I know exactly what I read

”Never ceases to amaze me how those that talk of 'over-population' never really include their own existence in that.”

I repeat my comment.  Feel free to respond without avoiding the point.

Originally Posted by: Gandalf The White 

Never ceases to amaze me how those that talk of 'over-population' never really include their own existence in that. 

Originally Posted by: Chunky Pea 

Isn't that the point MM was making?  We have loaded the dice to ensure we are perpetual winners.  I know we disagree but that cannot continue indefinitely.

Originally Posted by: Gandalf The White 

But within rich countries, the poor still have more children - its mostly to do with levels of female education and empowerment. 

Originally Posted by: The Beast from the East 

When I get old and unable to look after myself, I would be more than happy to be euthanised or I will take myself out rather than have some stranger wipe my arse in a care home

Over population issues tend to resolve themselves naturally. In the case of Sao Paolo in the Packham documentary, they are running out of water, and in other cases, illness and ethnic violence will also keep the human population under control

Originally Posted by: The Beast from the East 

When I get old and unable to look after myself, I would be more than happy to be euthanised or I will take myself out rather than have some stranger wipe my arse in a care home

Over population issues tend to resolve themselves naturally. In the case of Sao Paolo in the Packham documentary, they are running out of water, and in other cases, illness and ethnic violence will also keep the human population under control

Originally Posted by: The Beast from the East 

 you are falling into MM's right wing trap of seeing human beings as nothing more than a sort of bacteria. 

Originally Posted by: Chunky Pea 

Humans are no different to any other animal. the difference is that our superior intelligence means we can directly impact and damage the planet. It also means we can create the technology that can reverse that damage, but that's a political choice

Originally Posted by: The Beast from the East 

Seems odd that in this day and age, we are more concerned about the health of the climate than we are with the health and well-being of humanity. What an utterly soulless world we have become. 

Originally Posted by: Chunky Pea 

There is a point here - we have disturbed the balance of nature by our ingenuity. The biggest problem we face is one of over population - too many people for nature to support. In the "good old days", nature kept a balance - fecundity versus pestilence and disease - human populations were largely held in balance for millennia as baby production and mortality more or less matched each other.

Our modern ability to identify causes of disease and to prevent disease, has upset the old balance. If humanity is to have a future where we can live long lives unmolested by viruses and bacteria, then we need to control the fecundity side of the equation by balancing baby production with deaths. In the advanced world, this has been more or less achieved, since wealthy people prefer to divert all their resources into raising one or two offspring, rather than in having a large litter. Unfortunately, for both cultural and economic reasons, poor countries produce an over supply of offspring, leading to all the issues of over population and attendant environmental calamity.

Nature will sort us out one way or another, if we don't remedy the problem ourselves. The key aims of foreign aid for example, should be education and family planning.

Originally Posted by: Maunder Minimum 

Anyway, a Scottish friend of mine has a wife whose family originates from China. To show solidarity with the situation over there but also recognising the Scottish culture, their having a party to celebrate both the Chinese New Year and Burns Night. They're calling it Chinese Burns Night.

I wasn't going to go, but they twisted my arm.

Originally Posted by: Saint Snow 

I fear that this is rapidly turning into the potential catastrophe that epidemiologists have long predicted if one of these animal viruses mutated in the 'right' way and made the jump to humans. 

Originally Posted by: Gandalf The White 

It depends on the definition I guess, but so far there is little evidence for the above. We are still far from a worst case scenario and this could well end being less bad than SARS. It does look like it will get worse though in the next few weeks.

A truly apocalyptic global pandemic would have some interesting consequences. Let's say it wipes out a third of the global population, it would help with global warming, immigration and the 'neoliberal' model. Something for both the populist right and populist left to unite for?  

Originally Posted by: xioni2 

What is your view on "end of life" options for the infirm, elderly, or yourself in particular?

Roger

Originally Posted by: Roger Parsons 

I wrote: "Yes - they* were spoilt for choice, NS - no wimpy antibiotics or bed blocking." [*People in Tudor times.]

I was indeed making a point, MM - but through irony. 

I put it to you that pandemics are an imprecise way of "capping" population. The riskier your own existence, the more likely you will have more offspring - it's playing the odds and preparing for your old age. "Culling by disease" simply means that humans will be selected for their ability to show or develop immunity. If the infecting agent loses virulence, that too will make it less effective. The crutch of antibiotics and antivirals may help survival short term, but longer term carries its own risks.

Re bed blocking - I am sure that most of us would want our older or infirm family members to have a decent, agreeable old age, but more importantly, when the time eventually comes for them to go that needs, if possible, to be decent and compassionate too. I'd wish that for everyone, and for myself.

Key questions are:

How many children is it reasonable to have?

[I have none. My parents had 2, grandparents 4, great grandparents 8 - there's your pattern.]

What is your view on "end of life" options for the infirm, elderly, or yourself in particular?

I've already written my own "Advance Decision". Have you? No time like the present.

Roger

Originally Posted by: Roger Parsons 

We have so much to look forward to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_persecutions_during_the_Black_Death

Originally Posted by: Ulric 

You are not making any point. Only looking for someone to gripe at.

.. by assuming that my assumption is wrong, without ever stating why... 

Originally Posted by: Chunky Pea 

Seems odd that in this day and age, we are more concerned about the health of the climate than we are with the health and well-being of humanity. What an utterly soulless world we have become. 

Originally Posted by: Chunky Pea 

Maybe you EE doesn't to stop and think a little more. This latest obfuscation is wrong on three points: pretty impressive even by your wayward standards.

1. I was making a point; if you missed it then it's your probelm


2. I wasn't having a gripe


3. I didn't say your assumption was wrong; I said you had no basis for making it.

You could always just go away and leave the adults to discuss this subject calmly instead of offering up your usual wayward contribution.

Originally Posted by: Gandalf The White 

That aside, if we don't address the climate issue then it will affect human health and well-being.  

Originally Posted by: Gandalf The White