i admit, we don't exactly study real-world phenomena, but .. seriously?

just earlier i stumbled onto this headline @ io9:

"why we should study zombie attacks"
by lauren davis.

i scoffed immediately.

is that what biologists are studying these days?
i guess cancer research isn't paying off ..

.. but then, unfortunately, i read on:

Patrick J. Kiger, a journalist and blogger for the Science Channel, has been criticized for focusing on technologies in his column Is This a Good Idea? that currently exist only in the realm of speculative fiction. To answer those critics, Kiger looks at the recent study by mathematicians in Ottawa as to the best response to a zombie outbreak. (more)

[sighs]
one more thing to explain or deny, i guess.

from the sounds of it, though, it seems that the writer of the previous article meant "mathematical biologists" --

In a paper published in Infectious Disease Modelling Research Progress, a team of mathematicians from Carleton University and the University of Ottawa have created a series of mathematical models to explore the effects of a zombie outbreak and determine the best course for human survival. (more)

and, in their defense, they at least have style --

For the purpose of the paper, the team limited their models to the George Romero slow-moving zombies, and created separate models for zombie infections that cause the infected to resurrect immediately after contact with a zombie and for zombie infections with a 24-hour incubation period.

does that mean that the fast-moving zombies of "28 weeks later" will be a topic of future research? q-: