this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2023
8 points (90.0% liked)

Ask Biologists ๐Ÿ™‹๐Ÿ‘จโ€๐Ÿ”ฌ ๐Ÿงฌ

616 readers
2 users here now

Ask anything about all fields of biology. ๐Ÿงช๐Ÿงฌ๐Ÿ”ฌ

We value quality over quantity.


Rules:


You may also like:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ndr
 

Too many sci-fi movies make it seem like you've got minutes before catastrophic symptoms appear after being exposed, but what's the most realistic timeframe for an infection to cause a severe response?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Candelestine 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Honestly, pretty fast. You could look at cases of bowel rupture, where a large amount of bacteria quickly gains access to the bloodstream, causing sepsis and rapid death without immediate intervention. Can go from infection to death in half a day.

If we're just asking for a severe response instead of death, it just depends on how severe it needs to be. The bacteria is throughout your body within minutes, flowing at the speed your blood circulates, and almost immediately triggering a massive immune response. This immune response leads to shock, which is what kills you.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Great response!

So, something like botulism (according to Health Canada) can take 12 - 72 after ingestion for symptoms to appear. But even that seems pretty damn slow. Anthrax is even slower.

Are there any which cause symptoms in minutes?

Again, my context is that movies make it seem like if you're scratched by something infectious, you've got minutes before you're a zombie. LOL

[โ€“] Candelestine 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Theoretical zombifying pathogens have a few additional hurdles to pass. One, they can't destroy your tissue, because it's still necessary to operate the body. Two, they need access to your brain, which your body has a natural barrier protecting. Pathogens have a hard time getting in unless they start very nearby. Third, it'd have to alter your brain in such a way that a lot of behavior was left intact without destroying basic motor function and some simple logic.

This just isn't easy to do. Probably would require some kind of super spiffy sci fi nanotechnology to actually pull off. Like, if Tony injected his fanciest suit's nanites into your body and controlled them remotely, he might be able to ask Jarvis (or whoever it was, I forget) to zombify you.

Theoretically.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Theoretical zombifying pathogens have a few additional hurdles to pass.

We can only hope that the "zombie-ant fungus" never figures out a way to bypass human defence mechanisms. LOL

Thanks for the explanation. I really appreciate the insight.

[โ€“] Candelestine 2 points 2 years ago

We have something kinda like that, it's called rabies.

[โ€“] INeedMana 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

FWIW such short timespan seems possible with venom.

Maybe two vector approach would make such thing possible - you get infected some other time and the virus is dormant until the venom gets you.

I'm not a biologist, though :)

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

FWIW such short timespan seems possible with venom.

Yes, venom came to mind, but I thought that might be cheating :)

It's pretty scary to see just how many things have the potential to give us a really bad day from just a small prick or touch or taste!

[โ€“] INeedMana 1 points 2 years ago

"How many" - yeah, probably

But statistically I think we should rather be worried about other things ;)