multitrillions

This kind of warfare [i.e., biological] would have us devouring the world’s children in a manner of speaking and those who are immunologically impaired, presuming we were going to immunize our own population but not those of the antagonist. Thus we would be conducting warfare which by definition would be indiscriminate rather than selective. We would lose control of the evolution of the bacteria that we would be releasing in the multitrillions.

1992, Douglas MacLean, quoting Marc Lappé, “Ethics and Biological Defense Research”, in Raymond A[llan] Zilinskas, editor, The Microbiologist and Biological Defense Research: Ethics, Politics, and International Security (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences; 666), New York, N.Y.: The New York Academy of Sciences, →ISBN, part II (Ethics of Biological Defense Research), page 112

When dealing with relatively small amounts, numerals do have the advantage of quickly sending information from the page to the reader’s brain. […] But when we start dealing with multimillions and multibillions, and (heaven forbid!) multitrillions, it’s a different ball game. Let’s consider again the $10,937,837,444.27 example.

2000, Jefferson D[avis] Bates, “Tell Me Not in Mournful Numbers”, in Writing with Precision: How to Write So That You Cannot Possibly Be Misunderstood, new, expanded edition, New York, N.Y.: Penguin Books, →ISBN, part 2 (Editing (and Self-Editing) with Precision), page 189