What does everybody else think?
There have been two fatalities in the US that may have been the result of aerosol exposure to rabies virus in a cave. Both were about 50 years ago. Of course, medical diagnostic technology 50 years ago was quite limited by today’s standards. Both cases were probably exposures to Mexican Free-tailed bats in Texas. One person was a state rabies investigator that had handled thousands of bats. The other victim had been in a cave and denied being bitten, but a friend reported that the victim had blood on his face that was presumed to be from a bat bite. The chances of aerosol exposure while caving are extremely small, and perhaps non-existent, but I think the information should be included. Here is another possible rewording of this section with three possible choices for the last paragraph (each with less information than the previous one). Is this too much information? Could somebody suggest an alternative? Should we just skip it? Should we use one of the options below, if so, which one?
