• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Sign in to follow this  
sarahbell

Polio type disease

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Van Lady said:

Nature will win regarding mutating viruses and diseases. Already antibiotics, due to over prescribing IMO, aren’t the wonder drug they used to be.

Nature is always a step ahead of humanity. 

It's an arms race

A superb book and an enjoyable book to read, and accessible to the layman: Price P: Evolutionary Biology of Parasites, 1980, Princeton

https://press.princeton.edu/titles/645.html

(buy it secondhand)

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/10/2018 at 19:55, Van Lady said:

Nature will win regarding mutating viruses and diseases. Already antibiotics, due to over prescribing IMO, aren’t the wonder drug they used to be.

Nature is always a step ahead of humanity.  

Amen to that, a big old 2019 Spanish Flu pandemic with a few hundred million dead, would do wonders for the natural world. Nihilistic but necessary I feel.

(As long as no family or DOSBODers get caught out!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, spunko said:

Amen to that, a big old 2019 Spanish Flu pandemic with a few hundred million dead, would do wonders for the natural world. Nihilistic but necessary I feel.

(As long as no family or DOSBODers get caught out!)

In 1600 there were about 500 million people

In 1918 there were about 1.7 billion people

There are now about 7.6 billion people

We need to knock out a few billion, but with population density as it is, and with global travel thrown in, transmission will be much better and so that may well happen.

You really want to be an uncontacted tribesman or woman.

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hopeful said:

In 1600 there were about 500 million people

In 1918 there were about 1.7 billion people

There are now about 7.6 billion people

We need to knock out a few billion, but with population density as it is, and with global travel thrown in, transmission will be much better and so that may well happen.

You really want to be an uncontacted tribesman or woman.


So what will it be: ebola or flu?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, sarahbell said:


So what will it be: ebola or flu?

I'd expect flu

I think a pandemic is almost inevitable. The WHO is hugely vigilant, more than anyone probably realises since a pandemic is the greatest health fear.

If there are two people in a room and one has a cold you might not catch it, but as you fill the room with people transmission improves until the density at which everyone except the immune will become infected. If the infection is quickly lethal the numbers of people in the room will fall until transmission is reduced again, and so there may be some survivors that are not simply those that are immune. It's in a parasite's interests not to kill the host too quickly.

Infection is 'nature's' way of controlling population growth. Close to home, the outbreak of Phocine distemper virus among seals in the North Sea a couple of decades ago was a classic example of infection dynamics. The seal population grew until the point that physical barriers to transmission were broken down, the virus spread and the seal population reduced until transmission was broken again. Both the seal and the virus populations had their 'good times'. It's a cycle.

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Hopeful said:

I'd expect flu

I think a pandemic is almost inevitable. The WHO is hugely vigilant, more than anyone probably realises since a pandemic is the greatest health fear.

If there are two people in a room and one has a cold you might not catch it, but as you fill the room with people transmission improves until the density at which everyone except the immune will become infected. If the infection is quickly lethal the numbers of people in the room will fall until transmission is reduced again, and so there may be some survivors that are not simply those that are immune. It's in a parasite's interests not to kill the host too quickly.

Infection is 'nature's' way of controlling population growth. Close to home, the outbreak of Phocine distemper virus among seals in the North Sea a couple of decades ago was a classic example of infection dynamics. The seal population grew until the point that physical barriers to transmission were broken down, the virus spread and the seal population reduced until transmission was broken again. Both the seal and the virus populations had their 'good times'. It's a cycle.

Spanish flu (a 'nasty variant') killed about 5% of the population, so I'm not sure that flu would make a big dent in the population as is suggested in your earlier post.

The plague in the middle ages killed about 30% of the population, so would have a severe effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dgul said:

Spanish flu (a 'nasty variant') killed about 5% of the population, so I'm not sure that flu would make a big dent in the population as is suggested in your earlier post.

The plague in the middle ages killed about 30% of the population, so would have a severe effect.

Agree,

flu is just my expectation for the next pandemic. While serious for individuals, the WHO and governments would ultimately take the death toll in their stride I suspect.

Something else might arise and if serious like a plague and it threatened to be a pandemic, then I'd expect the WHO and states to swing into rapid action, the plebs freedom would be curtailed.

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hopeful said:

We need to knock out a few billion, but with population density as it is, and with global travel thrown in, transmission will be much better and so that may well happen.

You really want to be an uncontacted tribesman or woman.

Communication is a lot better too though..   as soon as people start dropping like flies everyone will barricade themselves in their houses and it will all go zombie apocalypse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fall out from a nuclear war might get the job done sooner.

Nature takes care of overpopulation by starvation, drought or disease.

With man it's adds disproportionate aggression to the mix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hopeful said:

In 1600 there were about 500 million people

In 1918 there were about 1.7 billion people

There are now about 7.6 billion people

We need to knock out a few billion, but with population density as it is, and with global travel thrown in, transmission will be much better and so that may well happen.

You really want to be an uncontacted tribesman or woman.

each human produces 800Kg CO2 pa just from breathing, that's over 6Gt of CO2 pa for comparrison all cars globably produce 9.8 Gt (2014 figures).

At current growth rates CO2 production from humans while sleeping will be one of the largest causes of climate change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, snaga said:

each human produces 800Kg CO2 pa just from breathing, that's over 6Gt of CO2 pa for comparrison all cars globably produce 9.8 Gt (2014 figures).

At current growth rates CO2 production from humans while sleeping will be one of the largest causes of climate change.

not to mention the methane coming out of their behinds

don't we just get everyone to carry a plant around to absorb the co2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ashestoashes said:

not to mention the methane coming out of their behinds

don't we just get everyone to carry a plant around to absorb the co2

we should eat termites, might be carbon & methane neutral then.

Termites produce more greenhouse gasses than all other living things, they are truely evil little fucks, wonder how they taste?

https://www.iceagenow.info/termites-produce-co2-year-living-combined/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, XswampyX said:

The secondhand edition comes with it's own parasite. :/

Page 42 = the last person to look up scabies... Had scabies. xD

I had scabies nasty fucking thing it was too. Tried everything, antifungal athlete's foot cream, antiseptic cream, tea tree oil, just wouldn't stop itching. Tried not to scratch but used to wake up covered in blood. BUPA health check doctor told me it was eczema use E45 cream, nope didn't work.

Finally a chance remark by a friend made me look up scabies on Wikipedia, yep nailed it all the symptoms. Cured it with a cat flea collar I got from Poundland. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, snaga said:

each human produces 800Kg CO2 pa just from breathing, that's over 6Gt of CO2 pa for comparrison all cars globably produce 9.8 Gt (2014 figures).

At current growth rates CO2 production from humans while sleeping will be one of the largest causes of climate change.

No net contributory effect* as the carbon we respire was removed from the atmosphere over the same time period

Climate change comes from returning carbon to the atmosphere that was removed from the atmosphere and buried underground millenia ago and over millenia

 

*With the exception of the fossil fuels used in agriculture and in the transport and manufacture of produce, and unless we eat drink petroleum and munch on calcium carbonate

 

1547172259_ClimateChaneg1912.jpg.74001b92ee7f27b93b432fe305b4847a.jpg

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hopeful said:

No net contributory effect* as the carbon we respire was removed from the atmosphere over the same time period

Climate change comes from returning carbon to the atmosphere that was removed from the atmosphere and buried underground millenia ago and over millenia

 

*With the exception of the fossil fuels used in agriculture and in the transport and manufacture of produce, and unless we eat drink petroleum and munch on calcium carbonate

 

1547172259_ClimateChaneg1912.jpg.74001b92ee7f27b93b432fe305b4847a.jpg

I know that, but I don't think physics cares where the CO2 comes from. Burning wood is CO2 neutral, but not burning it is even better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, snaga said:

I know that, but I don't think physics cares where the CO2 comes from. Burning wood is CO2 neutral, but not burning it is even better. 

I thought you probably did, but not wanting to leave a stone not turned, as that inevitably leads to a 'yes, but',.....

Anyway, so long as the tree is replaced it doesn't matter if you burn it, it only matters to all the bugs living on that specific tree that are cremated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hopeful said:

I thought you probably did, but not wanting to leave a stone not turned, as that inevitably leads to a 'yes, but',.....

Anyway, so long as the tree is replaced it doesn't matter if you burn it, it only matters to all the bugs living on that specific tree that are cremated

That's a human concept, planing a tree offsets the burning of a tree, why not plant a tree for every bag of coal or barrel of oil? because some git will cut it down and plant another tree. It a ponzi scheme :)

Edited by snaga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, snaga said:

That's a human concept, planing a tree offsets the burning of a tree, why not plant a tree for every bag of coal or barrel of oil? because some git will cut it down and plant another tree. It a ponzi scheme :)

Of course, sequestering carbon is the way to offset. Growing trees, burying the stuff, probably all impractical on the scale needed.

Geophysics and nature does it remarkably well - Ebelman-Urey reaction, just very slowly, but still, if that reaction went without replacement it would remove all CO2 from the atmosphere in about 10,000 years

 

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.