological weapon).

Managed treatment for the heart and kidneys would likely decrease the mortality rate. Since HPS is a rare disorder, very few people get a managed treatment. Early detection could very well be a lifesaving action.

But yes, if you are elderly with a weak immune system and are infected by a hantavirus like the Sin Nombre strain, it would help to have time to write a will and set your affairs in order.

The Stand... (2, Interesting)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | about 2 years ago | (#41281087)

This is the beginning...

Fortunately, this isn't a virus easy to pass between humans. Unfortunately, it is one of the contagions in our biological weapon program.

Re:The Stand... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281127)

The Chair...

This is the beginning...

Re:The Stand... (2)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | about 2 years ago | (#41281521)

The Stool...

This is the beginning...

Re:The Stand... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281891)

The Chair [youtube.com] ?

Re:The Stand... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281277)

Captain Trips made the announcement.

Re:The Stand... (3, Informative)

cold fjord (826450) | about 2 years ago | (#41281857)

Unfortunately, it is one of the contagions in our biological weapon program.

Just so everybody is clear. . .

Biological Weapons [fas.org] - (United States)

In anticipation of the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention, President Nixon terminated the United States offensive biological weapons program by executive order. The United States adopted a policy to never use biological weapons, including toxins, under any circumstances whatsoever. National Security Decisions 35 and 44, issued during November 1969 (microorganisms) and February 1970 (toxins), mandated the cessation of offensive biological research and production, and the destruction of the biological arsenal. Research efforts were directed exclusively to the development of defensive measures such as diagnostic tests, vaccines, and therapies for potential biological weapons threats. Stocks of pathogens and the entire biological arsenal were destroyed between May 1971 and February 1973 under the auspices of the US Department of Agriculture, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and the Departments of Natural Resources of Arkansas, Colorado, and Maryland. Small quantities of some pathogens were retained at Fort Detrick to test the efficacy of investigational preventive measures and therapies.

Factors influencing the decision to terminate the offensive biological program included pragmatic as well as moral and ethical considerations. Given the available conventional, chemical, and nuclear weapons, biological weapons were not considered essential for national security. The potential effects of biological weapons on military and civilian populations were still conjectural, and for obvious ethical and public health reasons, could not be empirically studied. Biological weapons were considered untried, unpredictable, and potentially hazardous for the users as well for those under attack. Field commanders and troops were unfamiliar with their use. In addition, the United States and allied countries had a strategic interest in outlawing biological weapons programs in order to prevent the proliferation of relatively low-cost weapons of mass destruction. By outlawing biological weapons, the arms race for weapons of mass destruction would be prohibitively expensive, given the expense of nuclear programs.

After the termination of the offensive biological program, the US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) was established in order to continue the development of medical defenses for US military members against potential biological attack. USAMRIID conducts research to develop strategies, products, information, and training programs for medical defense against potential biological weapons. Endemic or epidemic infectious diseases due to highly virulent pathogens requiring high-level containment for laboratory safety are also studied. USAMRIID is an open research institution; no research is classified. The in-house programs are complemented by contract programs with universities and other research institutions.

Next Generation Bioweapons:Genetic Engineering and BW - The Former Soviet Union’s Biological Warfare Program [af.mil]

Despite signing the 1972 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BWC), it is now certain that the former Soviet Union (FSU) continued a clandestine and illegal offensive biological weapons program until at least the early 1990s. Biopreparat (a huge military program with civilian cover) was organized to develop and weaponize biological agents for BW.3 It employed approximately half of the Soviet Union‘s 60,000 workers in more than 18 BW facilities, and in the 1980s had an annual budget equivalent to tens of millions of U.S. dollars.4 Unlike the American offensive BW program (1942-69) that worked primarily with organisms that were not contagious in humans (e.g., anthrax and tularemia), the Soviet BW research and development program also sought out the most contagious and lethal bacteria (e.g., plague) and viruses (e.g., smallpox) known to man.5

Because Biopreparat and other Soviet BW research facilities operated under the highest security classification of Special Importance (higher than Top Secret), the U.S. intelligence community did not even know it existed until 1989 when a top ranking scientist from the BW program defected to the United Kingdom.6 From his extensive debrief, and subsequent collaboration by two other defectors from the program, we now know detailed information on the genetic engineering successes and other advances in Russian microbiology. Obviously much of the data remains classified, but the three defectors‘ accounts have been documented to some extent in various unclassified books and articles. This paper discusses their open-source accounts.

This World uncovers the "gas chambers" of North Korea [bbc.co.uk]

Witnesses tell the BBC's This World (BBC TWO, 1 February 2004, 9.00pm) that North Korea is killing political prisoners in gas chambers.

The programme has also uncovered documentary evidence that North Korea is now testing new chemical weapons on women and children, the families of dissidents and political prisoners held in secret jails.

Kwon Hyuk (his new name) was the former military attaché at the North Korean embassy in Beijing and chief of management at North Korea's prison camp 22 (or "Management Centre" as they call them).

He says he has chosen to speak because he wants the world to know what is happening there and for the first time has decided to reveal on public record what he witnessed in Camp 22. . . .

"Scientists observe the entire process from above, through the glass."

"I witnessed a whole family being tested on suffocating gas and dying in the gas chamber. The parents, son and a daughter.

"The parents were vomiting and dying, but till the very last moment they tried to save kids by doing mouth to mouth breathing.

"At the time I felt that they thoroughly deserved such a death. Because all of us were led to believe that all the bad things that were happening to North Korea was their fault; that we were poor, divided and not making progress as a country."

Asked about the children Kwon Hyuk says: "It would be a total lie for me to say I felt sympathetic about the children dying such a painful death.

"Under the society and the regime I was in at the time I only felt that they were the enemies. So I felt no sympathy or pity for them at all."

Defense is the best offence (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41282515)

President Nixon terminated the United States offensive biological weapons program by executive order.

Note the word offensive.

Official policies

War on drugs: Defensive
Iraq war #1: Defensive
War on terror: Defensive
Iraq war #2: Defensive
Afghanistan: Defensive

I live too close to one of the largest biodefence research companies for the US Military. It is frightening when someone moves in next door and they tell you their job is in infectious disease propagation improvement. Sure it is to find better ways to stop the spread and kill the next pandemic, but when you have a drawer full of hammers.....

Re:Defense is the best offence (1, Flamebait)

cold fjord (826450) | about 2 years ago | (#41284153)

Official policies

War on drugs: Defensive
Iraq war #1: Defensive
War on terror: Defensive
Iraq war #2: Defensive
Afghanistan: Defensive

Offensive weapons can be used in a defensive war, just as defensive weapons can be used in a defensive war. The US destroyed its biological weapons nearly 40 years ago. If it isn't done yet, it is close to done destroying its chemical weapons.

The "War on Drugs" is not an actual war, it is law enforcement action, so that is nonsense.
Iraq War #1 was a result of Iraq invading and conquering, and annexing the country of Kuwait. I'm not sure how you would have a problem with freeing Kuwait.
The War on Terror was the result of a declaration of war [pbs.org] against the United States by Al Qaeda followed by years of deadly attacks, culminating in 9/11, which killed nearly 3,000 people on American soil. NATO stood behind the United States. I'm not sure where you have a problem with that.
Afghanistan - That was a natural consequence of Al Qaeda integrating itself into the government structure of Afghanistan, and the Taliban shielding both Al Qaeda and Bin Laden, and a natural part of the War on Terror. I'm not sure where you have a problem with that, either.
Iraq War #2 - Iraq was in material breach before the UN of its responsibilities from Iraq War #1. They were engaged in numerous illegal activities, and fired on Coalition aircraft, including American, nearly every day - an act of war. I'm more understanding of protest against this one, but it was still justifiable.

I live too close to one of the largest biodefence research companies for the US Military. It is frightening when someone moves in next door and they tell you their job is in infectious disease propagation improvement.

Darned convenient for the subject under discussion that you live there, eh? I'm curious, what other information from what are no doubt classified programs do they share with you? Or is this all just fabricated?

Sure it is to find better ways to stop the spread and kill the next pandemic, but when you have a drawer full of hammers.....

A "drawer full of hammers" puts you an enormous amount of effort, engineering, experimentation, planning, and execution away from making "hammer" artillery shells and missile warheads available. Those need to be available in large numbers if they are going to be used for military purposes, and that would be very noticeable in the open American society. I doubt that much of anyone in the US military wants to get anywhere near those sorts of weapons either. Smart weapons take care of most things. For WMD needs, the US has nukes.

Just out of curiosity, do you live under a bridge by any chance?

Re:Defense is the best offence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41285587)

He does have a point about the word defensive. The US has no credibility when it says that they only perform defensive actions.

The War on Drugs may not be an actual war, but enough politicians refer to it as a war. I agree it is nonsense though, since nobody is claiming it is either defensive or offensive.

All wars after World War II are completely offensive in nature. The US was not under any sort of immediate national security threat. We were not going to be repelling borders from Iraq or Afghanistan anytime soon like scenes out of Red Dawn. You can't say the same about the Germans because they made it clear (*twice*) they were directly interested in attacking the US. Japan made it abundantly clear in the attack on Pearl Harbor.

These were just terrorists, not nation states. That would be like the LAPD arresting all of Compton because somebody got shot in Beverly Hills.

While I don't agree with all the wars listed, it would be complete bullshit to call them defensive in nature. My agreement would be besides the point, since I did agree with the offensive war against Iraq in the 90's and I did believe in the 2nd one.. till I learned they were flat out fucking lying about the WMDs.

He has a very valid point about the distinction between defensive and offensive being largely propaganda and not rooted in reality.

That's not to say I don't think we need a "defensive" bioweapons program. I think we do. I'm just not naive enough to think it could not be switched over to an offensive program and weaponized at the drop of hat. It could, it just very unlikely since conventional weapons are so much more reliable and effective and lack the obvious consequences in world perception. Not that the US seems to give a fuck what the rest of the world thinks anymore.....

Re:Defense is the best offence (1)

khallow (566160) | about 2 years ago | (#41286509)

All wars after World War II are completely offensive in nature. The US was not under any sort of immediate national security threat.

Just because you think something isn't an immediate national security threat, doesn't mean the rest of us share your peculiar delusion. The Korean War started because an ally of the US was invaded by another state. That was an immediate national security threat even though the North Koreans weren't invading California. The same was true of the Persian Gulf War with the added bit of spice that the US was preventing a potential oligopoly on oil from being formed. The invasion of Afghanistan happened because of a pretty destructive terrorist attack on US soil by Al Qaeda. The government of Afghanistan at the time was providing considerable material support to Al Qaeda.

I can't imagine why one thinks active paramilitary operations on US soil, which kills thousands of people and disrupt major transportation and financial systems, are somehow not "immediate national security threats".

But given your definitions and your ridiculously high threshold for a "defensive" war, I think a large number of "offensive" wars are wholly justified just to prevent even the possibility of a single "defensive" war.

Re:Defense is the best offence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41292671)

All wars after World War II are completely offensive in nature. The US was not under any sort of immediate national security threat. We were not going to be repelling borders from Iraq or Afghanistan anytime soon like scenes out of Red Dawn. You can't say the same about the Germans because they made it clear (*twice*) they were directly interested in attacking the US.

Actually, just once. And that was due to Nazi stupidity. Although "Nazi stupidity" is redundant.

At the start of World War I, the British Empire was enormously wealthy (how much of that money came from abusing native peoples around the world is still an open question) and was prepared to spend their money on desperately needed weapons (the British industrial system was already quite backwards at this point, and the incompetence of the army meant that huge quantities of weapons were being used up, which in turn meant that they needed to buy munitions from third parties).

This situation allowed US merchants to make a tremendous profit selling weapons to England. The British navy was blockading Germany and adjacent neutral nations (a blockade that incidentally led to large numbers of civilian deaths, including many children, as a result of blockading food and medical supplies -- something that would be very hard to get away with in today's world). When the Germans tried in turn to blockade the British Isles, under the rather naive idea that turnabout is fair play, these US merchants (or their bought-and-paid for politicians) screamed bloody murder. The US did not, of course, insist on a right to ship war goods to both Germany and Britain. After all, the British had deeper pockets. Ultimately, this situation led to the US entry into World War I.

In other words, the USA entered World War I not because Germany intended to directly attack the USA, but rather because of pure greed on the part of a relatively small number of influential individuals and corporations.

The well-known Lusitania incident was just an excuse which was used to fan public opinion in the USA to be favorable towards war. The British routinely used liners as troop ships in both World Wars, transporting hundreds of thousands of soldiers by this means. A troop transport is a legitimate military target by any standard, which meant that any liner in British waters was necessarily at risk. Further, the Lusitania was listed as an Armed Merchant Cruiser in naval ship recognition books, and was in fact carrying significant quantities of munitions, as modern dives on the wreck have shown.

The whole business with German-Mexican collaboration only started after the USA had made it clear that it intended to continue to ship munitions to Britain.

While World War II is (mostly) something the USA can be proud about, there are some serious moral issues that must be addressed when looking at the role of the USA in World War I.

I hear Central Park is no picnic, either. (5, Funny)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#41281153)

Great. First the supervolcano under Yellowstone, now deadly virus from Yosemite.

You nature lovers and conservationists feel good about yourselves for preserving it? Huh?

Re:I hear Central Park is no picnic, either. (2, Funny)

TheLink (130905) | about 2 years ago | (#41281281)

The Chinese are good at preserving wildlife - they dry shark fins.

Re:I hear Central Park is no picnic, either. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281317)

Great. First the supervolcano under Yellowstone, now deadly virus from Yosemite.

You nature lovers and conservationists feel good about yourselves for preserving it? Huh?

Yeah, maybe you're right. I mean who the hell needs trees anyway? Big ugly things that get in the way of progress.

We should probably just nuke the rain forest too...why take any chances...

Re:I hear Central Park is no picnic, either. (3, Informative)

guttentag (313541) | about 2 years ago | (#41281417)

Great. First the supervolcano under Yellowstone, now deadly virus from Yosemite.

You nature lovers and conservationists feel good about yourselves for preserving it? Huh?

Right, because if we'd built a WalMart over Yellowstone the weight of several million obese consumers would keep the supervolcano from erupting. In the U.S., more people will die in car accidents this week on the way to WalMart than the hantavirus will kill this year. Still feel good about preserving GM?

Re:I hear Central Park is no picnic, either. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281505)

You are an idiot for thinking that post was serious.

It should be modded down for its teen drama angsty tone

Re:I hear Central Park is no picnic, either. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281639)

You are an idiot for thinking that post was serious.

Perhaps it is you who are the idiot, good sir, for thinking the post you replied to was serious. I for one like the idea of a million WalMart shoppers trying to hold down a supervolcano. It makes me giggle, and that was worth sharing.

Re:I hear Central Park is no picnic, either. (4, Funny)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#41281883)

I for one like the idea of a million WalMart shoppers trying to hold down a supervolcano.

Mitt Rmoney, is that you?

Re:I hear Central Park is no picnic, either. (1)

somersault (912633) | about 2 years ago | (#41282421)

No AC, you are the idiot for thinking that the post you were replying to was serious.

It's turtles all the way down

Re:I hear Central Park is no picnic, either. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41285601)

Since this is Yosemite, wouldn't it be bears all the way down?

Re:I hear Central Park is no picnic, either. (1)

niftymitch (1625721) | about 2 years ago | (#41281665)

Great. First the supervolcano under Yellowstone, now deadly virus from Yosemite.

You nature lovers and conservationists feel good about yourselves for preserving it? Huh?

Do look at the Mamouth volcanic risk area. Yosemite is well within the reach of this hazard and it does bubble and gurgle a bit too.

official CDC/National Park Service/WHO links (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281311)

CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/hantavirus/outbreaks/yosemite-national-park-2012.html
National Park Service: http://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/hantafaq.htm
WHO (via TFA): http://www.who.int/csr/don/2012_09_04/en/index.html

Am I the only one who does not see the quoted number of 20,000 on either website?
TFA, on the other hand, links to Fox News.

Re:official CDC/National Park Service/WHO links (5, Funny)

flyingfsck (986395) | about 2 years ago | (#41281395)

Well, CNN reported 10,000 and MSN reported 10,000, so that makes 20,000.

Re:official CDC/National Park Service/WHO links (1)

JackieBrown (987087) | about 2 years ago | (#41281531)

Fox News did not give that number, either.

The warning was expanded to roughly 12,000 additional visitors to the park's more remote High Sierra Camps, after an eighth case of the illness was confirmed in a man who had stayed in tent cabins at three of those camp

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/09/07/yosemite-extends-hantavirus-warning-death-toll-rises/ [foxnews.com]

Re:official CDC/National Park Service/WHO links (1)

guttentag (313541) | about 2 years ago | (#41281549)

Am I the only one who does not see the quoted number of 20,000 on either website? TFA, on the other hand, links to Fox News.

I didn't see it either... just last year's warning from the CDC [cdc.gov] and this week's warning from Homeland Security [mercurynews.com] about Zombie attacks. I don't really care about the number of people who may be infected because that number doesn't really have any bearing on my safety. What really concerns me is this: can zombies transmit the hantavirus?

Re:official CDC/National Park Service/WHO links (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281583)

The numbers increased to 20,000 when visitors staying at high camp (Tuolumne Meadows) had to be included after a fatality occurred of someone who had stayed there, in addition to the 10-12,000 who had stayed at Curry Village in the valley.

the end is near! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281383)

I don't get it. 22,000 people went to Yellowstone Park to have sex with mice and other rodents?

Investment? (0)

tetrahedrassface (675645) | about 2 years ago | (#41281393)

Time to go long on cats? *buy* *buy* *buy*

Re:Investment? (4, Funny)

erice (13380) | about 2 years ago | (#41281625)

Time to go long on cats? *buy* *buy* *buy*

That's the Toxoplasmosis [theatlantic.com] talking.

Re:Investment? (1)

tetrahedrassface (675645) | about 2 years ago | (#41281965)

Oh yeah.... heh. ;)

Re:Investment? (1)

Formalin (1945560) | about 2 years ago | (#41283909)

I'd guess snakes are the biggest rodent predator? or hawks. followed by foxes or coyotes or so..?

Snakes have the advantage of being able to go into a mouse house and eat the whole family... Damn shame people are always killing them for no reason.

Re:Investment? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41285613)

into a mouse house

Awww, that's so cute. I have this vision of a tiny little mouse architect with drawings in one hand and pointing at the mouse construction workers while they build this little house......

Re:Investment? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41295523)

So which would be more toxic to a "human toilet", an ounce of shit from a Yosemite National Park mouse or an ounce of shit from a Yosemite National Park camper.

IV C (-1, Troll)

harvey the nerd (582806) | about 2 years ago | (#41281401)

There is a cheap generalized virucide, intravenous sodium ascorbate, little known inside of corporate, fascist and socialist controlled medical circles. Really nasty viruses may take 200-300 grams C per day, or even more, along with supportive nutrients like oral B-50 complex (50 is a size/strength). Under 50 to 100 grams of IV C per (first) day is more typical of common, severe viral infections. See Thomas Levy, Curing the Incurable

Re:IV C (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281455)

It sounds so much smarter when you describe injecting vitamin C with such fancy words.

Re:IV C (1)

harvey the nerd (582806) | about 2 years ago | (#41285449)

It helps to inject the correct form, the *sodium salt* of ascorbic acid, in a sufficient quantity. The life you save might be one of your own family. In some cases, like highly venomous creatures, time is important, without delays for argument or research. Already been there.

Re:IV C (1)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | about 2 years ago | (#41281599)

Vitamin C may be good against the common cold and such viruses, but it does nothing to prevent e.g. the hantavirus, no matter how much you inject it.

Re:IV C (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281951)

Not really, if you inject enough, you remove the pathway for the host to disseminate the virii, with the cessation of respiration.

Re:IV C (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41282307)

Citation or credentials please.

Re:IV C (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 2 years ago | (#41283961)

You've got it backwards.

Re:IV C (2)

no bloody nickname (2429300) | about 2 years ago | (#41282381)

Congratulations my good sir. You win this days tinfoil award.

Re:IV C (1)

harvey the nerd (582806) | about 2 years ago | (#41285441)

I have real patents, corporate bioresearch, degrees better than Ivy, and NSF gold. Just trying to help the common folks out, but the truth here is, can't cure stupid.

Re:IV C (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41285641)

Then why don't you point to some real studies or try to get them done? Do you have any real life cases where this has been done? Can you describe, in a technical paper how this is accomplished? What is it that causes the virus (or bacteria?) to breakdown? What is the method by which it cures the infection? Does it work on parasites?

That seems like an awfully high amount. That's like a 10th to a 5th of a pound, intravenously. At what point does C, or this specific form, become toxic?

Instead of calling us stupid and railing about corporate fascist states, try disseminating the data. Don't tease us and then lord your credentials on high while calling us stupid.

I live in pain right now and nobody can tell me why. If you have some secret then by all means... please explain it. I'll keep an open mind.

Bad deal for guests (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281459)

From my own experience at CV this summer, the management company DNC charges a small fortune to stay in the tents ($140 per night including tax), which are hot, stuffy, dirty, rodent infested, and have no running water. Warnings are all over the place about bears and securing your food. DNC offers lame excuses for not having previously posted warnings about hantavirus. We heard at least one rodent in our tent at night, which should have been far more concerning at the time.

"Complementary wifi" is also provided at the Curry Village guest lounge, but the network is so slow (1.5 Mbps) it can handle no more than a few users at a time. Literally about a hundred people try to use the network simultaneously during the day and evening. It's no exaggeration: everybody sits around staring at each other, waiting for their laptops, tablets and smartphones to achieve connectivity.

Somebody is making a fortune off Curry Village, and it probably isn't the workers.

Idiotic moderation (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41281687)

Anybody else think the /. moderators can be idiots?
The lack of intelligent postings really turns me off to this site.

Re:Idiotic moderation (2)

tetrahedrassface (675645) | about 2 years ago | (#41281945)

The moderation sorts itself out. Enough moderation occurs so there isn't a heavy bias and the general consensus on the best moderation for comments gets sorted. It's awesome. Of course if you cruise all comments like god intended you don't lose any comments due to your threshold being set too high.

Don't take the moderation too seriously. The meta-moderation has a karma all its own...*smile*

Re:Idiotic moderation (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41284503)

Sorry, the moderation on /. is pathetically bad. Some of the most informative comments never get bumped... or get downgraded by people who can't handle the truth. Make an uninformative wisecrack, though, and you rise to the top, like a "baby ruth" in a pool.

When will they learn (1)

antifoidulus (807088) | about 2 years ago | (#41282237)

Why after all these years are people still using Krusty Brand Chew Goo Gum Like Substance?

I was there last year... (1)

pr100 (653298) | about 2 years ago | (#41282247)

I (with my family) hiked round the High Sierra camps last year, with a small group guided by one of the park rangers. He said he'd never met anyone else from outside the US on one of those trips. Kind of surprising that they mention such a high number of non-US visitors in the press release.

Re:I was there last year... (1)

mspohr (589790) | about 2 years ago | (#41282759)

I think most of the international visitors stayed in the Valley at the Curry camps.
I was at one of the High Sierra Camps (Glen Aulin) in mid August as part of a 5 day backpack trip and haven't had any symptoms. (Also, didn't see any signs of mice.)
The virus is rare but endemic to large areas of the Western US. I've often worried I might get it by working under my house (in the Northern Sierra) in the crawl space (where we do have mice).

Meanwhile (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41282511)

Government of Madagascar shuts down shipyards due to safety concerns.

Re:Meanwhile (1)

Anemomaniac (1239142) | about 2 years ago | (#41283803)

Comment of the day!

reduce development (5, Informative)

bcrowell (177657) | about 2 years ago | (#41282889)

This seems like a typical situation that we see in the West arising from: (1) the legacy of heedless 19th-century attitudes toward the environment and (2) unrealistic expectations about human interaction with the environment.

A hundred years ago, people did all kinds of things to cherished natural resources that they'd never do today. San Francisco dammed Hetch Hetchy, Yosemite's twin that was reputed to be even more beautiful than Yosemite. Until ca. 1950, people intentionally fed bears in Yosemite Valley for entertainment, and sent burning logs over Yosemite Falls at night for people down in the valley to watch. They put permanent steps and cables on the back of Half Dome, which is something that just isn't a normal thing to do on a peak in the Sierra. And they developed the hell out of Yosemite Valley, turning it from a natural cathedral into an asphalt parking lot with big-city-style smog problems in the summer high season. All of these things have had negative consequences. A bunch of people have died on Half Dome, so they've had to start rationing access. Bear-human interactions, which are very, very seldom an issue in the undeveloped backcountry, are a huge problem in specific places, especially Yosemite Valley. And now we have hantavirus, which doesn't seem to be a big problem either in the city or in the backcountry.

People also have unrealistic expectations about how they can live alongside the environment. People build houses in beautiful forests, refuse to clear defensible space around their houses because they like the trees, and then yelp to the government to put out forest fires so their houses don't burn down. The result is that we build up tinder for decades, and then get huge, catastrophic fires that, unlike the many smaller fires that would naturally occur, have negative environmental effects. An example was the huge Station Fire in the San Gabriels a few years back. Various opportunistic species have taken over in the disturbed habitat. One of the worst of these is purple poodle bush, which is sort of like poison oak except ten times worse -- it gets microscopic needles under your skin like little syringes injecting you with the irritating chemical. The stuff is ordinarily pretty rare (thank God), but in the burned areas it's taking over like crazy.

It's not realistic to imagine that you can have a natural environment in Yosemite Valley with the population density they're trying to support. Why is it a surprise if they get disease-carrying rodents? If it was undeveloped backcountry, you wouldn't have a big enough supply of garbage to feed such a high density of mice. If it was a city, you could exterminate the mice. You can't do any of that in an environment that's basically a high-density suburb that you're pretending is a wilderness.

The guvmint-based solution is to scale back the density of development in Yosemite Valley radically, and also to stop allowing people to drive private cars into the valley.

As an individual, there are a couple of positive things you can do: (1) Instead of driving your car into Yosemite Valley, take the YARTS bus from a nearby town like Mariposa. (2) If you live in the Bay Area, please show a little originality by not doing the same stuff that everybody else does. The two things that people want to do are (a) climbing Half Dome as a day hike and (b) overnight backpacking in Little Yosemite. These areas are heavily overimpacted. Try something else. The Sierra is a big place.

Re:reduce development (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41286327)

You sound just like the people I see there every year who complain about, and are amazed at how many people are there. "OMG! I have to *share* this with all these other people???" Yup, you do.

So, the good thing? Its there for everyone to share. The bad thing? Its there for everyone to share.

Just keep sniffing your own farts there buddy.

Re:reduce development (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41287111)

All of this is irrelevant to Hantavirus, which is likely the result of insufficient hygienic conditions in camping areas. I am generally in agreement with your concerns, but taking the bus to the park instead of driving is not going to protect you from Hanta.

Re:reduce development (1)

onemorechip (816444) | about 2 years ago | (#41290155)

For the record, the firefall [wikipedia.org] was from Glacier Point, not Yosemite Falls.

HANTA VIRUS VS YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41284327)

Read the stats... 22,000 people exposed too Hanta virus and 3 people die. You have an immune system that protects you from all infections and cancerous cells. It's a miracle of life... a cue that there's been intelligent design... But when you get old, your body for no apparent reason gets decrepit and suceptable to infections. If you're interested in reading a concise book about how to avoid or treat diseases, read "The Healthcare Guide for Republicans," real stories about common illnesses, medical errors, effective treatments, how to get free Healthcare in any hospital in the U.S., ebook at Amazon or Apple. Don't worry about Hanta Virus, it usually only kills people who are immuno suppressed. If you want to know when the mass extinction will occur on Earth, google red tides, ocean dead zones or mass fish kills. Global warming is a crok, but agricultural runoff (insecticides, nitrates, poisons) are killing our oceans. Why should you care? Our oceans make 75% of the Earth's oxygen. Be scared, you might only have 20 years left to live. mensunion org

Re:HANTA VIRUS VS YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41284949)

Are you mentally ill?

Re:HANTA VIRUS VS YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41295547)

The road to hell is paved with good intentions like your own.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>