HIV has been with us for many years. How it's transmitted is well understood. although to this day we still have no cure, we know how to cope. Unless you need blood transfusion (which should already have been screened by now), share needles, have new *** partner(s), your risk is minimal. Again, can we proclaim we know how SARS is spread? It's one thing that a test is not 100% effective. It's another if the test is completely ineffective. In between is a wide range. Sure, the methods (questionaires, and temperature checks) are cheap alright. But IMHO they also have questionable effectiveness. While I've no objection to this measure, I do question the wisdom of relying on them though. Well put. You already said it's in the initial stage. So, why not have a bit more patience? It's not life imprisonment, is it? I believed that's exactly what happened here in U.S. immediately after 9/11. Airports were literally shut down, albeit shortly. That's, until counter-measures were put in place. Furthermore, traffics were cut down naturally since people automatically cancel their non-essential travel plans. As for Olympics, well, everything has a price/priority. No kidding. Someone might have made a decision for you how much your life is worth. It depends on the SARS situation as we get closer to Olympics time. Everything has its first time, I'm NOT rejecting the possibility of someone canceling Olympics altogether, do you? If this does happen, I believe this would be its first time in history? Hmm... You lost me here. Are you talking about the questions on those screening questionaires? This is just as saying everyone would die some day. Apparently, the insurance company has a slightly different idea using Actuarial Science. You don't need to apologize. As long as we don't resort to launching personal attacks, and just stick with "things", okay? But the idea of this screening is flawed... It admits the possibility of infection among some individuals. By the time he is screened out (based on development of symptoms), countless other may have be infected by him alone. To play Devil's Advocate, even if we've definitive diagnostic test, as long as it's not instantaneous, we'd have logistic nightmare. A person that gets a negative test result may be infected after the test was conducted but before the test was published. Hence he'd be free, by mistake. Why do you keep coming back to compare with HIV? Can you please establish the argument that this is an "apple to apple" comparison? What information? But SARS doesn't have to be eradicated. Furthermore, is it too early to surrender? Common cold is pretty much harmless. That may explain practically no resources are put into research a cure for it. Given high enough a profile and financial rewards, you could see talent emerges. Is there any intrinsic reason why we can't deal with coronavirus? Maybe because of SARS, we end up having vaccine for Common Cold also Of course, act/pretend as if nothing has happened is one way to cope. But it seems too early to fall hopeless.