Is there an equivalent to going afk from existence? Can I do that for a few years?

Apparently, the HLA-DQA2 gene might give natural immunity, at least it seems common to people less (or not) affected by the virus.

Human SARS-CoV-2 challenge uncovers local and systemic response dynamics
^{— Christopher Chiu et al · Nature · Jun 19, 2024}

Some people never get COVID-19: researchers say a specific gene could be why
^{— Christine Birak (Akiko Iwasaki, Dawn Bowdish, Donald Vinh) · CBC · Jun 27, 2024 · 2m:1s}

That's interesting. I've never had it (knock on wood) in spite of being exposed to it quite a few times. Maybe I have that gene!

Jesus. How callous and depraved. It directly targets civilians and disproportionality affects the weak. Horrible.

Vicious and awful. Though sadly unsurprising.

Pentagon ran secret anti-vax campaign to undermine China during pandemic

And somehow it just keeps getting worse. :lol: — Tzeentch

The US was responsible for why the Covid pandemic IN THE US happened

Oh yeah, that too. :sad:

Pentagon ran secret anti-vax campaign to undermine China during pandemic — Tzeentch

Just thegreatsatanthings :sparkle: :hearts:

Officials confirm human case of plague in Colorado (— Maya Davis · CNN · Jul 9, 2024)

I'm ba-ack

Anyway, are we (people, societies) ready for the next one?

Anyway, are we (people, societies) ready for the next one? — jorndoe

No. The next one might be a variation of Ebola. We'll see.

Very spooky. Maybe we should stop producing them then, eh?

No. The next one might be a variation of Ebola. We'll see. — frank

The "problem" with Covid-19 was that it wasn't deadly enough. It ended up in this middle ground in which people could just brush it off as "just another cold" while others got seriously ill and died or contracted long covid symptoms.

And since the public operates on whatever bubble of convictions that each individual lives within, the seriousness of the pandemic were never truly taken seriously.

But a larger and more deadly pandemic would drive the point home and get people to demand their governments to do precautions for it to never happen again. It's unfortunate that the only way society can truly change is if it gets hammered to inches of death, otherwise it would just create a polarized white noise that erodes any intellectually sound and proper precautionary practices to prevent a new outbreak.

It's the same for nuclear annihilation. People think that governments will press a button and send everything they got, but it would be more likely that a tactical nuke is set off on the battlefield or an already destroyed city (that's occupied) and the act would be so shocking that it would shake the world into reducing nukes.

The problem is that everyone rationalize based on hypotheticals that are filtered through fictional narratives all the time. And the subsequent hyperreality it creates makes progress slow down and precautionary and constructive actions and plans to be reduced over time.

In Sweden during the 90s, the fall of the wall made our governments think that we don't have to be ready for war anymore and the cost of having a big military defense was irrational seen as we could use those funds to fund necessary things in society instead. We didn't need Nato, we didn't need much of our own defense etc. And nothing happened when Russia first invaded and annexed part of Ukraine in 2014 because it seemed (in the public) as some minor shenanigans by that Putin clown.

But with a pandemic and a full blown invasion that shook the world, all of a sudden, seemingly out of the blue, the public supported a massive increase in rebuilding our defenses and joining Nato.

What changed was the perception, the narrative, being hit by actual reality. It's only this sledgehammer that moves a society to take action, nothing else is as effective.

So, whenever something more serious than the recent pandemic happens, it would quickly reprogram the population into supporting actions to mitigate, fight back and create precautions for future risks. But Covid-19 wasn't enough, so we will probably be unprepared for something more deadly and only after something like a billion deaths will people create demands that can move elections.

Just think of all the elections going on this year. Has any politician, anywhere, had any election point around preventing new pandemics? No? Or course not. Covid-19 is treated like it's over and that it "wasn't that bad". So there's no interest from the public, they just want to move on to other stuff. But if something really deadly starts a new pandemic, it would be at the top of the list for elections and push politicians who speak of necessary changes to global society.

So there's no interest from the public, they just want to move on to other stuff. — Christoffer

I hear you. I recently spoke with a doctor in private practice and he expressed the opinion that all the hype was for nothing, that we damaged our economy out of hysteria. The problem he has is widespread: nobody saw what was happening inside hospitals, so they don't understand how close we were to losing control and having people dying in their front yards like in 1918. We limited the effect with lockdowns, drugs, and vaccines (and huge amounts of oxygen).

The thing about a more severe pandemic is that it might shake the foundations of society so that what comes out the other side is not the same entity that went in, you know? Like the Bubonic plague created a middleclass because of labor shortages.

I think the US is tipping toward authoritarianism, so another pandemic might be the final ingredient.

In principle, it comes down to doctors·nurses·researchers·specialists to figure out what (not) to do, while learning/improving along the way.
It starts as a medical problem that would inform subsequent political decisions, etc.
Too bad that the implementation of the whole process has proven fragile/vulnerable; pathogens don't care about human crap.

Too bad that the implementation of the whole process has proven fragile/vulnerable; — jorndoe

But another thing people forget is that the vaccine was revolutionary. The massive pile of cash coming in to fund it from governments and rich guys was amazing. I really wonder what a socialist world would have done. I'd like to think the freedom to go with a crazy solution would exist there, but I don't know.