Logged in this evening after work. The random story from the archives today is titled Super Flu.
With all the recent news article about the Coronavirus and what's happened in China, including them putting tens of millions of people on lockdown and not allowing them to travel and cancelling all the Chinese New Year celebrations, I wondered if SOL was prescient, or we're just a gloomy damned bunch since there so many post-apocalypse stories on here.
I wondered if SOL was prescient, or we're just a gloomy damned bunch since there so many post-apocalypse stories on here.
Probably the latter. The last major pandemic, and by major I mean death tolls reaching into double digit percentages of the affected population, was the Spanish flu that IIRC happened between WWI and WWII.
The major reason in the drop in influenza lethality since then, the invention of IV fluid replacement threrapy.
As to the Coronavirus articles, they are probably mostly hype and fear mongering.
This is what Wikipedia has to say about Coronavirus in humans.
In humans, the virus causes respiratory infections, often mild, but in rare cases potentially lethal.
Even if it does go pandemic, this is not a disease with apocalyptic potential.
Spanish flu that IIRC happened between WWI and WWII.
The Center for Disease Control recalls it starting during and perhaps because of World War One.
"
In 1918, a new influenza virus emerged. During this same time period World War I was taking place. The conditions of World War I (overcrowding and global troop movement) helped the 1918 flu spread. The vulnerability of healthy young adults and the lack of vaccines and treatments created a major public health crisis, causing at least 50 million deaths worldwide, including approximately 675,000 in the United States. Below is a historical timeline of major events that took place during this time period."
The "Spanish Flu" continued during 1919 hypothetically because of troops returning home helped spread the disease.
As to the Coronavirus articles, they are probably mostly hype and fear mongering.
While I agree with you, about the danger posed by Coronavirus, the reason why everyone is so gun-shy, is because China has a LONG history of seriously unreporting serious health issues, so NO ONE believes the currently reported death toll. Thus the CDC is being overly cautious for good reason. Since it's supposedly been spreading, largely unfettered throughout China, they're ensuring that it's NOT a major health crisis. The news media, on the other hand, continues to report whatever gets the biggest headline, whether it's correct or not.
Spanish Flu is indeed the last time a global or wide scale pandemic caused major deaths. In fact, it was the last time outside of a disaster that mass graves were widely used in the US.
In some areas of the US, in old cemeteries mass graves can be found for the victims. And it spread so quickly because after WWI millions of people were using what was then fast transit to return home.
Somebody who got infected in France could be back in the US a week later, and a week after that be back home in a small town. And this was repeated globally.
And indeed, it is the preventative medicines as well as the ability to prevent secondary infections via antibiotics that has increased the survival rate.
In some areas of the US, in old cemeteries mass graves can be found for the victims.
A necessity given the death toll, which from what I've read/seen on it tended to be much worse in small towns that didn't have their own hospital. In a few cases upwards of 90%.
With a handful of people trying to deal with 10 times their number in dead bodies, mass graves or mass cremation are the only options.
I wondered if SOL was prescient,
In my opinion, history influences the stories we write. Illnesses, like the Black Plague and Spanish Flu, and natural disasters are some of the things that give our post-apocalypse stories a small measure of credibility.
In my opinion, history influences the stories we write. Illnesses, like the Black Plague and Spanish Flu, and natural disasters are some of the things that give our post-apocalypse stories a small measure of credibility.
The other reassuring news, is that the main reason why diseases like the Bubonic and other common diseases were so devastating, was due to the generic poor health, poor nutrition and rampant poverty in most early cultures. Thus, a disease which wouldn't ordinarily kill that many, struck a ready population with few defenses, and thus spread rapidly to everyone else.
What the current anti-vaccine crowd doesn't realize is that this isn't an individual choice, as Typhoid Mary was also exercising her own personal choice whether to be vaccinated or not. When a culture is unwilling to ensure the health of everyone, plagues frequently run rampant.
Hopefully we're past that now, but given our attitude towards 'Socializied Medicine', we may be setting the stage for yet another huge crisis in the not so distant future.
What the current anti-vaccine crowd doesn't realize is that this isn't an individual choice, as Typhoid Mary was also exercising her own personal choice whether to be vaccinated or not.
No, this is not the case.
1. The organism that causes Typhoid fever, Salmonella Typhi, is a bacteria, not a virus, so an immunization for it wouldn't be a vaccination.
2. Typhoid Mary did not have Typhoid fever. She was the first documented case of a healthy carrier, naturally immune, but able to pass the disease on to others.
3. The outbreak of Typhoid Fever in New York caused by Typhoid Mary happened in 1907. Immunization for Typhoid Fever wasn't developed until 1911, and antibiotic treatment was not available until 1948.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3959940/
The outbreak of Typhoid Fever in New York caused by Typhoid Mary happened in 1907. Immunization for Typhoid Fever wasn't developed until 1911, and antibiotic treatment was not available until 1948.
While those points are all true, her individual case probably did more to ensure that routine vaccinations became the norm (for the next 50 years, though it's in serious decline now). Her case became a national rallying cry, whereas now there is nothing to counter the arguments of "I don't wanna" and "you can't make me".
Her case became a national rallying cry, whereas now there is nothing to counter the arguments of "I don't wanna" and "you can't make me".
The 'botched' response to the Swine Flu epidemic didn't help.
See: Swine flu of 1976: lessons from the past [Link to WHO site]
When a culture is unwilling to ensure the health of everyone, plagues frequently run rampant.
And that is the essence of current (western) culture - I'm all right, Jack, Fuck you. Why should I do something to cause myself a minor inconventience / loss of some income / whatever for the 'better good'. Thanks Ayn Rand and her disciples...
The other reassuring news, is that the main reason why diseases like the Bubonic and other common diseases were so devastating, was due to the generic poor health, poor nutrition and rampant poverty in most early cultures. Thus, a disease which wouldn't ordinarily kill that many, struck a ready population with few defenses, and thus spread rapidly to everyone else.
Not so reassuring when you consider the 1.2 billion Africans, 1.3 billion Indians, 1.3 billion Chinese and all the other Asians and Central and South Americans that still live in those conditions. What happens when the world population has a major die-off and is suddenly covered with decaying corpses?
What's that? You need a part for your Chinese made tractor to grow a garden to replace the food you used to buy from Mexico?
Not so reassuring when you consider the 1.2 billion Africans, 1.3 billion Indians, 1.3 billion Chinese and all the other Asians and Central and South Americans that still live in those conditions.
Those regions (routine, bare-bones) healthcare isn't up to international standards, it's a far cry from what the world was like in the 1400s, and believe it or not, it's getting better all the time as various organizations find new ways of making elements easier to obtain.
The bigger danger are with the various viral diseases, and select, often persecuted minorities that are held in distain and purposely denied access for health care, as it sets up a case where an outbreak could easily affect though thousands of idiots who refuse to get routine vaccinations because they read 'somewhere on the internet', that vaccines 'cause' autism (hint: it don't!).
What happens when the world population has a major die-off and is suddenly covered with decaying corpses?
You get a lot of fertilizer?
Seriously, and this is going to sound gross, but that's what heavy equipment is for. Front end loaders to lift the bodies into dump trucks, bulldozers to shove 'em into either mass graves. Or you let a lot of pigs loose. Then you just have to figure out what to do with the leftover teeth and a bunch of overweight pigs.
Since all these viruses seem to jump the species barrier to humans via sex (sex with monkeys, cats, pigs, chickens etc), my mind is slightly wondrous at sex with snakes, although I did once see a film where eels were used as sex toys by a couple of ladies. I think we need video evidence - in high-res with close-ups ;)
AJ
Since all these viruses seem to jump the species barrier to humans via sex
In all seriousness, the links I've found so far seem to indicate that this is due to the Chinese habit of eating bats. Not just the meat, but basically the whole damned thing. (And not in a sexual way.)
the Chinese habit of eating bats
I wonder if they eat cricket bats. I've heard they can be a bit wooden.
AJ
I wonder if they eat cricket bats.
Or baseball/softball bats. Aluminum softball bats would be the worst.
Or baseball/softball bats. Aluminum softball bats would be the worst.
No, shattered, broken bats would be much worse, health wise. Luckily, aluminum bats rarely break, though they don't fly nearly as far as the natural kind, and also taste like aluminum crap!
Aluminum softball bats would be the worst.
Alzheimer's - a fate worse than death ;)
AJ
Ingestion of aluminium is associated with Alzheimer's. I'm not sure of the current state of knowledge, but I remember the evidence being inconclusive eg a higher incidence of Alzheimer's in areas where the tapwater has a higher concentration of aluminium.
AJ
Ingestion of aluminium is associated with Alzheimer's.
That was an early theory, which has since been widely disproven (though, as usual, science news travels slowly if it's not something unsupported, and completely out of left field. They (the medical field) continue to close in on the sources of Alzheimer's (and the multitude of competing dementia cases, which are rarely ever discussed), but it's not a simplistic single cause we can all simply avoid by making a choice between A and B.
The Alzheimer's Society believes there's a link.
There's a correlation and an aetiology. That's enough to make me concerned about what's in my drinking water.
AJ
The Alzheimer's Society believes there's a link.
There's a correlation and an aetiology. That's enough to make me concerned about what's in my drinking water.
While I don't know enough to talk about Alzheimer's years ago I looked into the rules and laws about drinking water and found there is no real uniformity in them beyond certain contaminants being banned from what's approved for human consumption. Most legal jurisdiction (read city, county, state, country) has their own laws and rules on what is and isn't allowed the basics are that certain known dangerous substances are not allowed, certain substances believed to be helpful are allowed, and everything else comes under the various rules and laws. Most of them do have limitations on the total number of other substances that are allowed for the water to be classed as drinking water. To make things harder there are some water sources that are approved for other uses like bathing and washing but not for use in cooking or drinking. I know of towns where they have two cold water taps in the kitchen - one for the tank water they can drink and cook with and the other for the bore water used for washing up and bathing and the toilets.
edit to add: even the bottled water has a number of allowed other substances, and in some places what's allowed in the bottled water is a higher number of other substances that what's allowed in the tap water due to the stringent local laws on tap water not applying to commercial products approved by the federal or state governments. The only places where bottle water is definitely better than the local water is where you take it straight from the stream or river and not through a major filtration system.
even the bottled water has a number of allowed other substances, and in some places what's allowed in the bottled water is a higher number of other substances that what's allowed in the tap water [...]
The regulation here in Germany draws a distinction between 'Tafelwasser' (table water), 'Mineralwasser' (mineral water), and 'Heilwasser' (healing water).
Tafelwasser may contain added minerals but is usually tap water, while the mineral content of Mineralwasser has to be natural, no addition allowed. Most Mineralwasser has higher mineral content as tap water and can't be used as tap water because the higher mineral content would corrode the mains.
BTW, cheep Mineralwasser is €0.19 per 1.5 litre bottle while Tafelwasser (bottled tap water) is more expensive, but that's produced by Coca Cola (brand name Bonaqua).
HM.
The regulation here in Germany draws a distinction between 'Tafelwasser' (table water), 'Mineralwasser' (mineral water), and 'Heilwasser' (healing water).
Tafelwasser may contain added minerals but is usually tap water, while the mineral content of Mineralwasser has to be natural, no addition allowed. Most Mineralwasser has higher mineral content as tap water and can't be used as tap water because the higher mineral content would corrode the mains.
That's the type of laws and regulations I was referring to. However, there is no know place in the world where the natural water is pure H2O so all naturally occurring water has other substances within it, most common are various mineral salts and the like. The laws restrict how many are allowed to be in whatever water is passed through the system for drinking water and has a list of what may not be passed along at all. That's why most government water supply systems go through a filtration prior to being pumped through the urban supply system. I know of towns where they specify what materials you may make your water pipes out of because the natural water supply has substances in it that adversely interacts with some types of pipes and can become poisonous, yet with other pipe the water is safe to drink.
even the bottled water has a number of allowed other substances, and in some places what's allowed in the bottled water is a higher number of other substances
That's the other thing that hardly gets reported. Most local drinking waters, especially those that rely on reservoirs (like Manhattans) are regularly tested (since they're open and subject to possible contaminants), but they're routinely much safer than the vast majority of bottled waters.
If you think bottled waters are somehow safer than tap water (aside from Flint, Mich, of course), then you're only deluding yourself.
If you think bottled waters are somehow safer than tap water (aside from Flint, Mich, of course), then you're only deluding yourself.
True, but bottled water is still safer than most natural river water today. If you live in an area with a reticulated water supply that uses a filtration system prior to pumping it to the users, then you're usually best to use the tap water.
The Alzheimer's Society believes there's a link.
There's a correlation and an aetiology. That's enough to make me concerned about what's in my drinking water.
From the link you provided: "As yet no study or group of studies has been able to confirm that aluminium is involved in the development of Alzheimer's disease."
They're right, there are associations between 'various metals' (lead especially), but there is no cuasal relationship between Aluminum cookware and Altzheimers, despite researches desperately searching for any evidence of one. Instead, they quote a single study, where the effectively poison rabbits with astronomical levels of aluminum and then declare 'case closed'. That's hardly a reliable study!
You can believe whatever you want, but after following Alzheimer's and other dementia research for years, few believe that everyday use of aluminum cooking utensils poses ANY risk.
few believe that everyday use of aluminum cooking utensils poses ANY risk.
On the other hand, eating an aluminum softball bat is a bit higher dose than you get from normal use of aluminum cooking utensils.
Well, it is the year of the rat.
That explains why certain politicians are now rising to eminence.
I did once see a film where eels were used as sex toys by a couple of ladies.
Is there elver going to be an end to your perversions...??
(I hope not) :)
my mind is slightly wondrous at sex with snakes, although I did once see a film where eels were used as sex toys by a couple of ladies.
I've seen the same done with snakes.
I've seen the same done with snakes.
Since we're already at sub-gutter level, the thought crossed my mind that, minus fangs and venom, having a snake's body rhythmically contracting round a penis as the snake tried to coerce it further down inside body might be an interesting sensation.
Or it might feel cold and clammy and totally disgusting.
AJ
Ummm my vote is for totally disgusting...
I wasn't expecting you to go out and try it ...
AJ
having a snake's body rhythmically contracting round a penis as the snake tried to coerce it further down inside body might be an interesting sensation.
It works better with a woman. A warm damp crevasse is something many snakes would naturally want to slither in to.
What you describe for a male would not be natural behavior for the snake.
What might work is getting a small constrictor to wrap it's body around your cock, but that strikes me as rather dangerous.
crevasse
I think this is a word with different meanings in American and British English.
When I read 'crevasse', I think big. When I read 'crevice', I think small. Yet many American authors seem to mean small when they use 'crevasse'. Unless they're from Texas, where allegedly everything's bigger - including vaginas.
AJ
When I read 'crevasse', I think big. When I read 'crevice', I think small. Yet many American authors seem to mean small when they use 'crevasse'.
I always considered them synonyms.
Unless they're from Texas, where allegedly everything's bigger - including vaginas.
The biggest thing in Texas is the egos of Texans.
If Alaska was divided evenly into two states, Texas would be demoted to being the third largest state.
If Alaska was divided evenly into two states, Texas would be demoted to being the third largest state.
But Alaska is like Canada - unless you're along the southern border, no one wants to live there.
But Alaska is like Canada - unless you're along the southern border, no one wants to live there.
I would have to disagree with that statement. Not a lot of people I'll grant you, but far from no one. I have friends in Utqiagvik and Fair Banks, they like where they live.
Not a lot of people I'll grant you, but far from no one. I have friends in Utqiagvik and Fair Banks, they like where they live.
Liking where you live - especially if that's where you grew up - is a whole lot different from people clamoring to move there because they WANT to live there. People live in San Francisco, too, but no one in their right mind wants to live there.
People live in San Francisco, too, but no one in their right mind wants to live there.
So few people want to live there that housing prices have gone through the floor.
Liking where you live - especially if that's where you grew up - is a whole lot different from people clamoring to move there because they WANT to live there. People live in San Francisco, too, but no one in their right mind wants to live there.
Right mind as judged by you I presume?
The people I know there were from the S.E. We spent some time together running the oil patch up there. They liked it and moved.
Edited to add; Exactly how much time in, and where did you spend it in Alaska?
Right mind
That was an attempt at a political joke, as San Francisco is notoriously a left wing city. (And they have to have maps to show you where the piles of human feces are.)
I've only spent two weeks in Alaska personally, did a Glacier Bay cruise and Denali tour. Beautiful terrain. My wife's dad was at Elmendorf, so she lived there for three years when she was younger.
did a Glacier Bay cruise and Denali tour.
Tours and cruises will only show you what the tourism department wants you to see. That is a truism world wide. A lot of people trash talk or build somewhere up based upon limited or vicariously absorbed information. The vast majority of which usually being bullshit.
Living around, socializing, and working with the locals, is a far better source of information from which to judge a city, state, or country. Bubba down at the gas station, the talking heads on the news, or youtube channels, are piss poor sources for information regarding a city, state, or country.
Tours and cruises will only show you what the tourism department wants you to see.
Nevertheless, undeveloped countryside = beautiful, concrete = ugly.
AJ
Nevertheless, undeveloped countryside = beautiful, concrete = ugly.
Statements in context = beautiful, statements out of context = ugly.
Alaska is like Canada
I disagree. The southern border of Alaska is far north of the southern border of Canada. A lot of Alaskans live near the ocean, or actually on islands, particularly fishermen.
The southern border of Alaska is far north of the southern border of Canada.
I understand that, but the southern border of Alaska effectively IS the coastline, at least until you get to Diomede.
If you wonder about sex with snakes, obviously you have never been to Okinawa.
But seriously, it mostly jumps through eating raw or improperly cooked animals. That is believed to be the source of HIV. The virus is now believed to have jumped about 100 years ago from "bushmeat".
It's far more likely that China is using the coronavirus as an excuse. Wuhan is where China sent most of the displaced people from flooding the Hubei province Three Gorge Dam. China would never allow the discontent that caused to be reported in their media or social media, but reports of that have slipped via former residents who've moved elsewhere in the world.
There are 58+ million people in Hubei. The odds of this virus being predominantly from one specific location in Wuhan are astronomically low. Firstly, the virus is likely far more spread out and secondly, viral outbreaks are old hat to China. Past outbreaks didn't result in the lock down being experienced in Wuhan. Color me skeptical at best at the idea China is doing it for their own good.
China has a long history of giving resources to provinces that do not cause trouble and withholding from the troublemakers, even taking from the troublemakers to give to the others.
Color me skeptical at best at the idea China is doing it for their own good.
I agree, for as long as history as China has with outbreaks, they've had a longer record of burying the official record, so no one could report on their poor health record. Rather than having an organized response, like our CDC, they simply further nail down press access to doctors and hospitals.
Once again, ultimately it's not a 'viral' disease while wipes out millions, its the rampant poverty and poor health of selected pockets, which allows an otherwise minor health issue to fester and spread widely. And since everyone like dumping on the politically unpopular factions ...
With all the news coming out about the Coronavirus, it's becoming obvious that it's mutated. China has been unable to keep a lid on it, which tells me the mutated strain is worse than they are letting on.
China has been unable to keep a lid on it, which tells me the mutated strain is worse than they are letting on.
Or, more likely, in an effort to keep a lid on reports of their abuse of specific minority populations, the Chinese government routinely lies about their health numbers, and thus were caught with their pants down when it turns out they had no idea of how widespread the cantagion was either.
Or, more likely, in an effort to keep a lid on reports of their abuse of specific minority populations, the Chinese government routinely lies about their health numbers, and thus were caught with their pants down when it turns out they had no idea of how widespread the cantagion was either.
Could be...
There are a couple of postings in this thread talking about impurities in water as though they are a bad thing. Some minerals are pretty much necessary, you do not drink distilled water in any quantities because it will kill you.
I remember an extreme case a few years ago, an Ironman was held in 40C (104f) heat and one of the first finishers then collapsed and - a week later - died. He had been drinking "normal" water and had not replaced enough of the minerals he had been sweating out.
This is not a suggestion we should all move to Flint Michigan though, there is a difference between minerals and poisons.
I stopped reading when I got to the part about bats. The video which was used to imply the virus came from bats is apparently several years old and from an area of the Pacific nearer to Australia than China.
If you want some tinfoil hat stuff, I hear that some Russian sources are claiming the Americans brewed it and released it in China as part of Trump's anti-China campaign.
Soviet sources used to say similar things about AIDS back in the day and that claim gained sufficient traction that a German researcher held a press conference explaining - in detail - why that was absolutely impossible.
Yes, there were internet conspiracy theories before the internet was created (or intelligently designed).
or intelligently designed
definitely designed, but intelligently? It started as a military research project. :)
It is entirely possible that the base virus started as RaTG13. Multiple variations of viruses along those lines were known to be in the Wuhan lab.
It doesn't take much imagination to believe the Chinese were experimenting with biological weapons either. In my opinion, it's more likely that was exactly what they were doing. That however, is where any intelligence ends.
Historically speaking, it wouldn't be the first time something got away from a lab.
As far as some nefarious plot on any countries part, never assign malfeasance to something that simple government incompetence can readily explain. Sometimes it really is just an idiot in a lab coat not following protocol and procedures.
/Edited for typo
never assign malfeasance to something that simple government incompetence can readily explain.
Sorry, doesn't work. Assumes, contrary to reality, that malfeasance and incompetence are mutually exclusive.
Splitting hairs with a laser there. The point remains true.
I was only referring to what I quoted. Not any other point you might have been making. That saying is BS because ill intent and incompetence are not mutually exclusive.
Again, you're splitting hairs. You obviously are aware of the intent of what I stated, but simply want to argue. Have fun with that.
Here, a couple of words from the professionals.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2820%2930418-9/fulltext
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/scientists-strongly-condemn-rumors-and-conspiracy-theories-about-origin-coronavirus and
http://virological.org/t/the-proximal-origin-of-sars-cov-2/398
From that last link.
It is improbable that SARS-CoV-2 emerged through laboratory manipulation of an existing SARS-related coronavirus. As noted above, the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 is optimized for human ACE2 receptor binding with an efficient binding solution different to that which would have been predicted. Further, if genetic manipulation had been performed, one would expect that one of the several reverse genetic systems available for betacoronaviruses would have been used. However, this is not the case as the genetic data shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not derived from any previously used virus backbone17. Instead, we propose two scenarios that can plausibly explain the origin of SARS-CoV-2: (i) natural selection in a non-human animal host prior to zoonotic transfer, and (ii) natural selection in humans following zoonotic transfer. We also discuss whether selection during passage in culture could have given rise to the same observed features.
I can buy into improbable, the rest of painting it as impossible is simply crap.
Well, I hope you understand when I place more weight on the opinions of experts in Immunology, Microbiology, Infectious Diseases and Evolutionary Biology than some anonymous dude calling himself "Remus2".
You can believe as you wish. However, what I posted in response was directly from one of your own sources. So do you believe your own or no?
As for 'experts', there is no such animal on the planet.
As for 'experts', there is no such animal on the planet.
There are lots of former drips out there. Most of them are retired politicians. :)
As for 'experts', there is no such animal on the planet.
I thought you were automatically considered an expert is you were hired to talk about something and had to travel more than 100 miles to give that talk.
I thought you were automatically considered an expert is you were hired to talk about something and had to travel more than 100 miles to give that talk.
Ummmm no.
automatically considered an expert
I seem to remember in addition to the 100 mile travel you also had to have a briefcase.
I stopped reading when I got to the part about bats.
The report about bats came well before this article, from the Chinese dietary habit of eating them, including the wings.
I am gonna get a bit technical here. But if anybody wants a good understanding of how virus like this "behave", I suggest reading "The Hot Zone", by Richard Preston.
Most "plagues" take one of two forms. Viral, and Bacteriological. And of these two, the Bacteria are generally the lowest threat. They can spread fast, and in a "virgin field" can be devastating. But proper sanitation and fast vaccination has largely nullified this threat.
It is the virus that causes the most problems now. And the pockets where most of them originate tends to be rainforests and other similarly dense areas. Ebola, Corona, Avian Flu, all of these are classic rainforest type diseases. And in places where humans are finally starting to operate more actively, they are finally coming into contact with them.
Most of the dense forested areas of China were largely "off limits" for millennia. The same with Africa, Philippines, and many other areas of the world. And as humans are now entering them, the contact with these is increasing.
And the hardest thing to research is that in many cases we still do not know what the vector is that spreads these diseases. Mosquitos, fleas, rats, flies, there is normally some kind of vector that spreads it. And normally the disease does not affect them, or affects them very slowly.
For Ebola, we have been searching for decades and still do not know what the disease vector is. Bats are one of the leading suspects (the area the disease breaks out is always an area with a high bat population), but that is still only a theory. And the fact that it has been found in both Africa and the Philippines has caused many to wonder exactly how old it is, and why it was only discovered some 45 years ago.
I think the thing I find most interesting is that while we have had huge outbreaks of these kinds of diseases from Asia and Africa, very few seem to have come out of Central and South America.
And of course, writing about the end of the world because of a virus is not new. 42 years ago Stephen King introduced us to "Captain Trips" in "The Stand".
To my knowledge, Ebola has never been confirmed in the P.I., though there was some suspected (though never confirmed) activity with something that behaved similarly that was introduced by Japan's unit 731 circa WW2.
WHO list the first known outbreak of Ebola in 1976 in Nzara, South Sudan, and the other in Yambuku, DRC. That is assuming some other outbreak hadn't been covered up by some government somewhere.
If you have information and a confirmable source for the P.I. I'd be very interested in knowing what it is? Particularly if it was from the Luzon Island?
If you have information and a confirmable source for the P.I. I'd be very interested in knowing what it is? Particularly if it was from the Luzon Island?
Simple enough.
In 1989, a shipment of Crab Eating Macaques from the Philippines came down with an unknown strain of Simian Hemorrhagic Fever, and were destroyed. A few months later and a few months later, yet another shipment also had to be destroyed.
Samples from the lab holding them in Reston, Virginia were sent to the US Army research hospital (USAMRIID in Maryland), and it was discovered that it was an unknown form of Ebola. Now named Ebola Reston, it is the only variant of Ebola that will decimate primates, but for some reason humans are asymptomatic carriers that do not suffer the high death rate of other forms of Ebola.
And since then the disease has broken out many other times, even in other holding facilities in the Philippines.
And in the years since, it has been confirmed it is also in Indonesia. And in addition, in the Philippines the disease has made the species jump to hogs, who also appear to be asymptomatic carriers.
At this time there are 6 known strains of Ebola. Only one of which does not appear to be fatal to humans. And that is the one strain that is not in Africa.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/10/ebola-1989-outbreak/13860929/
The Reston variant was not a threat to humans.
And the fact that it has been found in both Africa and the Philippines has caused many to wonder exactly how old it is, and why it was only discovered some 45 years ago.
It shared some basic characteristics, but key ones, such as being pathogenic for humans was not one of them. Why would you imply it was the same?
Becoming fatal to humans is actually a small mutation.
We know in it's oldest form, HIV was a liveable disease, and the life expectancy of those with it was about the same without it (40-45 years).
But when it started to mutate, that changed drastically.
E. Rest on is highly deadly to primates, only a small jump will make it so to H. Sapiens.
E. Rest on is highly deadly to primates, only a small jump will make it so to H. Sapiens.
A jump it has not made since it's discovery. Therefore it is not the same.
E. Rest on is highly deadly to primates, only a small jump will make it so to H. Sapiens.
A jump it has not made since it's discovery. Therefore it is not the same.
Which just goes to show that humans will have sex with cats, chickens and snakes more readily than Archbishops ;)
AJ
Which just goes to show that humans will have sex with cats, chickens and snakes more readily than Archbishops
Are you suggesting that:
Humans will have sex with cats, chickens, and snakes more readily than humans will have sex with archbishops.
Or
Humans will have sex with cats, chickens, and snakes more readily than archbiships will have sex with cats, chickens, and snakes?
Humans will have sex with cats, chickens, and snakes more readily than humans will have sex with archbishops.
That's the one!
AJ
Humans will have sex with cats, chickens, and snakes more readily than humans will have sex with archbishops.
That's the one!
Archbishops, Imams, Lamas, etc. The problem seems to exist across most religous leader archetypes.
Humans will have sex with cats, chickens, and snakes more readily than humans will have sex with archbishops.
However, I believe the opposite is true, that archbishops tend to prefer humans. Mostly male, and younger. Although having the Mother Superior blow Gabriel' Horn is a old standard.
one of which does not appear to be fatal to humans
If someone has had the non-fatal form, are they then immune to the others? Like Jenner's Cowpox for Smallpox, and Salk's weakened Polio virus, is there now a reasonable hope for an Ebola virus vaccination?
There have been some research into this, and at this point it is inconclusive. And most are not willing to take the risk of trying to play with it, since it is one of the most virulent and deadly pathogens known on the planet.
And there are advantages and disadvantages to the two forms of polio vaccine used. That is both the attenuated (weakened, given orally), and the inactivated (dead - through injection).
In the attenuated, it gives a shorter lasting immunization, but also eliminates the risk of a small fraction actually getting polio. But this is still often used in cases where needles are rare (in the past reusing needles has spread other diseases, like HIV). The Injection is generally only good for a decade or so, but is safer because the risk of contracting the disease is almost none.
There are Ebola vaccines out now, but still experimental. Mostly they are given to those who must enter an infected area, and while they seem to be effective, it is unclear how effective they are across multiple strains. It is going to be many more years until this is known.
Well, good luck to the rest of the world. Travel ban to Europe, effective Friday, for the United States.
I realize that right now this is much LESS of an issue than the flu, or even H1N1 was barely a decade ago. What the heck is going on out there?
Someone is sitting on the panic button.
Yes they are. Ebola, H1N1, etcetera, all had higher mortality rates. The fear merchants are not sparing the horses on this one. Why???
Ebola, H1N1, etcetera, all had higher mortality rates. The fear merchants are not sparing the horses on this one. Why???
Because they can.
The fear merchants are not sparing the horses on this one. Why???
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. H. L. Mencken, in 1919
Same old same old, give me power over your life and I will save it.
Same old same old, give me power over your life and I will save it.
At this point, I think I have to agree with Remus. It's the most plausible, because when you look at the actual numbers, it's really not a big deal unless you're already old and sick or immune compromised.
Allegedly Covid-19 is more contagious than previous coronaviruses, and being a new strain it's still at its most potent.
AJ
Allegedly Covid-19 is more contagious than previous coronaviruses, and being a new strain it's still at its most potent.
From the American CDC updated today, there are 938 known infections, and 29 known deaths. Roughly a 3% fatality rate (US only).
Past data from H1N1, circa 2008-2009 and from the same source recorded fewer infections but much higher fatality rates. Specifically 11% for those under 50, and 18-20% for those older and or already infirm.
It's been long enough now to get some viable data. That data shows a much higher rate of infections, but a drastically lower fatality rate.
Parsing out the numbers further, the vast majority of the fatalities are elderly and or already infirm.
Roughly a 3% fatality rate (US only).
In reality it's probably far lower. The dead get tested but many (most) of the infected won't be. In the UK there's a dire shortage of testing kits so only the very worst cases and rich people are getting tested.
AJ
The US numbers are low as compared to the world at large. WHO's most recent numbers are 124,518 infected, with 4,607 deaths. That's ~3.7% verses 3%. Outside of China, the top two are Italy and Iran. Lombardy region of Italy comprised 617 of the 827 known deaths in Italy out of just over 12,000 known cases. That's ~6.8% overall.
There are no hard numbers for Iran, but everything that can be found pushes them upwards of a ~7.5% rate.
As for the epicenter, numbers out of China are even more suspect, but I wouldn't be surprised if they touched on 10%.
However it's digested, the bottom line is, it's far more contagious than H1N1 (as a baseline), but overall far less deadly.
WHO's most recent numbers are 124,518 infected, with 4,607 deaths. That's ~3.7% verses 3%. Outside of China, the top two are Italy and Iran. Lombardy region of Italy comprised 617 of the 827 known deaths in Italy out of just over 12,000 known cases. That's ~6.8% overall.
I found what I was referring to above. This is yesterday's report.
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200311-sitrep-51-covid-19.pdf
The numbers I gave above were everything but china.
The numbers in that report for Italy are 10K cases and 637 total deaths.
Iran is 8k cases and 291 deaths: 3.6%
China is claiming 140+ cases but only 81K confirmed with 3162 deaths (3.9%)
The global death rate excluding China is 3.02%
That was not the same report I read. However, the point remains the same. More contagious, less deaths.
ETA:
https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020
118,000 cases in 114 countries, and 4,291 people have lost their lives.
Same date as your linked pdf, but different numbers showing 3.6%.
More contagious
When compared to actual population levels, the number of cases is insignificant.
Forget H1N1, you want real perspective, compare it to the Spanish flu from the early 20th century.
Post WW1 wasn't exactly a beacon for accurate reporting. Most of Europe was still suffering extreme levels of turmoil in the aftermath of WW1. That did not help matters and contributed in no small part to its mortality rate.
H1N1 is a better baseline to compare it against.
Post WW1 wasn't exactly a beacon for accurate reporting.
True, but under reporting would have been a much bigger issue than over reporting. And still, neither H1N1 nor Corona19 can come close to the infection rates from the Spanish Flue.
And still, neither H1N1 nor Corona19 can come close to the infection rates from the Spanish Flue.
It's not now the same world it was back then. Different social habits, better understanding of medicine and viruses, higher standards of public cleanliness, etcetera. It's comparing apples and oranges to compare the Spanish flu to Covid-19.
From the American CDC updated today, there are 938 known infections, and 29 known deaths. Roughly a 3% fatality rate (US only).
Not finding right now, but a little wile ago I saw something with global numbers.
Globally there are around 37,000 confirmed cases and around 1,100 deaths (again 3%)
Less than 40K cases over a population of billions and a 3% fatality rate.
I'm not sure if the numbers for WHO can be considered reliable. So far, I've seen three different reports, from three different parts of the WHO, and all three from the same date have different numbers.
I'm going to run with the CDC data as they don't have conflicting data.
Then compare its number to the flu. CDC reports 34 mil. influenza like illnesses, 350,000 hospitalizations with over 20,000 deaths this year alone in the US. And this is just a seasonal flu.
Covid-19 is so far inconsequential.
Then compare its number to the flu. CDC reports 34 mil. influenza like illnesses, 350,000 hospitalizations with over 20,000 deaths this year alone in the US. And this is just a seasonal flu.
Which in turn is inconsequential compared to the estimated number of deaths caused by air pollution.
It is now widely considered the number one cause in number of deaths. The difference is that viruses have a faster and shorter turn-over time while air pollution is long time, slowly creeping death.
The difference is that viruses have a faster and shorter turn-over time while air pollution is long time, slowly creeping death.
Well, if you are going to go there, life is a terminal illness, with a 100% fatality rate.
Well, if you are going to go there, life is a terminal illness, with a 100% fatality rate.
Some plants are effectively immortal - although it's a pretty boring lifestyle.
However breathing is pretty dangerous.
AJ
However breathing is pretty dangerous.
Last time I checked, not breathing is invariably fatal.
Last time I checked, not breathing is invariably fatal.
Breathing is part of life, and life is invariably fatal. Therefore breathing is invariably fatal.
However, not breathing will be fatal much more quickly than breathing. :)
