7 Scientific Reasons a Zombie Outbreak Would Fail (Quickly).

[Shadow Stalker]

I found this article too be a very interesting read, revolving around why a Zombie Outbreak might not be so bad as the Resident Evil series make them out to be.

http://www.cracked.com/article_18683...l-quickly.html

[Enrico Marini]

Interesting read though my only gripes with that are basically that its all theoretical. Zombies as potential meals doesn't ring well for me, a lot of animals won't eat a rotting corpse, with the exceptions of vultures and such. What about the animals that eat the zombies? Just because the disease does not affect the animal doesn't mean it can't become a carrier.

One thing about the Resident Evil Zombies, the T-Virus reanimates cells giving them sudo-life so essentially a Zombie can sort of heal and has a sort of immune system, well it will mutate to meet those needs. V-acts and Lickers any one?

The one thing that always gets me is how stupid people think zombies will be. Just because the films and games make them so doesn't necessarily mean they would be in reality. Animals are rather intelligent even relying on their own instincts, so whose to say good old Mr Z won't have some stealth and guile.

To me the one thing that would stop a zombie apocalypse is simply that we are "aware" of it. In the movies, it sneaks up upon the world, but with us we would kind of see the signs.

[Shadow Stalker]

Interesting read though my only gripes with that are basically that its all theoretical. Zombies as potential meals doesn't ring well for me, a lot of animals won't eat a rotting corpse, with the exceptions of vultures and such. What about the animals that eat the zombies? Just because the disease does not affect the animal doesn't mean it can't become a carrier.

One thing about the Resident Evil Zombies, the T-Virus reanimates cells giving them sudo-life so essentially a Zombie can sort of heal and has a sort of immune system, well it will mutate to meet those needs. V-acts and Lickers any one?

That's true. I've pretty much thought of the same thing myself.

The one thing that always gets me is how stupid people think zombies will be. Just because the films and games make them so doesn't necessarily mean they would be in reality. Animals are rather intelligent even relying on their own instincts, so whose to say good old Mr Z won't have some stealth and guile.

To me the one thing that would stop a zombie apocalypse is simply that we are "aware" of it. In the movies, it sneaks up upon the world, but with us we would kind of see the signs.

That's a really good point you made there Enrico Marini. Didn't really thought about that one.

[Dracarys]

Interesting read though my only gripes with that are basically that its all theoretical.

Sorry but this just made me laugh so much. A zombie outbreak theoretical? Really?

[Enetirnel]

Going on a ramble that probably won't make sense...

Though, this is my agreeing with Enrico.

Essentially, as it is technically possible considering some infections can have a similar effect on people.

Such as Ebola, as it causes internal and external blood loss and multiple organ failure, in it's early incubation period it can simply be seen as a bad bout of the flu and due to the virus replicating itself within the host's cells it essentially "overloads" the host with itself. During the incubation period, it can severely cut off a person's general thought-process into something rather simplistic that an idea may become looped "Go town. See doctor. Feel better." OR it can make some aggressive due to an underlying primal behavior piece, as we see in animals it's mostly hunt and feed when the ability to procreate isn't on the table.

As for my opinion on that Cracked article, I have to disagree with it - continuing by using Ebola as an example the infected aren't exactly "dead" but they are literally "living dead" as externally, internally their body is decaying due to the lack of blood, inability to coagulate/blood clot and stop the bleeding caused.

I had written up a lengthy post, but Firefox crashed and I lost it - long story short, the general noted forms of infection and/or transmission for the T-Virus, G-Virus, T-Veronica/Alexia (as it's referred to a different name at a point from what I recall) has a wider vector range, higher infection rate and judging by the Outbreak ending - it may also bear some similarities to Anthrax - being able to survive in soil in a spore form carried by infected animals, plants or even decomposed bodies that had been previously infected. As the zombies do still make noises, twitch and we also have the Crimson Heads with the reanimation it could be possible that essentially there is a first stage reanimation of which the body as a whole goes to primal instincts and hunts, feeds as a zombie commonly does and if the brain - now acting collectively to make up for damage caused during the incubation period, is not destroyed initially OR the cadaver is not decapitated when the secondary reanimation sequence starts there is more or less a further mutation due to the decomposition of the body, and the body attempting to repair itself as the virus would still require the host's cells in order to continually replicate.

With that and off the top of my head, that it can be transferred by direct contact, via air, via water makes it an extremely dangerous idea - with the higher infection rate, that could also have a chance to increase the general time it would take for a mutation in the strain to naturally happen.

Just a theory, with it and the viruses in the Biohazard games having a wider field and carries being still partially alive before mutating in a cycle that could result in a few differences depending on a genetic sequence (as we've seen with the Tyrants, Crimson Head -> Licker and the majority of the other villains such as Alexia and whatnot) that could leave the person to either decompose as a zombie, have a chance to mutate to a Crimson Head if killed, a slight possibility to follow that mutation through to the Licker variant OR if they essentially had a coinciding bit of genetics the virus could essentially survive within that carrier and cause a general reanimation without effects, OR could go into the the other mutations such as Tyrant.

Though, thinking of that with the possibility of still being technically "alive" - that could also stop the weather, animals interested in food from stopping a zombie as the body could decompose, the virus simply reanimates and continue the primal hunt and feed notion.

My apologies if this doesn't make sense, just expanding with a generalization and a real-life example of a slightly similar "effect".

Although, even if we did see it - there are some things that could possibly cause a "zombie" if it continued to mutate, as I mentioned Ebola as a prime example the origin hasn't been found (initially believed to be plants, however they kind of screwed up the experiment and they found the virus in a few bugs, they recently found it in a type or two of bats in Africa - however, they have not been deemed as the original vector) so with that essentially it could creep up on us especially if a carrier has an immunity, a longer incubation period, difference in general symptoms within the incubation period among other things.

[Enrico Marini]

Sorry but this just made me laugh so much. A zombie outbreak theoretical? Really?

So you're saying you don't get the outbreaks like around me in the south? I should have been more clear with what I said, the fact that its theoretical yet trying to be conclusive/gospel.

[TheSelfishGene]

Points 1, 2, 3, 5 (labeled 6), 6 and 7 all apply to zombies, irrespective of how the disease is transmitted. Even with a method of transmission with a better efficency than biting, they still have to best all the other challenges - and I really really really doubt they could.

This article seems to written around the zombie paradigm of 'walking corpse that eats people. Getting bitten by a zombie makes one a zombie'. When other lores (eg. Resident evil) are brought into it (and things like tissue regeneration etc), of course the article will be incorrect. It's like comparing apples to oranges.

[Enrico Marini]

This article seems to written around the zombie paradigm of 'walking corpse that eats people. Getting bitten by a zombie makes one a zombie'. When other lores (eg. Resident evil) are brought into it (and things like tissue regeneration etc), of course the article will be incorrect. It's like comparing apples to oranges.

True. But its the old chestnut of the undead walking around attacking people should technically be called ghouls.

There are so many mythos with zombies. Romero's retain knowledge and over time regain some. RTOD essentially its any form of contact with 2-4-5 Trioxin (is it sad that I remembered that without looking it up?) will result in zombification, the zombies can move quickly, are reasonably intelligent and cannot be killed with brain damage, so essentially the screwed factor. Then there is the Rage virus, essentially not undead but still technically zombies as they are manipulated to attacking uninfected and resist pain (to some degree). Just to name a few.

Its essentially pointless for me trying to justify any of this like trying to prove how a stuffed teddybear eats honey.

[Michael_Jackson]

yeah but even though theres many different views, it's still a funny article. But one thing for sure is that i wouldn't add a zombie porno pic in there haha

[Vixtro]

One thing I'd like to add about Romero's Zombies, in that universe, the virus became a part of the atmosphere and so any dead body with it's head intact will rise up as a Zombie.

[MeganGrass]

Interesting, if not comical, read. Thanks.

...we've all got to remember that everyone has their own vision of what a zombie/+outbreak would be like. You've got Romero's slow, mindless zombies, the running zombies from the 2004 'Dawn of the Dead', talking zombies who scream 'brains!' and can communicate with the living (the zombie cop in 'Return of the Living Dead' telling operators to 'bring more support'), Anderson's copycat zombies from Romero, Romero's original zombies which could use knives to murder, 'rage' zombies, 'mad cow diseased' zombies, and the list goes on and on. On top of all that, you've got various biological aspects which caused the outbreaks in each of these films (some unknown, most notably, Romero's work), which would deserve it's own topic of discussion.

The obviousness of the truth is that zombies don't exist (duh), so there's absolutely no way anyone could know what to expect or how to react, given such an outbreak should occur.

[The_15th]

I honestly don't think a corpse's braincells would be firing on all cylinders, sorry.

[Shadow Stalker]

Interesting, if not comical, read. Thanks.

...we've all got to remember that everyone has their own vision of what a zombie/+outbreak would be like. You've got Romero's slow, mindless zombies, the running zombies from the 2004 'Dawn of the Dead', talking zombies who scream 'brains!' and can communicate with the living (the zombie cop in 'Return of the Living Dead' telling operators to 'bring more support'), Anderson's copycat zombies from Romero, Romero's original zombies which could use knives to murder, 'rage' zombies, 'mad cow diseased' zombies, and the list goes on and on. On top of all that, you've got various biological aspects which caused the outbreaks in each of these films (some unknown, most notably, Romero's work), which would deserve it's own topic of discussion.

The obviousness of the truth is that zombies don't exist (duh), so there's absolutely no way anyone could know what to expect or how to react, given such an outbreak should occur.

That is true, and I'm glad you liked the article I've posted MarkGrass and your welcome.

[Karui]

A human body would need a heart beat to survive, undead or alive, in order for the muscles to function so that muscles throughout the body can get oxygen. Therefore, in order for a zombie to exist it technically would actually have to be close to the "Rage" zombies depicted in 28 days later, because coagulated blood cannot transport the necessary amount or any at all oxygen to muscles to operate, which would also include the brain. In other words, for a zombie to be real, you really would not be able to tell the difference between them and a living person other than that souless distant look in their eye and their desire to eat you. Furthermore, the immune system would react to a viral reaction, especially one as drastic as a virus attempting to take over brain functions and re-animate a body, and kill the host in the process, thus also killing the virus itself, for it needs the host in order to live. The closest thing we really have to a T-Virus would really be HIV/AIDS and I say that because it has a 100% fatality rate. I say this because there is no way for a virus to re-animate a human body while also being able to control the body properly and not killing the host in the process. The brain would be essential for control of the body and by overheating from response of the immune system or simply the body being unable to function, due to various variables, the brain would also die. Physically, it is impossible for the human body to live without a nervous system and the brain is the center of it, it regulates all voluntary and involuntary actions carried throughout the body.

[Det. Beauregard]

Everyone is so freaked out about a zombie outbreak, but what about a hunter outbreak? Far more terrifying, and probably more... ehem... realistic than reanimated corpses.