By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - What's going to destroy humanity this year?

Samus Aran said:

Actually the damages wouldn't be extremely high. There have been a lot of pandemic outbreaks were millions of people died, but there's almost no example in history were diseases killed of an entire race. The only thing that comes to mind at the moment are the Inca's and the Aztecs, but even they didn't completely die off.

Birth rate is so high in some places that it could easily buffer against 100million dead people.

I'm sorry, did you just say

A. Extremely high damages means the whole of the human race? 

B. It wouldn't be a disaster if 100 million people died because we could replace them?

 

Extremely high damages with is a case where a disease would kill millions; the whole human race would be another level altogether (catastrophic). Not one person in this thread has claimed that Swine flu will wipe out the human race, but many have acknowledged that it poses a risk of death to millions.



Around the Network
Rath said:
Samus Aran said:

Actually the damages wouldn't be extremely high. There have been a lot of pandemic outbreaks were millions of people died, but there's almost no example in history were diseases killed of an entire race. The only thing that comes to mind at the moment are the Inca's and the Aztecs, but even they didn't completely die off.

Birth rate is so high in some places that it could easily buffer against 100million dead people.

Bubonic Plague absolutley ravaged Europe, killed over half the population. I don't know a huge amount about it but it seems likely some ethnic groups would have been eradicated by that.

I have written my paper about that subject and you're well... wrong. First of all, it isn't even clear if it was the bubonic plague and second of all it's not entirely known how many people died of it, estimates range all over the place(it was however a pretty big number). No ethnic groups that we know of disappeared. 



Samus Aran said:
Rath said:
Samus Aran said:

Actually the damages wouldn't be extremely high. There have been a lot of pandemic outbreaks were millions of people died, but there's almost no example in history were diseases killed of an entire race. The only thing that comes to mind at the moment are the Inca's and the Aztecs, but even they didn't completely die off.

Birth rate is so high in some places that it could easily buffer against 100million dead people.

Bubonic Plague absolutley ravaged Europe, killed over half the population. I don't know a huge amount about it but it seems likely some ethnic groups would have been eradicated by that.

I have written my paper about that subject and you're well... wrong. First of all, it isn't even clear if it was the bubonic plague and second of all it's not entirely known how many people died of it, estimates range all over the place(it was however a pretty big number). No ethnic groups that we know of disappeared. 

Ok the black death then. And it certainly was a very large number, estimates of historical events almost always range widely but it certainly culled a very large percentage of the population. Given the number of ethnic groups in Europe and the percentage of people wiped out in some areas it just seems likely to me that some smaller ethnic groups would be eliminated. Of course I could easily be wrong, I'll bow to your expertise on this one as you've studied it and I haven't.



highwaystar101 said:
Samus Aran said:

Actually the damages wouldn't be extremely high. There have been a lot of pandemic outbreaks were millions of people died, but there's almost no example in history were diseases killed of an entire race. The only thing that comes to mind at the moment are the Inca's and the Aztecs, but even they didn't completely die off.

Birth rate is so high in some places that it could easily buffer against 100million dead people.

I'm sorry, did you just say

A. Extremely high damages means the whole of the human race? 

B. It wouldn't be a disaster if 100 million people died because we could replace them?

 

Extremely high damages with is a case where a disease would kill millions; the whole human race would be another level altogether (catastrophic). Not one person in this thread has claimed that Swine flu will wipe out the human race, but many have acknowledged that it poses a risk of death to millions.

It wouldn't be a disaster for the human race as a whole in the sense that there would still be plenty of us alive and that we wouldn't be endangered- at all. 

And also the fact that diseases have always been the number one killer of humanity since agriculture. Yes, we can replace them. That's the whole freaking point here.

Diseases are the cost we paid for agriculture. Of course there were diseases as well before we "invented" agriculture, but nowhere near as the diseases that came after it. The life expectancy actually went DOWN at first for a LONG time when people became farmers. Even though the life expectancy went down a lot, the birth rate was so high that it could easily buffer against the increased mortality rate. Yes, the population grew to astonishing heights even though we died a lot faster/sooner.

I'm glad we paid that cost, it's worth it :)

Diseases are a necessary evil(or were if we manage to wipe out all diseases one day, which I doubt).

Perhaps you should discuss the real treat to humanity for once?

 



halogamer1989 said:
d21lewis said:
halogamer1989 said:
d21lewis said:
Tiger Woods' penis.

;) Nice one.  Hey did you see the Nike ad?

Haven't seen it.  Post the link!!

http://www.youtube.com/user/NikeGolf  First one to pop up.  It is pretty controversial.

Soooo.... Nike promotes adultery?



Kimi wa ne tashika ni ano toki watashi no soba ni ita

Itsudatte itsudatte itsudatte

Sugu yoko de waratteita

Nakushitemo torimodosu kimi wo

I will never leave you

Around the Network
highwaystar101 said:
nightsurge said:
Look, I'm not saying that there was absolutely no threat. Obviously there was a threat of mutation and a high death rate, but the government and media painted it as a certainty. Even after overwhelming evidence came out to support that really only the people who are succeptible to normal flu complications were the ones experiencing issues with Swine Flu, they pressed on insisting we get vaccinated when there really wasn't much need. Now if it mutated to be much more violent, then a vaccine would be needed, but it would likely need to be a much different vaccine and the current one would not do much good anyway.

Also, I just don't see how 30,000 cases WORLDWIDE can be classed as an "epidemic over a wide geographic area and affecting a large proportion of the population". Sure it is over a wide area, but 30,000 at the time of that Pandemic labeling is less than .0004% of the population, not a large portion at all. There were only 2000 deaths in the USA since this "pandemic" due to combinations of all the flu's. That's only .008% of the US population.

30,000 cases? Where on Earth did you get that BS figure? The WHO seem to think the figure is 600,000+ (source), and these are the people who know. And as established, diseases that we have no natural immunity increases exponentially. This means that one month it can be 600,000, the next month it could be a billion under the right conditions.

30,000 cases is when the WHO claimed it to be a pandemic.  Check your own freakin source for the info on that one.

Also, are you not listening to what we are saying about deaths? We are not saying that the flu will kill you, but we are saying it spreads like wildfire, much much faster than a regular flu because we have no natural immunity. If it mutated (which viruses like to do, a lot) to a virus that could kill, then the new deadly virus will claim millions upon millions of lives. (So you can't use current death figures, they are unimportant; what is important is the infection rate)

I still don't see why you would want so many people to take vaccines of a non-lethal virus then.  If it mutated, the current vaccine you already took wouldn't be any more affective than no vaccine in most cases.  So once again, the government and media were simply trying to get us to believe it already was some super violent strand that killed lots of people and the vaccine was our only hope.  If it mutates, we are all screwed anyways.

Even if the chances of this happening are low, the damage would be extremely high should it happen.

Also, vaccines work. You had to go all the way back to the Guillain-barre sydrome from 1976 vaccines to find a case where they didn't work in a significant way. The latest vaccines worked, the problems in 1976 are not really an issue in the latest pandemic vaccines. I quote...

Actually, even today the vaccines cause permanent handicaps and stuff.  Even the normal season flu vaccines cause irreparable damage in some people.  Vaccines are not guaranteed safe.  They never are.  Not to mention seasonal vaccines are mere guesses to which strand will be dominant this season.  I don't know about you but I don't feel like injecting myself with a "guess".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URHhyP4lmQ4

"There has been in particular a lot of concern about Guillain-Barre syndrome because of the incidences during the swine flu vaccination campaigns in 1976 in the US. To date, less than a dozen suspected cases of Guillain-Barre have been reported following vaccination. Only a few of these Guillain-Barre cases may be linked to the pandemic vaccine. Illness has been transient and patients have recovered."

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny, Director, Initiative for Vaccine Research Source

I guess when I hear the word pandemic, as well as the general public, we assume it is something serious, not something that has some slight chance of being serious.  And what is the point of taking a vaccine for a non-lethal strain if there was to be a mutated strain far more severe?  Only a vaccine for the mutated strain would be any help.

Oh and still 600,000 cases as of today worldwide would still only be .01% and I still don't see how that meets a large portion of the population in order to be named a pandemic in the first place.  Just face it, the government and the pharmaceutical companies just wanted some easy money, and they also knew creating a panic would lead to an economic boost as people would rush stores and things to buy supplies.



@nightsurge. Are you being serious or satirical?



nightsurge said:
highwaystar101 said:
nightsurge said:
Look, I'm not saying that there was absolutely no threat. Obviously there was a threat of mutation and a high death rate, but the government and media painted it as a certainty. Even after overwhelming evidence came out to support that really only the people who are succeptible to normal flu complications were the ones experiencing issues with Swine Flu, they pressed on insisting we get vaccinated when there really wasn't much need. Now if it mutated to be much more violent, then a vaccine would be needed, but it would likely need to be a much different vaccine and the current one would not do much good anyway.

Also, I just don't see how 30,000 cases WORLDWIDE can be classed as an "epidemic over a wide geographic area and affecting a large proportion of the population". Sure it is over a wide area, but 30,000 at the time of that Pandemic labeling is less than .0004% of the population, not a large portion at all. There were only 2000 deaths in the USA since this "pandemic" due to combinations of all the flu's. That's only .008% of the US population.

30,000 cases? Where on Earth did you get that BS figure? The WHO seem to think the figure is 600,000+ (source), and these are the people who know. And as established, diseases that we have no natural immunity increases exponentially. This means that one month it can be 600,000, the next month it could be a billion under the right conditions.

30,000 cases is when the WHO claimed it to be a pandemic.  Check your own freakin source for the info on that one.

Also, are you not listening to what we are saying about deaths? We are not saying that the flu will kill you, but we are saying it spreads like wildfire, much much faster than a regular flu because we have no natural immunity. If it mutated (which viruses like to do, a lot) to a virus that could kill, then the new deadly virus will claim millions upon millions of lives. (So you can't use current death figures, they are unimportant; what is important is the infection rate)

I still don't see why you would want so many people to take vaccines of a non-lethal virus then.  If it mutated, the current vaccine you already took wouldn't be any more affective than no vaccine in most cases.  So once again, the government and media were simply trying to get us to believe it already was some super violent strand that killed lots of people and the vaccine was our only hope.  If it mutates, we are all screwed anyways.

Even if the chances of this happening are low, the damage would be extremely high should it happen.

Also, vaccines work. You had to go all the way back to the Guillain-barre sydrome from 1976 vaccines to find a case where they didn't work in a significant way. The latest vaccines worked, the problems in 1976 are not really an issue in the latest pandemic vaccines. I quote...

Actually, even today the vaccines cause permanent handicaps and stuff.  Even the normal season flu vaccines cause irreparable damage in some people.  Vaccines are not guaranteed safe.  They never are.  Not to mention seasonal vaccines are mere guesses to which strand will be dominant this season.  I don't know about you but I don't feel like injecting myself with a "guess".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URHhyP4lmQ4

"There has been in particular a lot of concern about Guillain-Barre syndrome because of the incidences during the swine flu vaccination campaigns in 1976 in the US. To date, less than a dozen suspected cases of Guillain-Barre have been reported following vaccination. Only a few of these Guillain-Barre cases may be linked to the pandemic vaccine. Illness has been transient and patients have recovered."

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny, Director, Initiative for Vaccine Research Source

I guess when I hear the word pandemic, as well as the general public, we assume it is something serious, not something that has some slight chance of being serious.  And what is the point of taking a vaccine for a non-lethal strain if there was to be a mutated strain far more severe?  Only a vaccine for the mutated strain would be any help.

Oh and still 600,000 cases as of today worldwide would still only be .01% and I still don't see how that meets a large portion of the population in order to be named a pandemic in the first place.  Just face it, the government and the pharmaceutical companies just wanted some easy money, and they also knew creating a panic would lead to an economic boost as people would rush stores and things to buy supplies.

Shush.

I shush you for being very wrong. Without need for rebuttal, I shush you.



Kimi wa ne tashika ni ano toki watashi no soba ni ita

Itsudatte itsudatte itsudatte

Sugu yoko de waratteita

Nakushitemo torimodosu kimi wo

I will never leave you

earthquakes



nightsurge said:

nightsurge said:

30,000 cases is when the WHO claimed it to be a pandemic.  Check your own freakin source for the info on that one.

 

Ok, I misunderstood, that I'll retract. For some reason I thought you meant currently infected in the pandemic.

I still don't see why you would want so many people to take vaccines of a non-lethal virus then.  If it mutated, the current vaccine you already took wouldn't be any more affective than no vaccine in most cases.  So once again, the government and media were simply trying to get us to believe it already was some super violent strand that killed lots of people and the vaccine was our only hope.  If it mutates, we are all screwed anyways.

 

You still don't see why you would get people to take vaccines for a non lethal virus? We weren't vaccinating against the mutated lethal strain, we were trying to limit the current strain so it infected as few people as possible. The more people it infected, the higher chance of it mutating. The (world) government(s) (yes, they all recognised it as a threat) tried to limit the amount of people who got swine flu, and they were, to this point, successful. Swine flu is a virus that humans have no natural immunity to, if the government hadn't of stepped in to try and reduce the risk, everyone would have had swine flu, and if everyone had swine flu the risk of mutation would have been high.

 

Actually, even today the vaccines cause permanent handicaps and stuff.  Even the normal season flu vaccines cause irreparable damage in some people.  Vaccines are not guaranteed safe.  They never are.  Not to mention seasonal vaccines are mere guesses to which strand will be dominant this season.  I don't know about you but I don't feel like injecting myself with a "guess".

Are you serious? You wouldn't let someone vaccine you because you don't trust vaccines due to a small risk? It's not a guess...

I would rather live in a world where polio, small pox, diptheria, mumps, rubella, etc are all vaccinated against, all those vaccines work well, in fact they have saved substantially more lives than the couple of freak cases where they have cost lives.

Vaccines work.

I guess when I hear the word pandemic, as well as the general public, we assume it is something serious, not something that has some slight chance of being serious.  And what is the point of taking a vaccine for a non-lethal strain if there was to be a mutated strain far more severe?  Only a vaccine for the mutated strain would be any help.

I've already explained why the vaccine for the current strain was needed in the last section. I refer you back to that.

Oh and still 600,000 cases as of today worldwide would still only be .01% and I still don't see how that meets a large portion of the population in order to be named a pandemic in the first place.  Just face it, the government and the pharmaceutical companies just wanted some easy money, and they also knew creating a panic would lead to an economic boost as people would rush stores and things to buy supplies.

Only 600,000? You still don't understand what the situation was do you? 600,000 today, but with no natural immunity in humans worldwide, 600,000 today would become 600 million in a matter of weeks. I'll say it again, it spreads like wildfire. Honestly, anyone who has read around the subject outside of newspapers and blogs for five minutes would understand the severity of the situation.

 

It wasn't just some government conspiracy either, they did not want you to rush to stores to buy supplies. My country gave vaccines for swine flu out for free, my country gave advice over the phone to hundreds of thousands of people for free, my country saw thousands upon thousands of people in clinics for free. Most governments did the same. Most governments lost millions trying to prevent swine flu.

There was no room to make profit from swine flu. Such a conspiracy is ludicrous.

Look, I can't tell if you are just being stubborn now. But swine flu was a serious case. It was overblown in the press I grant you, but governments acted accordingly and they managed to limit something that would have been potentially extremely dangerous if it had gotten out of control.