Rio Olympics 2016 Should be Cancelled

Thank you Con, for your argument. To quickly put aside our argument of the relevancy of my graph compared to yours, (Refer to source 2 of the previous round), the source states "more than 1 million people have contracted the virus (In Brazil)". If the virus did not exponentially rise as shown by my graph, only a quarter of that number would have Zika. The economics graph wouldn't be relevant to the recession as the recession is the product of the decline, not the rise.SeveresəG2;vir/adjective1.(of something bad or undesirable) very great; intense [1]. I made an equation to the difference between 4 months and 3 years which I believe would apply to severe.[1 Month = *Approximately 30 days] & [4 months = *120 days] & [3 Years = 36 Months] & [36 Months = *1080 Days]The rough difference in percentage rise from 120 to 1080 days is 800%. Health I didn't misunderstand your point. Zika is a virus just like influenza. Zika either remains dormant or goes away like Influenza. When a virus leaves your body, it is natural and in no way special (To Zika or any other pathogen) for your body to develop an immunity. It's one of the most commonly accepted concepts in the studies of Biology [2]. The only thing I pointed out wrong with your argument was the form in which the virus 'left' your body. Your source didn't provide back-up to your argument that the virus actually left. My source was able to provide the foundation that Zika simply remained dormant after the next 7 days. The CDC website would also show whether the virus would leave or not, and it doesn't state the expulsion of the virus from your system, only when it becomes dormant [3]. Your source number 3 of the New York times regarding when the virus leaves your system was unanswered. Q&A of numbers 10 and 15 in your article did not say whether the virus leaves your system nor did it say whether they become dormant meaning your source isn't very helpful to either of us in terms of our arguments. My source number two from round 3 regarding microcephaly had stated multiple times of the proven lasting period for microcephaly to still effect infants even when Zika is dormant [4]. I will quote the primary statement from the source in order to make it easier for you to analyze my argument. "The rapid spread of the Zika virus has prompted Latin American governments to urge women not to get pregnant for up to two years." is in the first sentence. To break it down, it means these governments recognize the lasting effects of Zika inside the body even when the other symptoms aren't present. I have not conceded my argument on the clothing and methods of repelling mosquitoes on that topic. Unless you want to create an experiment on the hypothetical effectiveness of your method suggestions, there are no sources that will provide either of our arguments any foundation. If we continue to argue our points on method prevention then the argument will become subjective as our perspectives are too specific to back-up with external sources. It will simply be subjective and not prove as progressive to our debate. Crime Just to reiterate, Rio crime rates are not "slightly higher than average", they are well beyond average. Doing simple mean and range math from these statistics I found on a trusted safety source, the average is at High, or at 75.92 [5]. I highly recommend to see that source as it is extremely effective in my argument. The safety of the Olympic athletes are virtually guaranteed, but the tourists coming in to Rio are the majority and the ones in danger. If you refer to source five in this round, the commentary that helped in providing those numbers from persons that actually ventured to Rio, they resided in high star hotels in the coast of Rio where the Olympics will be taking place. Culture I do see an importance in culture, although, as I argued before, with the combination of all these factors against the continuation of the Olympics, I'm afraid culture is a weak argument. Besides it being a 'weak argument', it is subjective and you can't exactly use a foundation for it other than opinonation. Your quotation of my statement is that culture sharing is the least of Brazil's arguments against cancellation. Economics You keep refusing to see my argument that finishing the stadiums will result in sinking the loss of profit for Brazil even more. If they continue with the construction projects they will still lose more revenue that continuing with the sales. Due to character limits, please refer to my previous arguments which you must have skimmed over as it is the same argument against your point, now. Nothing is feasibile in economics, although, the routes taken in order to avert more devestation may be easier to handle than the others. You know well, why I initiated this debate, and regarding on how easy it is to fix the problem, is not the reason why I started the debate.Thank you for this wonderful debate!DUE TO CHARACTER LIMITS, SOURCES ARE IN COMMENTS