@brodehouse: The Romans didn't have to deal with a virus that turned all the slaves and other people who maintained all that into physically resilient yet mindless flesh eaters though. I do not understand how "Well, the Romans existed" is an answer to "Are zombies hypothetically dangerous?" Just because it might not lead to civilisation shitting itself doesn't mean it couldn't be dangerous. There are plenty of real viruses out there that could devastate the world if they got out right now. Thousands, even millions, can die in an epidemic without society crumbling. That doesn't negate their dangerousness.
That said, the answer is still a "No" if it's traditional zombie virus (spread by physically biting someone) but an air/water borne virus could shake things up really badly. Just look at the hypothetical fallout of one vial of smallpox being released in a busy area like Time Square New York or Heathrow airport London.
Now, it's still not super hard to contain though it could be spread globally very easily if the virus takes a good few hours to start zombification, easily leading to a global pandemic and it'd shut down trade for days, possibly weeks, which would result in the loss of billions of dollars of trade. Trillions in the right place. Not every country would be as able to deal with the outbreak either.
In the right conditions and in the right place a zombie virus spread by coughing/sneezing or second hand contact (touching/licking/eating something an infected has contaminated) could be hugely devastating but then so could any serious enough virus.
Don't forget, if a real zombie outbreak happened like described above, people's first reaction would not be to kill them but to try and find a cure which would prolong the time between the infection spreading and people using shotguns for brain surgery.
Log in to comment