Donate SIGN UP
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 18 of 18rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Bobbisox1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It rather illustrates that you cannot overcome simple human nature among the populace.

Whether that extends to this lady unconsciously negating her own advice even while she is giving it, to 'panic buying' in the shops, as human beings, we do react in ways that directly adversely affect the situation we are trying to deal with.

Italy has locked down its citizens in huge areas, while still allowing planes and trains to come and go as normal, which again rather negates the point of the restrictions.

The simple fact is, this virus will spread, peak, reduce, and die out.

As a result, a very very small section of the world population will die, mainly because of underlying health problems, which seems to be everyone who has died thus far as i understand it, and the remaining healthy population with either contract the virus and get over it, or not contract it at all.

That is the way viruses affect us as a world population - they always have, and for the foreseeable future, they always will.
Question Author
Well said Mr H
Thank goodness,Andy, a common sense post at last.
Not always to be fair.

Spanish flu killed millions.
Generally tho viruses don’t really want to kill you as it’s it good for their own survival prospects. It’s often the defences against it that cause many of the symptoms.
“not good”
ich - // Not always to be fair.

Spanish flu killed millions.
Generally tho viruses don’t really want to kill you as it’s it good for their own survival prospects. It’s often the defences against it that cause many of the symptoms. //

There are exceptions to every rule.

It does depend on circumstances.

As a modern society we interact and travel far more than our ancestors could have dreamed of.

A virus like The Black Death was so virulent because no-one knew how it spread, and the absence of sanitation, coupled with the overcrowding of cities meant it was able to spread and kill vast swathes of the population, with no known cure.

The equivalent today would probably be the Coronavirus, not especially effective in isolation, but able to spread easily and quickly.

Modern society is far better equipped to deal with it, but the fundamentals still apply - existence, infection, spread, fatalities, peak, reduction, die-out / antidote, which ever comes first.
Since we're at the ejicatin, the Black Death was a bacterial infection.
Sounds like KFC needs a new tagline.
14.41 yep it was, well spotted. :0)
douglas - // Since we're at the ejicatin, the Black Death was a bacterial infection. //

It was, but that does not in any way detract from the point I was making.

Still, you got a thumbs up from your little acolyte, so your time was not entirely wasted!
Accurate facts are very important, Virus / bacterial treatments very different.
teacake - // Accurate facts are very important, Virus / bacterial treatments very different. //

In terms of the general discussion we are having on her here, and the point I illustrated, the finer minutia of the subject is not actually important.

It's the Answerbank - not the Lancet, so nit-picking simply detracts from the thread, and starts to look like petty fault-finding, which doesn't help to move the debate along
I leave nit-picking /fault-finding to those who care to do it, also any sarcastic remarks such as, Quote, your little acolyte, end quote. as in your 15.07 post. I was agreeing with an accurate post. bacterial, not virus, what's wrong with that?
-- answer removed --
Question Author
Do you ever get sick of being so caustic ^^^^^
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --

1 to 18 of 18rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Do As I Say Not As I Do?

Answer Question >>