Who's afraid of Coronavirus?

[belamyi]

There's also an economic thread [STRIKE]going[/STRIKE] vegetating on out there in JUB

The concept of famine fits either in the economic or the healthcare discussion slot...

We could start new threads about the entertainment... Hollywood, printing business... effects in the global imaginery...

Or about "social implications of the coronav"... maybe you could even consider "famines" a "social" implication.

"Secondary effects": that is why there are famines... there are famines going on already... but being considered "secondary" is what leaves millions of people suffering from hunger. Nobody cares about what has been going on in Yemen or South Sudan until they can be considered a "secondary" effect of big fat spoilt Westerners suffering in their pockets. If you want to care, do care, otherwise just shut up, because your "secondary effects" of today are just business as usual.

Maybe we can have just two threads, one for proper discussion of the pandemic, and the other for the "secondary" implications...

youtube.com/watch?v=MM9zavhXyjg&list=PLxSjpqxdE1IlOk9pHZfF_I6UliH6DQGBX&index=6

 

[belamyi]

 

[belamyi]

 

[ChristianGianni]

Sorry I'm A Bit Late ...

 

[ChristianGianni]

 

[PalacePaul]

Not only this. Wild life is recovering, too. Some wild goats have been seen in my town last week.

 

[Alistair]

^ that's me even without a virus

 

[belamyi]

^ Oh, so that is why you are the only one still more or less regularly communicating with me.

- - - Updated - - -

Wait, you meant you are the idiot or the idiotess.

 

[zoltanspawn]

I have to second this -- I don't know that the famine side-effect needs its own thread, especially when famine feeds back to disease, looping us back to the main topic.

Well, I'll probably just have to get around to starting more threads on secondary effects. I have some important topics in mind.

My worry is that these secondary effects will just get pushed off the page and neglected. Maybe the idea is that they'll get more attention in a separate thread? That would be nice. Unfortunately, I think the reality is that it will foster more tunnel-vision and panic, instead of thoughtful and measured consideration.

People are so freaked out about one thing only, that all other death and trouble is no longer in anyone's headlights. That's a real problem.

We need to talk about them.

For example, NPR today mentioned that sub-Saharan Africa is expecting to see something like double its typical death rate from malaria. Resources normally channeled to malaria are being diverted to covid-19.

Here's an article about that: https://www.rochesterfirst.com/news...malaria-could-be-set-back-20-years-who-warns/ In a worst-case scenario (I'm developing some skepticism about that phrase) WHO is estimating 769,000 people could die this year from it.

 

[Cormac135]

 

[belamyi]

 

[NotHardUp1]

I have to second this -- I don't know that the famine side-effect needs its own thread, especially when famine feeds back to disease, looping us back to the main topic.

When you're grown, you'll understand.

Right now, we all need our JUB nannies.

Can't have anything not directly related to body counts from hospitals contaminating the redefined virus thread. Famine is way too abstract and iffy. We need bodies, and we need them now.

Then we need masks.

 

[belamyi]

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/unrest

un·rest (ŭn-rĕst′, ŭn′rĕst′)
n.
1. An uneasy or troubled condition; unease or discontent: voter unrest over the scandal.
2. A condition of social disturbance, often involving demonstrations or rioting: "Superiors gave their officers carteblanche to quash unrest with indiscriminate force" (Neil Bascomb).

Notice that the social, street-burning unrest that people usually associate to the term, is a secondary derivation from the fundamental sense of mental uneasiness. The mental stability of well-balanced adult people depended on ignoring facts and conditions that were taken for granted, when not utterly ignored or unsuspected, but now they are forced to face: until about two months ago, you could talk of the things that really matter, as long as you could either remain, or else go back to the normal, grown-up life of things and responsibilities that did not really matter, but which supported life, politics, the eoconomy... which drove history.
You could live as a real, a balanced, resposible, fully grown-up person without considering what would you become when, for whatever reason, people stopped demanding the products and services around which your whole life revolved. You could think of famines and pandemics as some piece of news, and an occasion to be charitable out of the fullness of your heart and your business.

As long as no political enemy got in the way, you could count on scientific research or applied science, mainly medicine and healthcare in general, to be there for you whenever you had a problem or, mostly, whenever you had some idle moment to spare and devote to internet mingling: all the data, all the information or, in their absence, the procedures, were firmly established so that they could easily and swiftly be retrieved at any given moment of emergency, without the need of long periods of research, discussion, of uncertainty.

Whenever there was a discussion and a problem seemed to arise, you were certain it could only be because someone was being uninformed, or irrational, or plain stupid or, simply, did not know the language being employed in the discussion: if there ever would be any problem on your own side, it would be just "semantics", that is, discussion over senses that did not need to be reconsidered for discussion, before entering any further discussion employing them.

Some may consider it way too abstract and iffy, and far from directly related to body counts from hospitals, or famines about which people cared even less only two months ago (February 25), as in that other pandemic of splitted virus threads. Mental unrest is way too abstract and iffy. We need bodies, dead or hungry, and we need them now, to throw them to other know-worses in a cyberkennel.

Anyway, I find it is not that hard to be up for the concept.

Goodbye science, good bye development and well-being, goodbye Western paradise, good bye 21st century, good bye happiness, good bye x, and x, and...

When your mind is older, when it is grown up, maybe you'll understand.

Right now, we all need our ranting nannies.

 

[mcbrion]

Re: 2019 Coronavirus (COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2)

Hopefully people will remember what the sky is supposed to look like and smell like, and demand more be done fast.

yes. That would be nice.

 

[mcbrion]

Re: 2019 Coronavirus (COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2)

@ never considered

Speaking only for yourself, of course.


I only skimmed your article as I've read many others.

Did it mention that it's been estimated that some hundreds of thousands of young and elderly have had their appointments with the Grim Reaper postponed due to cleaner air?

You're correct, of course. I meant that we would not anticipate that a lethal virus would lead to cleaner air as a byproduct, although clearly it stands to reason that less travel would in and of itself make some improvement. But 60% in 3 weeks? No, I don't think anyone foresaw that big a drop.

 

[mcbrion]

Someone was kind enough to point out to me that this also happened after 9/11.


"After 9/11 when the airlines were grounded, the pollution levels dropped dramatically and the temperature dropped by 3 degrees Fahrenheit (if I remember correctly).

I would have posted in your thread but I refuse to post there as long as a certain somebody is posting.

I haven't been able to find the study, but you're free to share the info if you feel it's an addition to your thread."

- - - Updated - - -



thanks, gsdx!

 

[rareboy]

How many people are shopping on-line for shit you really don't need?

 

[Alistair]

 

[rareboy]

 

[zoltanspawn]

So typical of us.

Two choices, black or white.

Maybe there is a third way? A fourth? A fifth?

Policies and protocols that balance competing interests? Reasons for some to stay at home while others attempt to open? Targeted easing under expert guidance? A step forward here, and a step back if it doesn't work?

Nah.