While the vampire is a monster of folklore, modern technothrillers (e.g. Federal Vampire and Zombie Agency, Ultraviolet, Blade, Underworld, Daybreakers) have portrayed vampires as humans infected by a pathogen that causes hematophagy, photosensitivity, and enhanced physical attributes (e.g. strength, senses, longevity).

If such a pathogen was constrained by hard science, how would it differ from the pop culture version in order to approximate the same result? How could the infected exist without being malnourished and scourged by rickets and scurvy?

  • $\begingroup$ Not a virus, but are parasites fair game? They seem like they might be a better vector to attack this from. $\endgroup$
    – Ranger
    Aug 22, 2016 at 17:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ That should be hematophysis not hematophagy. Hematophysis is blood drinking & hematophagy is blood eating. A subtle difference I know, but good table manners are important. $\endgroup$
    – a4android
    Aug 23, 2016 at 7:02
  • $\begingroup$ Wouldn’t science-based be better? Some good answers are already appearing that don't have formulas and citations. $\endgroup$
    – JDługosz
    Aug 23, 2016 at 11:58
  • $\begingroup$ @JDługosz: I'm not sure your understanding of the hard-science requirements is correct. I'm of the opinion that my answer does fulfil the requirements of hard-science. $\endgroup$
    – celtschk
    Aug 23, 2016 at 12:41
  • $\begingroup$ Also see this question regarding the need to drink blood to survive. Not a complete answer to your question but solves one of the biggest problems in approximating a vampire $\endgroup$
    – Annonymus
    Aug 23, 2016 at 14:30

3 Answers 3


A remark at the beginning: In a world where real-life vampires existed, there would certainly also grow a lot of myths about them. So we would have to distinguish between in-world real traits and in-world myths (that is, things that are commonly ascribed to vampires in that world, but are not true, or not entirely true). Therefore the real task would be to devise a pathogen and corresponding vampire traits that cause the commonly assumed traits to be plausible to the general population, given the actual traits of the infected.

Note that if the pathogen appears in a society where vampire stories are already culturally ingrained, it is quite likely that the fictional vampire traits would be projected to the real-world vampires, as long as some traits are a good fit.

So, let's look at what traits real-world (as in, real in that fictional world) infected people might have that would make them to be seen as having the traits of vampires.

Drinking blood for nutrition

The main theme of vampirism is, of course, that vampires drink the blood of their victims, and those bitten then become vampires themselves. So how much of that could be true?

As other answers already explained, nutrition just from blood is unlikely, as you'd too much of it to live from. However, what is definitely possible is that a pathogen gets transferred on a bite; that's for example how rabies is transferred. Now while rabies certainly makes animals bite, it doesn't make humans bite. However I found this article which details that aggression after infections is not quite uncommon, and even cites a case where a girl bit her father several times, although admittedly from the description, the biting doesn't look like a specific result of the illness but just part of the common infection.

So while there is no direct indication that an illness could specifically cause biting in humans, I'd say there's nothing that specifically indicates that it could not be possible in principle. And indeed, for an illness that is transferred by biting and that is human-specific (that is, it cannot simply spread through aggressive animals, like rabies can), it would make sense to cause this behaviour, as that would spread the disease.

Indeed, for effective spreading, it would be advantageous if the pathogen got directly into the blood of the bitten, so it would also make sense if the infected developed a specific appetite for blood. However according to Wikipedia there's little evidence for specific appetite in humans, and the few examples cited are for specific elements. So it is unlikely to be caused by a pathogen.

So how could the perception of blood drinking be caused?

  • The infection spreads through bites. The victim is more likely to be infected if the bite reaches the blood stream. Thus it is commonly assumed that the infected specifically long for getting to the blood stream.

  • The infected get pale (more on that below). This seems compatible with the idea that their blood is sucked out.

  • The infected live separate from the uninfected humans, both for their light sensitivity, see below, and the fact that they are feared by the general population (and in turn have to fear the normal population, as those are likely to kill them). Therefore non-infected people generally won't see infected people eating, reinforcing the myth that they are living off the blood they suck from the victims.

There still remains one problem: Why would vampires seek out uninfected humans? Well, from the point of view of the disease it would make sense, but I cannot imagine a mechanism that could provide that.

However note that the actual rate of people being bitten need not be that high for the perceived rate to be high. It's just like crime in our real world: The actual violent crime is generally going down, but the perception is that the world is a very dangerous place. So maybe in that world, actual bites are also a relatively rare event (and most of the infections happen through different infection paths), but get blown out of proportion in public perception.

Pale appearance

One of the symptoms of the illness may be Pallor. Note that the list of causes includes tuberculosis, so it definitely can be a symptom of an illness. In addition, they will likely have little pigmentation, either just from never being in the sun, of from an additional Hypopigmentation which can also be caused by illness (the linked Wikipedia page lists leprosy as possible cause).

Avoiding the sunlight

Of course, the idea that a vampire decays into ashes when exposed to sunlight can only be a myth. However what is realistic is that the vampires would have to avoid sunlight, which would then inspire/reinforce that myth.

This could have several causes. One is Photophobia where one of the causes listed in the Wikipedia article is excessive response in the central nervous system; this fits well with the aggressivity theme above.

Besides that there is also Phototoxicity: The pathogen could produce a substance (or make the body produce a substance) that is phototoxic. This would also mean that exposure of vampires to skin would cause visible effects (although not immediately), something that could well add to the myth about sunlight killing vampires.

No mirror image

This is of course physically impossible. However, it might be that the infected people simply avoid mirrors in order to not have to see their own deceased look. This may fuel the myth that they are not seen in the mirror.

Sleeping in coffins in burial crypts

They most probably won't sleep in coffins. But since they have to hide from the sunlight (see above), they have to seek dark places to hide during the day. Moreover they might want to do it in places where non-infected people are unlikely to come. A burial crypt might just be the ideal place for that.

Garlic helping against vampires

Well, garlic allergy exists. From the Wikipedia page:

Garlic allergy has been known since at least 1950. It is not limited to hand contact, but can also be induced, with different symptoms, by inhaling garlic dust or ingesting raw garlic, though the latter cases are relatively rare.

So if the vampires all develop a garlic allergy, garlic will indeed be a good means to keep them away. And contact with garlic will indeed have very bad symptoms for allergic people:

The affected fingertips show an asymmetrical pattern of fissure as well as thickening and shedding of the outer skin layers, which may progress to second- or third-degree burn of injured skin.

This may well be interpreted as a sort of decay by someone seeing it.

However, I've not found anything indicating that infections can cause allergies to unrelated substances.

Improved senses

Could an illness sharpen their senses? Well, there are indeed some possibilities.

One thing they'd probably have is a better night vision. In the Wikipedia article on Accelerating dark adaptation in humans I found the following:

Rod cells are much slower to adapt to the dark and it is believed to take days for these cells to reach full dark adaptation.

Since rod cells are precisely those used for night reception, it implies that if you are continuously in relative darkness, your night reception should be better than that of people having daily sunlight exposure.

Also there might be effects similar to the blind being better at hearing which according to the linked article is confirmed. Since the vampires won't exercise their day vision (like the colour perception systems) much, their brain may reassign its resources to night vision, or even to unrelated senses like hearing or smell.

Speaking about smell, there's also Hyperosmia which causes a decreased threshold of smell; that is, you smell things you wouldn't smell otherwise. The Wikipedia article indicates that there are some substances that might cause it, so it's not unconceivable that the pathogen might produce one of those substances.

  • $\begingroup$ Alas, the question is tagged hard-science and this answer doesn’t follow those constraints. $\endgroup$
    – JDługosz
    Aug 23, 2016 at 11:59
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @JDługosz: So you don't see references in my post? Look harder! $\endgroup$
    – celtschk
    Aug 23, 2016 at 12:15
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @JDługosz: Also I note that you put that comment only on my answer, not on the other answers; if my answer doesn't fit the constraints of hard-science, then the other answers do so even less. $\endgroup$
    – celtschk
    Aug 23, 2016 at 12:22
  • $\begingroup$ Other answers already have yellow banners, not just comments. $\endgroup$
    – JDługosz
    Aug 23, 2016 at 15:25
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @JDługosz: Only one of the answers had the yellow bar at the time I responded to your comment (whether that had the yellow bar already when you write your comment, I certainly cannot say). But every single answer that existed at that time was less well referenced than mine. So I sincerely wonder why you picked specifically my answer for your comment. $\endgroup$
    – celtschk
    Aug 23, 2016 at 15:38

Firstly, a scientifically realistic vampire would differ from its pop culture by not doing a number of things. Not crumbling into dust when staked through the heart. Not needing to rest with its native soil. Not being able to turn into red mist, bats or wolves. Not being able to control the minds of the insane.

Plus the things a scientifically realistic vampire can now do. Being able to cross running water. Entering homes and dwellings uninvited. Seeing its reflection in mirrors.

There will be uncertainties about reactions to garlic. Vampirism may induce allergies and garlic is known as an allergen. Vide Block (2009) and Moyle et al (2004). While silver is usually for werewolves, it might also be an allergen for vampires.

All of the vampire traits discussed above were exhibited by the King vampire himself! This is none other than Count Dracula! About whom more can be found in Mr Bram Stoker's novel of the same name.

The main problem of a pathogen inducing vampirism in its host is that the infecting organism has to induce massive metamorphosis in a human being to transform so many physiological functions and rebuild the person structurally as well. The pathogen effectively needs to be engineered to do this. While it is possible bio-technologists from a type K2 civilization whipping up something like this to while away a dull afternoon on a Friday, it would be inadvisable for them to let loose on a planet with a less than K1 civilization.

The mechanics and dynamics of the spread of the vampire pathogen have been discussed here. This study by Schneider (2016) developed the following useful categories for the understanding of vampire pathogen epidemics.

1, Outbreak epidemiology/dynamics; 2, Imaginative cures; 3, Pathogen life cycles; 4, Host heterogeneity and disease tolerance; 5, Native microbiota; 6, Pathogen social behavior; 7, Lives of the infected; 8, Unusual pathogens; 9, Mode of transmission; 10, Manipulation of the host.

Research by Sandvik et al (1994) has revealed that the traditional prophylactic action of garlic may been overrated.

Garlic has been regarded as an effective prophylactic against vampires. We wanted to explore this alleged effect experimentally. Owing to the lack of vampires, we used leeches instead. In strictly standardized research surroundings, the leeches were to attach themselves to either a hand smeared with garlic or to a clean hand. The garlic-smeared hand was preferred in two out of three cases (95% confidence interval 50.4% to 80.4%). When they preferred the garlic the leeches used only 14.9 seconds to attach themselves, compared with 44.9 seconds when going to the non-garlic hand (p < 0.05). The traditional belief that garlic has prophylactic properties is probably wrong. The reverse may in fact be true. This study indicates that garlic possibly attracts vampires

While it is conceivable that a pathogen or parasite might evolve the necessary mechanisms to infect, colonize, and then metamorphose a human being into a creature that is functionally a vampire this would be extremely difficult to do and is most likely to take extremely long timescales. Elsewhere this has suggested at hundreds of millions of years as the result of a long co-evolution between humans and the vampirizing organism.


Eric Block (2009). Garlic and other alliums: the lore and the science. Royal Society of Chemistry. p. 228. ISBN 0-85404-190-7.

Moyle, M; Frowen, K; Nixon, R (2004). "Use of gloves in protection from diallyl disulphide allergy.". The Australasian journal of dermatology. 45 (4): 223–5.

Sandvik H1, Baerheim A., Does garlic protect against vampires? An experimental study. [Article in Norwegian], Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 1994 Dec 10;114(30):3583-6.

David S. Schneider, What Can Vampires Teach Us about Immunology? Trends in Immunology, Volume 37, Issue 4, April 2016, pp 253–256.

  • $\begingroup$ Crossing running water, and entering homes uninvited can easily be mental trouble coming with the pathogen. $\endgroup$ Aug 23, 2016 at 12:49
  • $\begingroup$ True enough. A psychiatric explanation is plausible. My answer was, in part, about removing the supernatural aspects of the vampire. The pop culture vampire is a confection of supernatural phenomena. $\endgroup$
    – a4android
    Aug 23, 2016 at 13:28

Vampires would require tons of energy to be themselves. Blood does contain nutrients in form of sugars. A quick research reveals that sugar in blood is around 1.4 g/L. With 5 L of blood per human, a vamp can harvest 28 kcal of energy from a single drain. Additionally, there is cholesterol in blood. A round 2 g/L which translates to 90 kcal. Lets say vamps can harvest other material from blood too, totaling 250 kcal per person. Even if they could reduce their bio rhythm while they are inactive, they would still require a lot of humans in order to survive.

  • $\begingroup$ For the sake of comparison, how many kcal is the average meal? $\endgroup$
    – UIDAlexD
    Aug 22, 2016 at 18:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ a single slice of pizza has 300 kilocalories,one avocado fruit has 320 kilocalories, an entire banana has 103 kilocalories, a single slice of bread has 70 kilocalories, a cup of sugar has 770 calories a cup of olive oil has 2000 kilocalories..... Usually cooked food has more calories....and a person needs 2400 kilocalories to survive or from 6000 to 15000 for body building or extreme sports, like olympic eat 10000 kilocalories per day.... I've heard of bodybuilders or strongmen eating up 45000 kilocalories in a day but I don't think it's really necessary. $\endgroup$
    – Charon
    Aug 22, 2016 at 18:46
  • $\begingroup$ You are underestimating the contents of blood - it is rather protein rich. All told, it looks to be closer to 440 Calories per 500ml (425 for women to 460 for men) - about double what a typical person burns in a day if you drain every drop. The problem is the lack of fatty acids, carbohydrates, and insufficient essential nutrients. $\endgroup$ Aug 22, 2016 at 19:18
  • $\begingroup$ 440 kcal for 500ml is 8.8 kcal per gram which is almost at the level of pure fat. Could it be 440 per 5 liters? Remember 92% of blood is water. May be that figure is in kilo joules. $\endgroup$ Aug 22, 2016 at 19:37
  • $\begingroup$ OK, a little bit sleepy here, numbers mixed up. So, 440k cal for 500 from 8% makes 11 kcal per gram. Way too much. kjoules is making more sense now. If it is kj, it would be 2.6 kcal per gram, which would make sense. If that would be the case, total would be 1000 kcal. $\endgroup$ Aug 22, 2016 at 19:44

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .