You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 10, 2016, 08:26:51 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: What has happened to us?  (Read 10993 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #125 on: October 12, 2011, 02:57:50 PM »
Contraception is getting better, not worse.  If your friend has had six children on birth control then she is doing something wrong and/or should have had a serious discussion with her doctor some time ago.  You are hearing more about contraception failing because 1) more women are on it and so there is a greater pool of critics and chances for something to go wrong and 2) there are a lot of new options with different instructions and “fits” for lifestyle so there is once more a greater chance for mistakes to be made while a woman adjusts to their contraception.

Before giving medical opinion please verify your facts and have more than the hearsay of the media and an example of your friend. 

Offline LustfulLord2011

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #126 on: October 12, 2011, 03:05:26 PM »
@ Pumpkin: I stated in the initial post that it was based only on personal observation. Those observations are facts. As to what they MEAN, I don't have the medical knowledge to verify. However, all of the women I know who have had this happen were told, basically, that there wasn't a verifiable explanation. Translation: We don't know WHAT the hell is going on, but we aren't going to tell YOU that." Other forms have been just as ineffective for others. We aren't talking isolated incidents here. Nevertheless, that's why I used the word SOME.

I made that statement just based on the evidence right around me. Some women don't seem to be getting any benefit out of birth control. I don't know to what extent this is happening, though... Actually read the following sentences, and it becomes clear that it's based on personal observation, and conversations with women, NOT any scientific study. Hence the, "I am not sure to what extent this phenomenon is taking place globally, nor it's rate of acceleration if indeed there IS one (I don't even know of any studies that have been done on the topic)" part.

As to First World countries... What matters is GLOBAL rates. Now, in the short term, things look like this: The population is continuing to grow, at a declining rate. In a larger time context, it looks like this: The population is continuing to grow, at an expanding percentile rate (doublings are taking place in a faster and faster time, a trend which only seems to have recently receded somewhat. If you count forward from the end of the Hundred Year's War, when the global population was about 300 million estimated, you get a couple of centuries to hit 600 million, then a century or so to hit 1.5 billion, then about fifty years to hit 3 billion, then a scant 35 years to hit 6 billion. Now it seems to be tapering off, but I don't think it likely to completely level out ever. The problem is that there are too many factors that seem to go into it for accurate prediction; the best we can do is look at the evidence of the past. The evidence of the past tells us that, at whatever rate, our population is going to continue to expand.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #127 on: October 12, 2011, 03:31:27 PM »
A common misconception by the general public is that their observations are indeed fact.  People often feel that what is laid before them is the truth.  Variables that cannot be accounted for by a casual observer are not seen and interpreted.  That is the fault of the untrained observer and of personal experience in debate.  One humorous example is about storks bringing babies.  By looking over the patterns of storks it is found that place with low incidents of birth are not in their migration pattern.  Someone can infer that storks are the cause of the low birth rate.  Yet, if one notices the variable that urban centers are the places with low birth rates and that storks avoid urban centers then this makes more sense.

A woman that has six unintended pregnancies is an obvious case of “user error.”  There comes a point when she would stop wasting her money on birth control and move back to condoms and/or simply stop.  Birth control, like any medication, has multiple variables each of which is individual with a woman’s body.  People believe that medicine is a universal pill but that is not the case.  She could have been taking antibiotics, not waited a correct amount of time, been taking the medication wrong, might not have been the right medication for her body, etc. etc.  Women rarely read the long list of things that come in the box in regard to these birth control options.  A doctor will respond with ignorance about what happened in regard to the pill, because the doctor is not aware of what the person taking the medication did.  This is a big reason pharmacist, doctors and nurses desperately encourage people to READ the directions. 

You, as a casual observer and not a researcher, do not have access to her medical record or the ability to do a structured interview.   You as the casual observer do not have the ability to draw on anything more than personal experience and her words.  One of the first things my teacher told me in statistics is that “people lie.”  Not always intentionally, but people omit, mislead and obfuscate based on a variety of reasons. 

I have not seen any research to indicate birth control is becoming less effective.  Women have more options now, more convenience and more support in taking birth control. 


(Sidenote: I realize this is off topic.  I want anyone reading this thread that may be thinking of birth control for themselves or their children to see what is there and find the facts.)

Offline LustfulLord2011

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #128 on: October 12, 2011, 03:38:23 PM »
I'm not disagreeing with you. I am merely pointing out that WHATEVER the cause, it isn't working. Whether due to errors in usage, or potency of the method, or anything else. People do lie... people also make mistakes. Causes are not so important as results. So whatever the cause of all the stories I am hearing from women (most of whom have more than one child, and half of whom have more than two... as I mentioned, Shannon is the most extreme case, however), the fact remains it isn't working. Even if that's due to them screwing it up somehow. I was merely pointing out the result: in some verified cases, it's not controlling the birth rate. Also, I mentioned that the mother of six DOES use condoms... That one I can't really explain, that part MUST be user error or someone tampering with them, or perhaps a bad batch.

Offline LustfulLord2011

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #129 on: October 12, 2011, 03:55:34 PM »
If it IS due to user error, than we need a method that is user-error free, that near as possible needs no input from the user at ALL. There are some things that shouldn't be left to chance in ANY capacity.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #130 on: October 12, 2011, 04:05:00 PM »
There is one - unfortunately, it's rather permanent, and most doctors won't consider it for a woman who hasn't had at least one child already.

Offline LustfulLord2011

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #131 on: October 12, 2011, 04:17:32 PM »
I am still waiting for a safe, effective male contraceptive... Our bodies tend (in general) to be less finicky than women's, and since we wouldn't have to stop to allow for menstruation, and don't (from the few clinical trials of progestrin-based BC for men) seem to have as many problems or side effects with it, it could be a real boon for people who don't want kids, or not at the current time, anyway.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #132 on: October 12, 2011, 04:24:29 PM »
Men do have the option of wearing condoms, which any casual intercourse should use regardless of other birth control options in place.  The problem with male birth control is that the man’s body does not already have a mechanism in place to prevent pregnancy.  A woman’s body does which is what birth control utilizes to accomplish the desired effect.

Offline LustfulLord2011

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #133 on: October 12, 2011, 04:28:41 PM »
Condoms are great, but I prefer the option of double stacked protection. There is a chemical form of male birth control which has been in clinical trials for a few years now... so far, it seems to be very successful, with minimal instances of failure or side effects, but it's still probably at LEAST five years away from FDA approval, if it ever gets it due to the social concerns some ignorant tools have raised. *rolls eyes*

Offline Zakharra

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #134 on: October 12, 2011, 05:31:51 PM »
@ Pumpkin: I stated in the initial post that it was based only on personal observation. Those observations are facts. As to what they MEAN, I don't have the medical knowledge to verify. However, all of the women I know who have had this happen were told, basically, that there wasn't a verifiable explanation. Translation: We don't know WHAT the hell is going on, but we aren't going to tell YOU that." Other forms have been just as ineffective for others. We aren't talking isolated incidents here. Nevertheless, that's why I used the word SOME.

I made that statement just based on the evidence right around me. Some women don't seem to be getting any benefit out of birth control. I don't know to what extent this is happening, though... Actually read the following sentences, and it becomes clear that it's based on personal observation, and conversations with women, NOT any scientific study. Hence the, "I am not sure to what extent this phenomenon is taking place globally, nor it's rate of acceleration if indeed there IS one (I don't even know of any studies that have been done on the topic)" part.


 Pumpkin Seeds already did a good case against this viewpoint.

Quote
As to First World countries... What matters is GLOBAL rates. Now, in the short term, things look like this: The population is continuing to grow, at a declining rate. In a larger time context, it looks like this: The population is continuing to grow, at an expanding percentile rate (doublings are taking place in a faster and faster time, a trend which only seems to have recently receded somewhat. If you count forward from the end of the Hundred Year's War, when the global population was about 300 million estimated, you get a couple of centuries to hit 600 million, then a century or so to hit 1.5 billion, then about fifty years to hit 3 billion, then a scant 35 years to hit 6 billion. Now it seems to be tapering off, but I don't think it likely to completely level out ever. The problem is that there are too many factors that seem to go into it for accurate prediction; the best we can do is look at the evidence of the past. The evidence of the past tells us that, at whatever rate, our population is going to continue to expand.

 First world nations DO matter because more nations are reaching that status and statistics are showing that  when it is reached, the birthrate goes down. Before the 1920s, pretty much all of society was agricultural. It took lot more labor to produce food. Now it takes very little of the labor force to produce enough food to feed people. The percentage of people on the farms has fallen drastically, and as society modernized (better food, medicine, travel, labor saving devices and communication), the birth rate has fallen.

 The population is only expanding in Third world/developing nations, and it makes sense that as they modernize, the modern areas will see a corresponding drop in birthrates.   

What you are suggesting is that even in a modern society we'll be overpopulated. Which doesn't seem to be true.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #135 on: October 12, 2011, 05:45:03 PM »
As to First World countries... What matters is GLOBAL rates. Now, in the short term, things look like this: The population is continuing to grow, at a declining rate. In a larger time context, it looks like this: The population is continuing to grow, at an expanding percentile rate (doublings are taking place in a faster and faster time, a trend which only seems to have recently receded somewhat. If you count forward from the end of the Hundred Year's War, when the global population was about 300 million estimated, you get a couple of centuries to hit 600 million, then a century or so to hit 1.5 billion, then about fifty years to hit 3 billion, then a scant 35 years to hit 6 billion. Now it seems to be tapering off, but I don't think it likely to completely level out ever. The problem is that there are too many factors that seem to go into it for accurate prediction; the best we can do is look at the evidence of the past. The evidence of the past tells us that, at whatever rate, our population is going to continue to expand.

From this bit here, and taking into account the fact that advances have increased longevity (everything from medicine to better resource management), it sounds like we're reaching the so-called 'critical point' where the exponential growth (rapid doubling) shifts into the leveling part of the curve.  IF advancements continue to be made, then the population can continue to increase - but there's still an upper limit.  Land area is finite.  Oxygen is finite.  At some point, the population will bump up against that limit and the growth rate will have to either stop or reverse.

Offline LustfulLord2011

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #136 on: October 12, 2011, 05:51:13 PM »
My problem is that, before we hit that point, we are likely to experience economic collapse and a serious cut in our potential food production. Or be swept with more diseases, due to the presence of more people. Disease especially will be a concern. The Black Death will be NOTHING compared to pandemics of the future, simply because they will spread so far before their incubation period is up due to the widespread, close contact of humans on a global level. Most illnesses take a few days to incubate... but in the past few days, I have literally been in four different states. And I'm not even that heavily traveled. Some rich executive who makes a lot of cross continental business deals catches something, they'll spread it to four different CONTINENTS before they even know they're sick.

Online Callie Del Noire

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #137 on: October 12, 2011, 07:25:14 PM »
Lustful, google Spanish influenza. That was a century ago

Online TheGlyphstone

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #138 on: October 12, 2011, 07:37:01 PM »
Or more recently, swine flu/bird flu. That's the most modern official pandemic we've seen, and it was for all of its media hype rather underwhelming.

Online Callie Del Noire

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #139 on: October 12, 2011, 07:57:51 PM »
Or more recently, swine flu/bird flu. That's the most modern official pandemic we've seen, and it was for all of its media hype rather underwhelming.

Both were proven to be H1N1.. the origin of the 1918 pandemic was never consistently proven but one culprit was China. Of note was an estimated 3% of the planet died.

Online TheGlyphstone

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #140 on: October 12, 2011, 08:15:35 PM »
Both were proven to be H1N1.. the origin of the 1918 pandemic was never consistently proven but one culprit was China. Of note was an estimated 3% of the planet died.

3% of the planet died from swine flu?

Online Callie Del Noire

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #141 on: October 12, 2011, 08:22:48 PM »
3% of the planet died from swine flu?

An estimated 3% of the planet died from the 1918 pandemic. In some regions (such as parts of the pacific it was as high as 20%). Entire towns in Alaska died out.


Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #142 on: October 12, 2011, 09:07:25 PM »
It was a different strain of H1N1 than we were used to in 2009.  It also seemed to result in an excessive immune response according to some - the people that got taken out by it tended to be the ones with stronger immune systems.  Normally, flu deaths are mostly small children, the elderly, and the immuno-suppressed, and there was a much higher percentage of young adult to middle-aged deaths during that pandemic.

I still get to read lab reports about it every week or so, because everyone wants to make sure that their cleanser/disinfectant works to kill it.  On a really good data package, I'll see Avian A, regular H1N1, H3N2, B (Hong Kong), and the 2009 Swine H1N1.  (Might even have another one in tonight's load.)  I can look up the exact strain if anyone's interested.

Online Callie Del Noire

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #143 on: October 12, 2011, 09:43:58 PM »
It was a different strain of H1N1 than we were used to in 2009.  It also seemed to result in an excessive immune response according to some - the people that got taken out by it tended to be the ones with stronger immune systems.  Normally, flu deaths are mostly small children, the elderly, and the immuno-suppressed, and there was a much higher percentage of young adult to middle-aged deaths during that pandemic.

I still get to read lab reports about it every week or so, because everyone wants to make sure that their cleanser/disinfectant works to kill it.  On a really good data package, I'll see Avian A, regular H1N1, H3N2, B (Hong Kong), and the 2009 Swine H1N1.  (Might even have another one in tonight's load.)  I can look up the exact strain if anyone's interested.

Yeah my mom told me about it.. it really screwed up those with strong immune systems. It's been a study in 'what could happen' and with the increase in transportation since then has made folks in the projection business make some truly scarey predictions.

Offline LustfulLord2011

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #144 on: October 13, 2011, 12:10:28 AM »
Okay, but percentage of infection wise, none of these technically met the requirements to be considered a true pandemic. Heck, the Bubonic Plague was only an epidemic, and it wiped out way, WAY more people than H1N1 ever did. I am well familiar with the more recent history of pathogens, but the problem looks like this...

In any given population, any potentially fatal disease will kill (A) people, infect and inoculate (B) people, infect (C) people who will carry it as a host, and not be contracted by (D) people. What relative numbers those variables represent can vary widely. But lets take a worst case kind of disease... septicemia.

Speticimea, even with immediate medical treatment (within 24 hours of contraction) has a fatality rate averaging at 10%. If it is NOT treated immediately (and keep in mind, it's not uncommon for people to die on the same day they were infected, before any symptoms even appear), the fatality rate rises to 99-100%. It has an incredibly short incubation time, and is highly infectious. So... for such a disease, group A will be very large, even in a place where proper medical treatment is possible, group B will be either tiny or large, depending on access to medical treatment, group C will be nonexistant in any case, and group D will likely be infinitesimally small, because it spreads so easily.

Released into a small, self contained population, it will quickly run it's course: the survivors will be fine within three days, and everyone else would be dead. That's kind of how things went in the Middle Ages, but even then, it swept half the length of the globe, though in a fairly narrow channel. But were an outbreak of septicemia to happen TODAY, the results would be, literally, apocalyptic. Back then there were three hundred million people, MOST of whom had never even left the villages they were born in. NOW, we have 6 billion, and many of us travel across continents in a matter of hours on a daily or weekly basis. The same holds true with any deadly, easily transmittable disease. And if it should happen to have a longer incubation time or less obvious symptoms than the disease I have mentioned? Well... kiss your ass goodbye. Of course, most infections are not nearly so virulent... but my point is that, with so packed a planet, the first one that IS that comes along is likely to kill the vast majority of us, simply because of how easily people in large, mobile groups spread illness.

Online Callie Del Noire

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #145 on: October 13, 2011, 01:11:58 AM »
You are saying a disease that according to some figures infected upwards of 30% of the worlds population isn't a pandemic? (1918). The black death killed more percentage wise and is thought to have taken decades to fully spread.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #146 on: October 13, 2011, 02:47:06 AM »
Quote
The origin of “The Black Death” dates to an outbreak in China during the 1330s. During this period, China was an important trading nation, and international trade via the Silk Road helped create the world's first pandemic. Plague-infected rats on merchant ships spread the disease to western Asia and Europe. In the fall of 1347, Italian merchant ships with crewmembers dying of plague docked in Sicily, and within days the disease spread to the city and the surrounding countryside. The disease killed people so quickly that the Italian novelist Giovanni Boccaccio, whose father and stepmother died of plague, wrote that “its victims ate lunch with their friends and dinner with their ancestors in paradise.” By August, the plague had spread as far north as England.

Read more: Epidemics of the Past: Bubonic Plague — Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/cig/dangerous-diseases-epidemics/bubonic-plague.html#ixzz1ae6KH1vA

I think the difference is semantic hair-splitting.

Offline Caehlim

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #147 on: October 13, 2011, 05:12:13 AM »
Both were proven to be H1N1.. the origin of the 1918 pandemic was never consistently proven but one culprit was China. Of note was an estimated 3% of the planet died.

Although both are H1N1 influenzas they are not the same bug. H1N1 is an extremely broad category and includes many strains, some of which aren't even human influenzas.

It's a bit like being worried about housecats because lions are known to eat people. They may both be cats, but they're not the same species.

Edit: Oh sorry, someone already mentioned this and explained it better than I did. Never mind.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2011, 05:25:52 AM by Caehlim »

Offline LustfulLord2011

Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #148 on: October 13, 2011, 07:52:07 AM »
I think part of what made H1N1 so scary for some people is the fact that most common strains of influenza are only really life threatening to people whose health is compromised in other ways (concurrent illness, age, etc). H1N1 was not very scary in terms of total deaths compared to many diseases, but it was killing even people in their prime, who were otherwise in perfect health. Plus, all varieties of influenza spread rather easily, and have incubation periods long enough that it's possible to infect many other people before one even knows they are sick. That said, H1N1, and influenza in general, are of comparatively small concern these days. Wait and see what happens the first time someone contracts something REALLY lethal, that spreads that easily.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: What has happened to us?
« Reply #149 on: October 13, 2011, 08:25:21 AM »
I think part of what made H1N1 so scary for some people is the fact that most common strains of influenza are only really life threatening to people whose health is compromised in other ways (concurrent illness, age, etc). H1N1 was not very scary in terms of total deaths compared to many diseases, but it was killing even people in their prime, who were otherwise in perfect health. Plus, all varieties of influenza spread rather easily, and have incubation periods long enough that it's possible to infect many other people before one even knows they are sick. That said, H1N1, and influenza in general, are of comparatively small concern these days. Wait and see what happens the first time someone contracts something REALLY lethal, that spreads that easily.

Yes - and the symptoms of a benign flu aren't really that different from the symptoms of a 'killer' flu during those early stages.  We actually did have a bit of a panic a while back with Ebola - there was a research facility in Reston, VA where the transmission route not only went from 'contact with body fluids' to 'airborne', and it jumped the species gap.  Thankfully, that particular strain was only lethal in monkeys, and didn't produce symptoms in humans.