Haha. Eradication also reduces hospital loading so it’s still not about case counts. That’s not the point of eradication, it’s just a byproduct.
I also wanted eradication, but obviously not possible in this country in retrospect. To me it seems that history has shown eradication is clearly better than the alternative economically, societally, etc. But it is not possible in our country. It’s partly about leadership but human behavior also basically makes it impossible without draconian restrictions. Once you get to zero it’s much much less restrictive than our current state though (that’s the huge advantage).
Early on the Chinese were trying to quietly eradicate it while publicly playing hide-the-ball. There are stories of two different Chinese business people coming to the US in 2019, getting sick, and Chinese people in hazmat suits taking them home. They knew there was a serious disease on the loose, but didn't tell anyone else until near the end of the year.
SARS was eradicated because aggressive measures kept it contained and it burned itself out like a contained wildfire. COVID had the added advantage of being able to spread asymptotically. People who didn't get ill or only got mildly ill were it's greatest ally. SARS never really had that.
When I saw this could spread asymptotically and had an incubation period as long as 14 days, I knew we were in trouble.
Ever since this broke out of Wuhan stopping it completely was going to be virtually impossible. The only chance we had was if we came up with a vaccine that was 100% effective or very close to it forever like we have with some other diseases like measles, polio, small pox, etc. And having it would give you similar permanent immunity.
But this virus has continued to mutate and immunity does not last forever. I've had it twice now (Feb 2020 and Dec 2021). Both times mild fortunately, but there does seem to be some long term damage to my breathing.
I expect that going forward we're going to see yearly outbreaks worldwide. In places like the United States the outbreaks will tend to track "indoor" season in a given region. That means a summer outbreak in the South and Winter in the North. We are developing new drugs to fight infections when they happen. We may eventually have something like Teraflu to take at the first signs of symptoms which will keep most people from developing a serious case. But going forward COVID season will always be worse than cold and flu season ever was. Unfortunately those with other health risks will be more likely to end up in the hospital and many will die every year. If you have underlying health problems, your life expectancy has been cut.
People with historically strong immune systems and no underlying health problems will probably live as long as they would have pre-COVID. Hopefully there will be a push develop to deal with lifestyle illnesses. Bill Maher has been talking about that since this pandemic began, but few others have taken up the cause.
At this point COVID is here to stay. Omicron may mutate into an even less deadly form, but it's unlikely we're going to get a variant that is less virulent. Omicron may have an R number greater than measles. If not, it's probably pretty close. That is what makes this a more dangerous endemic threat than cold and flu. But we have to make due with where we are. We can't go back and change things.
Governments around the world handled this differently. Some did amazingly bad, and others quite well, but in the end it wasn't the developed world governments that allowed this to become what it did. Omicron came out of Africa. It probably mutated into its final form in undeveloped areas where any kind of healthcare is provided by international charities. The governments in those countries are struggling just to keep people fed. There was never any hope that those governments could have done anything to curb the virus. It was as beyond them as the governments of Europe were able to control the Black Death.
I notice that scale starts at 'normal' and goes to various degrees of overweight. (No country ranks as 'underweight?')
The countries I see in the 'normal' category I associate with food scarcity.
It is scary to think that we need malnourished people to bring the overall curve more into a 'normal' range for those countries.
So what they are saying is that "starvation diet" should be 'normal'? Most of the world eats too much?
Which country is 'healthier', Haiti or Dominican Republic?
View attachment 753095
Haiti and Dominican Republic living comparison. Explore similarities and differences. The Taino - indigenous inhabitants of Hispaniola prior to the arrival of the Europeans - divided the island into five chiefdoms and territories. Christopher COLUMBUS explored and claimed the island on his...
www.mylifeelsewhere.com
"In Dominican Republic you will be 21.6% more likely to be obese"
This is curious:
Haiti is 1368 days behind the Dominican Republic in terms of the number of coronavirus cases per 100,000 people: 336 vs 6497. The Dominican Republic - 675,890 and Haiti - 34,667... See the table of by date comparison...
georank.org
It seems to show D.R. case counts much higher than Haiti.
But I would guess that could be due to lack of available testing in Haiti?
It shows 2.9% death rate in Haiti vs 0.96% in D.R.
Interesting place to compare given an Island split in half with very different demographics on either side.
High calorie national diets are a new phenomenon. I'm not sure where it is now, but I once had a book of historical maps that showed on one page the average caloric intake for each European country on the eve of WW II. Only one country had an intake we would consider "normal" today ~ 1800 calories. That was the Netherlands. Some countries like Poland were around 800 calories a day.
At the same time Americans enjoyed a diet on par with the Dutch. Even during colonial times the life expectancy in the American colonies was better than just about any country in Europe because food was more abundant. Even at that food got scarce in colder climates in the winter. Those dandelions in your lawn are a legacy of our early ancestors to North America. They are not native too North America, but were brought over from Europe to give a late winter food source for settlers. It was the first edible plant to be able to grow and mature as the ground defrosted, so it was planted everywhere settlers went.
I read somewhere years ago that when hit with the same life threatening disease, people with a BMI between 25 and 28 had the best chances of survival. They had a little extra padding to burn while fighting off the disease while not having so much that it made it more difficult to fight the disease. People with BMIs over 28 had much poorer outcomes than people with BMI's below 25.
Food insecurity is a problem humans have lived with since we first started walking upright. It's only been solved for a slice of the population in the last hundred years. We're hard wired to hoard calories when they are available. Some people seem to lack the instinct to hoard calories or somehow curb it, but most people have it. By middle age most adults in countries with abundant food are either overweight or taking measures to try and prevent being overweight. We're fighting a strong instinct that has been good for survival for most of our existence.
There is a book called A Utopia for Realists that looks at the history of utopias in literature and talks about our ideas going forward. The author points out that virtually all the utopias of the past paint a picture of the modern world where we have more than enough food to eat and are surrounded by devices that do the heavy labor for us.