Because we all love talking about the living dead. Following on from a conversation I had about the newer ‘fast zombies’ vs traditional shambling ‘slow zombies’ and which type of apocalypse would be worse.
So, taking the two types (I’m using viruses), which is worse?
Solanum (slow zombies - information taken from Max Brook’s Zombie Survival Guide):
Incubation and symptoms: Fever, dementia, paralysis and numbness following initial infection. ~20 hours to death, ~23 hours to reanimation.
Infection: Through direct fluidic contact. 100% communicable and 100% fatal.
Cross species infection: Fatal to all creatures, only reanimates humans.
Treatment: No known treatment or cure other than immediate severing of infected limb, which has 10% chance of success.
Strengths: Complete immunity to pain. Unlimited patience and stamina. No need for food, water, oxygen or anything else. Relies more on senses of hearing and smell. Can only be killed by destroying the brain. Rejects agents of decay giving a lifespan of years. Able to communicate to other solanum infectees through moans. Can identify friend/foe.
Weaknesses: Slow moving and clumsy, extremely low dexterity and agility, balancing, swimming and (to a large extent) climbing are beyond their abilities. Extremely low intelligence and no problem solving skills. Predictable behaviour. No regenerative abilities whatsoever.
Rage virus (fast zombies from the 28 Days/Weeks later films)
Incubation and symptoms: Almost instantaneous transformation, victim is fully infected with murderous intent a mere 10-20 seconds after contact.
Infection: Like solanum, direct fluidic contact 100% communicable, but not 100% fatal.
Cross species infection: Humans and other primates can become infected.
Treatment: A complete blood transfusion has a low probability of success. Rare immunities also exist, whereby the infected becomes a non-symptomatic carrier.
Strengths: Quick and relatively agile, able to sprint. Fast and brutal attacks, attacking with fists and bites. Able to vomit infected blood onto the target turning victim into infected without biting. Enhanced stamina and survivability of a person utterly consumed by hatred and anger. A limited intelligence - Rage zombies have been shown to be able to skilfully stalk single prey. Superb sense of smell. Some nocturnal hunting patterns suggest enhanced night vision. Can identify friend/foe.
Weaknesses: Can be killed any way a human could. Will eventually die of starvation.
Both pretty grim…but which type of apocalypse spells greater doom for humanity?
It’s a tough one. Rage zombies are a heck of a lot scarier to me, what with the running ( I’m slow ) and the near-instantaneous transformation of your buddy into a slavering maniac that could outrun you ( I’m slow ). On the other hand if you can somehow find some reasonably secure place to hide out for several weeks with a stash of food, you’re golden - the rage zombies will eventually all drop dead.
Slow zombies on the other hand are a lot easier to evade and it is easier to find or create a fortified stronghold. But they never stop and never seem to die of their own accord. You’ll be dealing with the damn things for as long as you live.
I think I’d be more likely to live longer with the slow zombies, but humanity as whole would probably be better able to weather fast zombies if you can quarantine the outbreak quickly enough.
Honestly, I’d pick the Rage Virus. It’s a “real” disease with rules you can follow and some hope for the future. Just keep hiding until the infected die away.
Supernatural zombies? That’s End of Days stuff. That’s Mankind Living Forever in Postapocalyptic Wasteland stuff.
Either would be exterminated long before they became a global threat, but I’d expect the Rage zombies to do more damage before they go down. Remember: in order to increase the number of zombies by one, they need to wound but not kill a human, without being killed themselves, and without the benefit of humanity’s greatest assets. As Cracked.com put it, it’s like if every time you ever wanted to have sex or eat a sandwich, you first had to fight a lion bare-handed. Every “generation” of zombies would be smaller than the last, not an ever-growing plague.
Rage zombies are inherently more dangerous if you live in an urban sector. I’m confident that in an outbreak of slow zombies, I’d be perfectly fine between my escape plan and survival training courtesy of the USAF. Rage zombies are a whole different animal, I’d have to view every single other person as a potential threat during the execution of the escape plan. That makes singling out targets much more difficult and screws basic diversion tactics that would stymie shufflers.
Except that they vomit blood in your face. If it was all based on biting and scratching, I could sort of take your point. I side with the movie and think that only starvation will bring them down.
Those 28 Days Later “zombies” aren’t ever shown actually eating people, are they? I haven’t seen it in a few years. So, if they take in no calories, they probably will be down in weeks. But all that blood vomiting still convinces me that only the most impassable natural barriers and starvation would save humanity.
It’s more like a pack of people fighting a single lion bare-handed with relentless effort, all day and all night. And just because their numbers decrease doesn’t mean that humans’ numbers would rise. If they win the fight, they get another recruit instantly. It’ll take us 16 years or so to replace that one guy! Pretty soon, all the adults are zombies and the kids are still toddlers.
I’m all about some zombie posts today! I think that rage zombies would have me dead pretty quick, but if I could hunker down and hide long enough, they die off…so that gives me at least a chance of survival.
Solanum zombies never quit, nor do they “die off” - but the huge weakness, and the one drawback I found in their presentation, is that you have to have fluid transfer to become infected; while this works with rage zombies because the infection and change is nearly instant, the relatively slow turn for Solanum victims means they can be isolated and dispatched before becoming a threat.
Now, if this were a Walking Dead (comic, not show) situation or Romero’s Dead universe, where ANYONE that dies rises as a zombie? The slow zombies would win merely through attrition. Everyone, eventually, will join their ranks - that is not a foe you can realistically stop.
Darn! There’s no option for “I can take any zombie any day”, so I picked the fast ones simply because it would prove more of a challenge. However, allow me access to my razor sharp battle-ready katana (with which I’m skilled at using BTW), and maybe a shotgun (which I’ll need to raid a sporting goods store for), then we’ll see who can put down a zombie outbreak.
Bosstrain…a cure for zombies, see your local anti-zombie outpost for details
The slowpokes are harder to kill, and infected people can infiltrate populations. The rage zombies turn instantly, so they’re easier to identify as a threat and eliminate. Slow zombies would do much more damage to the population. I’d rather fight a fast zombie that can die, than a slow zombie that can’t.
Slow zombies obviously. It’s like asking if you’d rather be in the jungle with velociraptors or kimodo dragons. Both will make you just as dead, but rage zombies are 100% balls to the wall, rip-you-to-pieces, adrenaline fueled fury, while slow zombies are more of an interesting problem that can be deadly if you’re dumb and don’t watch what you’re doing.
Rage zombies are a much bigger threat, but the threat is not long lasting. If you manage to hide out for a month or two the plague will mostly burn itself out. Solamnum zombies are slow and stupid but they are long lasting, you basically have to deal with them your whole life. I guess it would mostly depend on where you are, you could get lucky and completely miss out on the rage zombie outbreak.
I’m not sure how this is even a question. The rage zombies would be much, much worse. They’re super fast and I’m pretty sure they’re not technically dead thus they won’t decompose like regular zombies (though some regular zombies won’t decompose all the way, depending on setting - ftr, the zombies from the Survival Guide are explicitly stated to decompose I believe, meaning you only have to hold out a few months most likely, to account for newly-made zombies. After that there’d only be a tiny fraction of them left).
I think that rage zombies would have me dead pretty quick, but if I could hunker down and hide long enough, they die off…so that gives me at least a chance of survival.