+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 9 to 16 of 18

Thread: Swine Flu: nature or man's fault and what is it's effect?

  1. #9
    Otaku Vincent has disabled reputation Vincent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    288
    Thanks
    47
    Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts

    Re: Swine Flu: nature or man's fault and what is it's effect?

    I agree but not just some areas are over populated. A LOT OF AREAS ARE OVERPOPULATED. We are growing way to fast and nature is just trying to "Put a lid on us". But we just keep growing, and unfortuantly, it might lead to something we can';t stop.

  2. #10
    Poultry Projectile Cannon Scourge is making a name for themselves Scourge is making a name for themselves Scourge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Oceanside CA
    Posts
    1,297
    Thanks
    476
    Thanked 171 Times in 152 Posts

    Re: Swine Flu: nature or man's fault and what is it's effect?

    Its both. Like Len has said, nature alows the virus to mutate and blend with other viruses to form a new one. It is man made in the fact of how fast it spreads from person to person do to denser populations and because of travel between countries and other locations around the world. If you think it is literaly man made by genetic engineering in a lab then you are completely wrong.
    I how ever am not worried about it all that much, more people die from the commen cold then the swine flu so far.
    "MY DEAR... I GIVE YOU THE CAPELLAN CONFEDERATION"
    AND THUS THE WAR WAS STARTED NOT BY GUN SHOT BUT BY WEDDING BELLS

  3. #11
    Otaku Vincent has disabled reputation Vincent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    288
    Thanks
    47
    Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts

    Re: Swine Flu: nature or man's fault and what is it's effect?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scourge View Post
    Its both. Like Len has said, nature alows the virus to mutate and blend with other viruses to form a new one. It is man made in the fact of how fast it spreads from person to person do to denser populations and because of travel between countries and other locations around the world. If you think it is literaly man made by genetic engineering in a lab then you are completely wrong.
    I how ever am not worried about it all that much, more people die from the commen cold then the swine flu so far.
    That last part is completely true. Well, all of it is true. But the last part illustrates how much people over exagerate these kind of things. A new disease appears and the world breaks into mass panic. It's pretty terrible.

  4. #12
    Otaku Tula is off to a good start Tula's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    On my way back to Philadelphia
    Posts
    238
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 26 Times in 24 Posts

    Re: Swine Flu: nature or man's fault and what is it's effect?

    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    A new disease appears and the world breaks into mass panic. It's pretty terrible.
    Lies.

    The human race just met yet another check and balance.
    If we could cut our population by half the occurrence and or likelihood of things like the swine flu wouldn't be a big deal. And maybe we could get a restoration of ecosystems destroyed by the human populace.

    My condolenses to those that have died. Now if a few more million could get in line, take a number and get infected.

  5. #13
    Poultry Projectile Cannon Scourge is making a name for themselves Scourge is making a name for themselves Scourge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Oceanside CA
    Posts
    1,297
    Thanks
    476
    Thanked 171 Times in 152 Posts

    Re: Swine Flu: nature or man's fault and what is it's effect?

    Actually he is right about that Tula, every time some new pathagen pops up people over react and that is rather puthetic for them to do so when its easily proventable.

    Are you saying that you your self would be a willing canadet and take a number and be infected and possibly die a rather misserable death there Tula if I gave you my condolenses?

    How ever I would have to agree that disease of ANY kind is for the most part a type of form of a check and balance methad for nature, also to weed out the weak ones of the herd. Thats the cold truth to disease and the roll it plays.
    Last edited by Scourge; Jul 07, 2009 at 10:51 AM.
    "MY DEAR... I GIVE YOU THE CAPELLAN CONFEDERATION"
    AND THUS THE WAR WAS STARTED NOT BY GUN SHOT BUT BY WEDDING BELLS

  6. #14
    Otaku Tula is off to a good start Tula's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    On my way back to Philadelphia
    Posts
    238
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 26 Times in 24 Posts

    Re: Swine Flu: nature or man's fault and what is it's effect?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scourge View Post
    Actually he is right about that Tula, every time some new pathagen pops up people over react and that is rather puthetic for them to do so when its easily proventable.
    A disease with the potential to be fatal is something people shouldn't worry about.
    And sure while you can help prevent or at the least minimize the risk of preventing contraction of a disease, it does not always guarantee you won't contract that disease.

    Are you saying that you your self would be a willing canadet and take a number and be infected and possibly die a rather misserable death there Tula if I gave you my condolenses?
    If I had a fatal disease, that could not be cured, forget misery, I'd rather take my own life.
    As to whether or not I believe more people should be infected by swine flu . . . I'd prefer the decimation of the human race be caused by something a little more flashy.
    No condolenses necessary.
    I think there's a contradiction in there somewhere.

  7. #15
    Poultry Projectile Cannon Scourge is making a name for themselves Scourge is making a name for themselves Scourge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Oceanside CA
    Posts
    1,297
    Thanks
    476
    Thanked 171 Times in 152 Posts

    Re: Swine Flu: nature or man's fault and what is it's effect?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tula View Post
    A disease with the potential to be fatal is something people shouldn't worry about.
    And sure while you can help prevent or at the least minimize the risk of preventing contraction of a disease, it does not always guarantee you won't contract that disease.


    If I had a fatal disease, that could not be cured, forget misery, I'd rather take my own life.
    As to whether or not I believe more people should be infected by swine flu . . . I'd prefer the decimation of the human race be caused by something a little more flashy.
    No condolenses necessary.
    I think there's a contradiction in there somewhere.
    No it does not always mean its 100% proventable but your chances of contracting it are easily cut in half and for many who take care of them selves will most likely never be infected by big bugs.
    That is my point, the H1N1 is a potentialy fatal virus strain, much like the commen flue bug which more people die from, and as you said that people shouldn't be worried about those which I agree, and yet you STILL see people get paranoid and fearfull.

    You missed what I meant, I was refering to how you put your last statment of... "My condolenses to those that have died. Now if a few more million could get in line, take a number and get infected."... This sounds like you are saying people should intentionaly go out, get infected and then die for the benofit of nature... My question was basicily would you go out and get infected and die to help benofit nature and all you get in retern is a condolence? If your answer is no (Which it most likely is) then words such as that should have never had left your lips as it makes you a hypocrit as you are pulling what I like to call a polition mentality which is "Its all fine and dandy as long as it doesnt affect me."
    "MY DEAR... I GIVE YOU THE CAPELLAN CONFEDERATION"
    AND THUS THE WAR WAS STARTED NOT BY GUN SHOT BUT BY WEDDING BELLS

  8. #16
    Otaku Tula is off to a good start Tula's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    On my way back to Philadelphia
    Posts
    238
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 26 Times in 24 Posts

    Re: Swine Flu: nature or man's fault and what is it's effect?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scourge View Post
    No it does not always mean its 100% proventable but your chances of contracting it are easily cut in half and for many who take care of them selves will most likely never be infected by big bugs.
    That is my point, the H1N1 is a potentialy fatal virus strain, much like the commen flue bug which more people die from, and as you said that people shouldn't be worried about those which I agree, and yet you STILL see people get paranoid and fearfull.
    If there is a chance of dying and if you care/value your life then you’re kinda being careless by not worrying.
    I’m not all that great with generating these sorts of stats but if you get a vaccine and or avoid individuals you suspect to be ill then yeah you'll lower your chance of infection. But I doubt it's at least 50%

    You are lowering the risk of contraction (I have no idea what the exact percentage is) but per individual there are various factors that will either help increase or decrease the chances of contracting an ailment. Things like age, whether or not you are pregnant, are in any way immuno-compromised.
    And for most humans around the globe, chances of getting infected with any ailment are pretty high because of urbanization and the close confines people share with other humans and not to mention known disease carrying species that can infect humans with diseases of their own or various strains of diseases. Examples of this are
    malaria (fatal)
    hanta virus (fatal)
    HIV/AIDS (harmful)
    influenza (fatal)
    measles (fatal)
    chickenpox (fatal)
    pneumonia (fatal)
    tuberculosis (fatal)
    diphtheria (fatal)
    Ebola (fatal)

    All of the above listed diseases that are capable of killing a person so they are listed as fatal. The number of cases treated each year is a result of a large human population. (No there was no typo. HIV/AIDS makes you more susceptible to diseases and those diseases kill you. Or treatment of HIV/AIDS kills you. If you don’t agree with that, consider this: is chemotherapy fatal? And if it is why do mean doctors around the globe administer the procedure?)
    I imagine you’ll argue chicken pox, so I’ll give you some more food for thought.
    - in 1996 tuberculosis killed nearly 3 million people
    - Hanta virus is native to South America and is caused by rodents. It has various strains and while in recent years the number of diagnosed cases has gone down, it kills several thousand people a year. The only reason it never or rarely occurs in the US is because of the medical technology the US has at its disposal. Which leads me to my next point
    - in 1989 and 1990 the US had a measles epidemic because most people could NOT afford the cost of vaccinating their children against it.
    - chickenpox can be fatal to unborn children and children that have not been vaccinated for whatever reason. Any pregnant woman that is exposed to chickenpox risks severe damages to her fetus. (There’s a separate debate around here somewhere about this)
    - I don’t know off hand how many people die of pneumonia, but if you are a child or elderly or otherwise immuno-compromised, you’re pretty much on your own in at least a quarter of the cases. (Because most people that have pneumonia don’t know they do and they wait until they think they’re on the verge of dying to seek treatment. In the meantime, how many people have they gone around unknowingly infected)
    - Diphtheria is most common in poor under developed nations. So about 1 billion people (rough estimate) each year risk contracting this disease and of those, let’s assume all of them were capable of paying for treatment (which we know isn’t the case) how many people will still die of the disease because the areas they live in aren’t really conducive to living (either because access to clean water doesn’t exist, food isn’t always the most nutritious or safest to eat, etc)
    - influenza (or the common flu or the common cold) usually only kills individuals that are immuno-compromised
    - Ebola is preventable but not curable. The vaccine for it is like 99.99% effective for people that are not immuno-compromised. But last time I checked, the vaccine is costly. (Pharmaceutical companies rake in a fortune in making vaccines for influenza but companies that make vaccines for Ebola could buy the planet) In addition to that, no matter how effective it is at preventing the disease the benefits don’t always outweigh the cost. There is no drug in the world that does not have side effects. Any vaccine you receive could possibly kill you. In most cases, you will only receive the Ebola vaccine if you are clinically diagnosed with the disease within 2 days of contracting it because after that period of time it’s not as effective And if the vaccine doesn’t work and since there’s no cure, you better pray they give you some powerful sedatives so you can just sleep it off. . . and never wake up. I mention this disease because there was an outbreak of Ebola in Virginia in the US a couple of decades ago. If it had spread, it could have leveled the playing field.

    You missed what I meant, I was refering to how you put your last statment of... "My condolenses to those that have died. Now if a few more million could get in line, take a number and get infected."... This sounds like you are saying people should intentionaly go out, get infected and then die for the benofit of nature... My question was basicily would you go out and get infected and die to help benofit nature and all you get in retern is a condolence? If your answer is no (Which it most likely is) then words such as that should have never had left your lips as it makes you a hypocrit as you are pulling what I like to call a polition mentality which is "Its all fine and dandy as long as it doesnt affect me."
    [/QUOTE]
    I do recall saying there was a contradiction in there somewhere.

    Certainly my death would be a benefit to nature and people as well. I’m sure there are other people out there that would love to fill any of my occupations. And I’m sure nature (specifically the world we live in) would possibly see a positive to that. That’s one less smoker in the world. One less mouth to feed. One less of a lot of stuff.

    As to how significant my death would be. . .
    I doubt it would make a very big impact. If specifically one out of every billion died (in this case me) the number of individuals of my species still have the upper hand. You’d need to have a lot more people at least a quarter of the planet’s current population to all die at once and prevent the birth of any more of us humans for I’d say maybe 4 months. Then you’d see one hell of an impact.

    But time will tell and then there is that whole survival of the fittest thing to contend with. For order and balance to exist (since it doesn’t now), I somehow doubt that if it came right down to maybe 16 people total in the world, you wouldn’t want diseased for handicapped (in anyway) individuals to be the ones left to procreate and get the human race flourishing in a manner such that our existence does not impede upon the existence of other species.
    And this also leaves out individuals of certain age groups. In recent years (or generations) female become sexually mature sooner so females under the age of 7 are out. And then there’s the traumas or psychological effects of sex at any earlier age (since we do not traumatized/crazed individuals populating the Earth and doing God knows what), so we’d have to wipe out all females under the age of 15 at least.
    And I’d like to think that by the age of 14 most males are either entering a sexual mature stage of development or already have. But we have no idea if they’re shooting blanks so we’d probably have to say maybe 17. So all males under the age of 17 perhaps would get the axe.
    And then there are the much older individuals. Any woman over 40 is out because the chances of giving birth to a child with Down’s Syndrome goes up. And all women infertile are out. (This would be women who if by their 18th birthday have not had a period and most likely never will.)
    And then since by nature (and or definition) humans care for their young, we can’t have any male over the age about 50 with any known ailments that would shorten their life span (and colorblindness).

    So for the benefit (or survival) of our species sure I’d choose life. Simply because as a human, I’d feel really ticked off if the survival of the human race went out the window because of ill fit humans.
    But if I ever thought I for a single moment knew for fact that I was going to die in some painful way (because of disease) I’d just end my own life. Why drain the planet and my government more than necessary? That and my medical insurance is a lot more expensive compared to a ton of years ago.

    But yeah, you’re right, at the moment I don’t mind living so I do.
    I’m not sure the exact science behind it (for one reason or other) but it’s almost pretty damn impossible (even under hypnosis) for a person of no mental illness/defect/ailment to commit suicide spur of the moment on a whim. I think I read somewhere it had to do with the limbic system or whatever. So I guess I can use that as my excuse for why I won’t get in a line with several million people and purposefully try and get infected with some potential fatal disease.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Swine Flu
    By Peach_follows in forum Cyber Lounge
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: May 02, 2009, 11:22 PM
  2. Is it his fault, or her fault?
    By Kool2bchilln in forum Cyber Lounge
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: May 27, 2008, 04:34 AM
  3. Who's fault is it?
    By Rave_Grip in forum Poems
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Dec 01, 2007, 07:47 PM
  4. It's Frances fault! ;)
    By Arrianna in forum The Thread Vault
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: Nov 10, 2005, 01:01 PM
  5. WHos fault is it?
    By Rook in forum The Thread Vault
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: Oct 11, 2005, 10:26 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts