SARS Quiz: Test Your Level of Intelligence
Leonard G. Horowitz, D.M.D., M.A., M.P.H.
Author of the national bestselling book
Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola—Nature, Accident or
It is April, have we not been fools?
Last year, didn’t more than 36,000 people die of the flu in the
Weren’t they, almost all, elderly or very young?
Weren’t these victims, almost all, immune compromised?
Had not the major source of their weakened immunity been drug side
effects and vaccine-induced toxicity and autoimmunity?
Why was there nearly no mention about this widespread mortality
from flu in previous years, compared to SARS this year, which to
date (April 16, 2003) has killed no one in America?
Alternatively, with zero deaths in the U.S. from SARS thus far,
why has so much media attention focused on this newest microscopic
Why hasn’t the mainstream media asked these simple questions?
Why are SARS “cases” and SARS mortality rates grossly overstated
and mixed-up in the press?
For instance, why are “confirmed” and “suspected” SARS cases
grouped together in most news reports, when the majority of
“suspected” “cases” turn out to be something other than SARS?
Why would public health officials, who know better, go along with
the false and misleading 4% death rate from SARS errantly
established on this inappropriate summing of “confirmed” and
“suspected” SARS “cases?”
Why would epidemiologically trained public health officials
completely disregard the thousands, if not millions, of other
people who got SARS—people who never reported their illness and
naturally healed without quarantine, hospitalization, or expensive
Wouldn’t an honest projection of the SARS mortality rate seem
miniscule and irrelevant?
Wouldn’t that make the economic incentive from SARS seem miniscule
Would SARS’s irrelevance help or harm newspaper sales?
Would miniscule mortality rates help or harm health officials
attempting to justify their existence and increase their budgets?
Speaking of money, if contraindications and side effects of
ribaviron abound, and it has never been tested against the SARS-strain
of coronavirus to begin with, then why has it been recommended and
prescribed by those claiming “authority” since the beginning of
the SARS scare?
Is it true that conservatively 10 percent of Americans are
psychologically and/or pharmacologically predisposed to developing
debilitating phobias with potentially deadly social dysfunctions
resulting from their frights?
Is this mentally challenged population placed at highest risk from
mass-mediated fear campaigns?
Is it likely that more of these 27 million people in the U.S.
alone have suffered horribly from the SARS fright than those who
have gotten SARS?
Is it likely far more of these people have died from
phobia-induced avoidance behaviors, like avoiding outside (i.e,
social) contacts, including life-saving services, in the wake of
SARS coverage by the media?
Don’t public health officials realize this as they “surf the SARS
wave to international fame?”
Likewise, does this SARS fright reflect irresponsible journalism?
Is there a specialty field of science in public health and
journalism known as “risk communication?”
Does a Google search on the Internet reveal about 2,780,000 “risk
communication” references with recommendations as to how to
communicate risks most efficiently without: a) harming the public;
b) creating phobias, and c) reinforcing irrational fears?
Doesn’t every public health official learn about this field of
science known as “risk communication” during their professional
Doesn’t risk communication in public health, such as applied in
the field of AIDS education, seek to reduce irrational fears?
Hasn’t every public health professional with media spokesperson
responsibilities been made keenly aware of the need to communicate
health risks honestly and appropriately with this being the
Haven’t experts in behavioral science and public health developed
“risk communication” protocols to assure the public is able to
accurately assess risks to their personal health from infectious
diseases among other threats?
Why has the entire field of “risk communication” in public health,
along with full honest disclosure, been completely neglected
in-so-far-as SARS is concerned?
Level 5: Genius Level
If far more than 99.99% of people infected with SARS get well on
their own, how did they manage to do that without government
If these people’s healthy immune systems are primarily responsible
for their speedy recoveries, with all the warnings issued
regarding SARS, why haven’t our officials published a variety of
practical immune boosting recommendations?
Is it true that both fear and stress reduces natural immunity to
infectious diseases like SARS?
Is it true that herbal cures for coronavirus infections were
published in the scientific literature in 1995?
Is it true that government authorities have neglected to mention
Logically, then, if government health experts know all of the
above, are fueling fears while neglecting practical solutions,
doesn’t it seem as though they are actively increasing public
risks and death rates?
Given the above, doesn’t “criminal negligence” and “public health
malpractice” best describe government officials’ actions in
response to SARS, thus far?
Does less than 3% of America’s annual health budget go to
Does a “stitch in time save nine?”
“Is there a fox in the henhouse?”
Is the third leading cause of death in the U.S. prescribed by
doctors and hospital staff?
Aren’t these the first people you think of seeing when you get
If yes, are you mentally ill?
Answers: All “Yes” or “No” questions (except for the last
two) are definitively affirmative. If you got them correct, then
there’s hope for you. For the other questions, your guess is as
good as mine . . . April fools.
Copyround © 2003, Leonard G. Horowitz
The author authorizes reprinting and circulation ad libitum.
This article was provided
courtesy of Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz
and Tetrahedron Publishing Group
206 North 4th Avenue, Suite 147
Sandpoint, Idaho 83864
Toll free order line: 888-508-4787;
Office telephone: 208-265-2575;