Animal melting pot created by climate change could lead to new disease outbreaks

For example monkeypox does not have the potential to have even close to an impact like Corona to the population and health system. Simply because most people are not promiscuous. Fears that it will involve to something spreading significantly beyond sexual encounters are unfounded at present. Edit: Like I said: significantly. I know it can spread in other ways but it's not doing so at levels which are harmful to society as a whole.

And I'm not saying it's just an LGBTIQ+ thing either, like most of the media are doing now. But it does spread mostly through sex right now which eliminates it as a risk for most of the population (being monogamous) and thus as the possibility of completely stopping society like Covid did (and i'm saying that as a person who is not monogamous)

I'm not saying it's harmless and yes we have to fight it but it's not another covid.

Illness is a risk and one that we can't ban completely. We just have to deal with it, and it's not worth completely throwing our lives around to have a minor effect on that risk.

There is something between panic mode and ignore it..

Reminder, this is obviously false.

Animal trade, human travel and commerce, alien species, exotic pets, exotic wildfood ... are much, much, much worse.

The only animal diseases that we had studied seriously and extensively are:

1) Human diseases

2) Diseases of pets. Canine and feline diseases

3) Diseases of human food. Poultry and cattle, and some fishes.

We farm since 3000 years or so and have spent huge resources into researching each disease of cattle. Anything hidden in cattle that could affect human has affected us since 1000 years ago and is definitely not new. A farm would be the last place to look for a lot of new diseases.

There was a study(I don’t have a link handy) on microbiota in Neanderthal dental plaque. You’d be surprised, but pathogens existed even before farming.

Look at how China is doing right now. Their population has almost no exposure to the virus, meaning every outbreak is still significant like it was for us in the early days.

We've moved beyond that where it's now a fact of life and no longer hampering us or saturating the health system. We have enough natural defenses along with the vaccines to give us adequate protection and we can live our lives again. We do control but it's on the health system impact, not the spread of the virus as such. And letting our immune system do the job it evolved over hundreds of thousands of years to do, supplemented by vaccines when necessary is really working out well for us.

Meanwhile China is stuck in a groundhog day loop of zero-covid policy that is really harming their society. I think in the western world we've handled it really well, we've accepted the inevitable and dealt with it in a way that had the least impact on society. Our focus on balancing freedom with prevention has really worked out well.

I do think a zero-covid policy could have worked but it would have been in February/March 2020 when total containment was still on the cards. In April/May when it spread to the entire world we were already past that point. At that point 'living with it with the least impact' became the only possible option.

I'm not a Trump follower at all but in Europe we have essentially adopted the same policy as the US did without the ridiculous misinformation of injecting bleach etc :P

Yeah. We've been lucky so far, comparatively speaking. It's insanity to insist on unmitigated rolling of the dice, though.

How so? Vaccines generate a good T cell response.

Without religion or kids giving a reason to live, mostly living for oneself is very depressive. (I know also people with kids do this)

Having a goal higher than yourself, especially that is of the highest moral purpose is very liberating.

It comes at a cost though, reason goes out of the window.

This doesn't mean there aren't real concern, but yeah the world is not ending.

And at that point, it will be far too late. Hell just look at France, Italy and Germany right now - France has had to cut output of their few remaining reactors that are not broken down because the rivers are too dry and hot to supply adequate cooling water, Germany's Rhine is almost incapable of letting ships float, meaning that the country's most important freight waterway is at 25% capacity and soon none at all, and in Italy the agricultural sector faces never-seen-before bad harvests due to the drought which is the hardest since 1800 [1] when the measurement of weather began.

We are already in the catastrophic scenario, we can only hope and act to make it not worse than it already is - but without panic there won't be any change!

[1] https://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/das-schlaraffenland-verdurstet-...

Yes, but not 8 billion of us living in vast cities with 80+ year life expectancies.

Are you prepared to live like a viking again?

Now, the annoying part here is that this is the best case scenario for the climate as well. If mankind does in fact manage to turn around this massive force, people like you will simply be gloating and claiming that there was nothing to worry about in the first place.

And yes climate change is a constant in history. However what is new is significant change in the timescale of a human life. Meaning we won't adapt gratefully as a society. Previously cities becoming uninhabitable would be abandoned slowly over the course of centuries.

Now we will have a situation where a significant portion of the population will have to move in their lifetime. That's the kind of stuff that causes hostility and wars. And given how good we've become at mass-killing humans, that is a frightening prospect.

It's an amazing lesson in scale. In the early game, it's pretty easy to recover from supply chain issues and refactor your setup to adjust to your growth needs and expansion across the land. Once you reach mid to late game, and something goes wrong, your whole factory starts to grind to halt as you try to diagnose where in the whole system things have clogged up, you need to measure and monitor throughput to make sure you are producing the materials needed for consumption by other machines at a rate that is sustainable. Refactoring at this point really means shutting most of it down and building from the ground up again.

Kind of like humanity 100s & 1000s of years ago. Most of life was localized, food, raw materials. We were not over fishing the seas or pushing the soils to the limit. The scale of humanity now, is such that all the supply chains, food and resource requirements depend on such a plethora of things running as they have been, uninterrupted (gas, food, water supplies, raw materials, spare parts).

That is why this argument about "climate disasters in the past" really never made sense to me. This is an entirely different game.

And yes, "humanity" may survive. But just like the factory that stops working that needs to be largely deconstructed and re-built, a lot of people will be unnecessarily plunged into hardship, famine and probably death. Economies and societies will be affected in ways we really can't imagine.

The question then is, what will humanity and society look like after? And what will our successors and future generations think of their ancestors who had the time, knowledge and the technology to ease or circumvent their suffering.

I mean, humanity made it through. No-one is realistically concerned that global warming is going to entirely wipe out humanity. A lot of _people_ didn't make it through, though.