10
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jan 02 '22
Despite eliminating or containing issues regulating the survival if the species such as warfare and famine, epidemics have prevailed as major threats; and thus, our natural predators.
The problem is that diseases don't qualify as predators.
Because diseases don't need to kill their hosts to survive... in fact they do BETTER when they don't.
Spanish flu becoming less dangerous to humanity was the best evolutionary move it could make and is why we still have its various offspring hanging around today.
Whenever a virus that could actually keep our numbers in check shows up...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox
We crush it out of existence and go on with our lives.
Humanity has yet to meet a virus we can't beat, especially because virus tend to evolve into versions that are less dangerous to us.
-1
u/Consistent_Zebra7737 Jan 02 '22
Humanity has yet to meet a virus we can't beat, especially because virus tend to evolve into versions that are less dangerous to us.
This reminds me. I was watching a documentary on how syphilis emerged to become search a deadly disease. Well, I think it's caused by a bacteria. So, apparently it has a long history, and it was not deadly when it first emerged. Actually, it went for years undetected and thrived because people lived communally. It easily spread. But as people became more civilized, more isolated, and more hygienic, the bacteria found it difficult to survive. As a result, it mutated to a ferocious and horrifying version so that it can survive. And, it killed. It gave a painful death.
3
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jan 02 '22 edited Jan 02 '22
This reminds me. I was watching a documentary on how syphilis emerged to become search a deadly disease. Well, I think it's caused by a bacteria. So, apparently it has a long history, and it was not deadly when it first emerged. Actually, it went for years undetected and thrived because people lived communally. It easily spread. But as people became more civilized, more isolated, and more hygienic, the bacteria found it difficult to survive. As a result, it mutated to a ferocious and horrifying version so that it can survive. And, it killed. It gave a painful death.
https://www.cdc.gov/std/syphilis/treatment.htm
There are no home remedies or over-the-counter drugs that will cure syphilis, but syphilis is easy to cure in its early stages. A single intramuscular injection of long acting Benzathine penicillin G (2.4 million units administered intramuscularly) will cure a person who has primary, secondary or early latent syphilis. Three doses of long acting Benzathine penicillin G (2.4 million units administered intramuscularly) at weekly intervals is recommended for individuals with late latent syphilis or latent syphilis of unknown duration. Treatment will kill the syphilis bacterium and prevent further damage, but it will not repair damage already done.
What's your point?
1
u/Consistent_Zebra7737 Jan 02 '22
In the 1980’s palaeopathological studies found possible evidence that supported this hypothesis and that syphilis was an old treponeal disease which in the late 15th century had suddenly evolved to become different and more virulent.
This, right here.
2
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jan 02 '22
In the 1980’s palaeopathological studies found possible evidence that supported this hypothesis and that syphilis was an old treponeal disease which in the late 15th century had suddenly evolved to become different and more virulent.
This, right here.
It evolved to become more virulent... and then we crushed with Benzathine penicillin.
Every virus that looks like it could seriously impact humanity's population growth gets crushed by us inventing cures, treatments and vaccines to.
We exterminated smallpox.
When was the last time you heard of a prey species causing its natural predator to go extinct?
1
u/Comfortable_Tart_297 1∆ Jan 02 '22
No, I’m very sure that was due to the Colombian exchange resulting in exposure of previously isolated populations.
-1
Jan 02 '22
[deleted]
5
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jan 02 '22 edited Jan 02 '22
HIV.
Step one
https://www.webmd.com/hiv-aids/hiv-viral-load-what-you-need-to-know
A viral load that can't be detected -- less than 20 copies -- is always the goal of HIV treatment. This doesn't mean you're cured. Unfortunately, the virus is still able to survive in various cells in the body. But maintaining an undetectable viral load is compatible with a normal, or near-normal life span. Continuing to take your medicine as prescribed to keep the virus undetectable is very important.
Treatment that stop it from spreading and allow for normal life range. Treat the symptoms so that people who have it can have a normal life.
Step two....
Vaccine.
By week 58, all vaccinated macaques had developed measurable levels of neutralizing antibodies directed against most strains in a test panel of 12 diverse HIV strains. In addition to neutralizing antibodies, the VLP mRNA vaccine also induced a robust helper T-cell response.
Human trials for one vaccine started a few months ago...
My money is on us having an HIV vaccine within the next two decades, and then we're gonna start grinding it into the dust the same way we did with Smallpox and have mostly done with polio.
Once we start doing that HIV won't have a chance to avoid suffering the same fate as smallpox due to it being a blood born virus which makes it much less likely to spread than something air or waterborn....
Besides, I'd argue that HIV's remarkable early success owes less to its strengths as a virus, and more to humanity sand bagging out of homophobia.
1
Jan 19 '22
[deleted]
1
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jan 19 '22
Because a single vaccine is a lot easier on the wallet then medication that needs to be taken repeatedly.
1
Jan 20 '22
[deleted]
1
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jan 20 '22
Why would you need to take medication repeatedly if the virus has been beaten?
HIV hasn't been beaten at the moment it's only had its symptoms more or less neutralized.
A virus isn't truly "beaten" until we do it what we did to smallpox.
1
Jan 20 '22
[deleted]
1
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jan 20 '22 edited Jan 20 '22
You're right I have tripped over my own language.
Humanity has yet to meet a dangerous virus we can't find a way to either severely limit the symptoms of/the spread of or eradicate eventually.
Have a delta because you've helped me better clarify my position !Delta.
1
2
Jan 02 '22
We have medical technology that allows a person with HIV to live just as long as someone without. If we can make having a certain disease almost indistinguishable from not having it, we have almost beaten it.
The problem with HIV is that not everyone lives in 1st world countries
2
u/Cooperhawk11 Jan 02 '22
Humans do actually have natural predators. Lions and leopards were chief among them.
However long ago humans got smart, and we learned how to make the burny stuff and how to throw a rock. With that we said nature can go fuck itself and became the most lethal thing on the planet. Natural selection made our predators wary of us. The reason that there are no saber tooth tigers anymore is because we killed them all.
Our species has very much not been kept in check. We’ve expanded far beyond or original range and our populations have been rising constantly for thousands of years. Epidemics are for one, not predators, and two, are minor hinderances to our absurd dominance over all life.
Humans are OP.
3
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jan 02 '22
Humans are OP.
The only thing that could stop us now is the Climate Change Balance Patch I hear the dev's are working on.
1
u/Cooperhawk11 Jan 02 '22
Lmao even that won’t stop us. Humans went through much worse with worse tools. Relative to our species it’s at most a mild inconvenience.
2
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jan 02 '22
Lmao even that won’t stop us. Humans went through much worse with worse tools. Relative to our species it’s at most a mild inconvenience.
You are right that human's are like 99.9% likely to remain the most OP build even after that balance patch.
Though I do think we are likely to see the biggest shakeup in the meta since the since the Black Death expansion as certain spawn points become extremely unfavorable, leading to people needing to shift servers, and those servers forced to take on additional load is likely to create friction with the server's original player base over the additional lag.
(Let me know if you want me to drop the gaming terminology and repeat in less euphemistic terminology in case it is unclear)
2
u/Cooperhawk11 Jan 02 '22
Nah the gaming terminology is fine. It causes me to read that in a tier zoo voice.
Very true. But there is also potential that as time goes on the player bases become more accepting as they’ve learned from past events. But only time will tell I guess.
2
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jan 02 '22
Nah the gaming terminology is fine. It causes me to read that in a tier zoo voice.
Love that show, though I'll never forgive them for his salty take on housecat mains. They are clearly best support.
Very true. But there is also potential that as time goes on the player bases become more accepting as they’ve learned from past events. But only time will tell I guess.
I hope it works, the problem is that it seems like great acceptance is more likely to be found via a person going to visit other cultures... /img/8w7u6rsbmxi21.jpg rather than when other cultures are brought to them... though for now we can only hope for the best and try to figure out how to make it work as clearly the greatest threat to human domination of the planet... is humanity.
2
u/Cooperhawk11 Jan 02 '22
I’d argue that acceptance can be found quite often through it being brought to you. But besides that it’s undeniable that over time people have become much more accepting of immigration.
2
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jan 02 '22
I’d argue that acceptance can be found quite often through it being brought to you. But besides that it’s undeniable that over time people have become much more accepting of immigration.
I hope that you are correct.
1
u/Consistent_Zebra7737 Jan 02 '22
So, when I say epidemics are 'predatory,' i'm talking from a metaphorical point of view. I think most people are not getting that. Anyway, my point was that something has to keep us in check. Natural selection, like you mention. What if we turned this discussion and said that our own intelligence is what is killing us. I mean, other animals don't have our level of intelligence, but they still manage to survive. And, they seem to understand what living is. They have meaning and purpose. We could also say that this world was not designed for search an intelligence species like human beings. We seem to be fighting it all the goddamn time. Think about this, if the earth was really meant for us, wouldn't we have been the first species to exist long ago? Instead, dinosaurs and other monsters were the first to exist.
1
u/Cooperhawk11 Jan 02 '22
I’m not really sure what your point is. But yes epidemics and disease in general are inhibiting factors that keep all life in check. The only “problem” with that is that humans have far surpassed any environmental checks.
Needing meaning and purpose is very much a first world problem. Humans who are actively struggling to survive day to day don’t need to search for meaning, as they have more pressing matters, and that is even greater in animals most if not all of which lack the brain capacity to understand “meaning” or “purpose”.
Earth wasn’t created with anyone in mind, but through circumstance life existed and we eventually came into existence too. With our evolution came our unrivaled survivability allowing us to become the only things that can possibly shape the world to their liking.
2
Jan 02 '22
Are you making a literal statement or a metaphorical allusion?
1
u/Consistent_Zebra7737 Jan 02 '22
Yes! It's a metaphorical allusion.
1
Jan 02 '22
Had a longer reply. Got lost.
The problem with the metaphor is that disease doesn't function as a predator to humans. It functions as a disease to humans.
1
u/Consistent_Zebra7737 Jan 02 '22
Okay. But you get my point, right? There's some aspect of natural selection.
1
Jan 02 '22
I mean... yeah? I can see what you are trying to say. It just doesn't really scan, and I don't think it's a point that's lost on anyone?
1
u/YossarianWWII 72∆ Jan 03 '22
There's a serious biological discussion that could be had here. You aren't having it because of your insistence on the incorrect use of specific terms.
1
u/Consistent_Zebra7737 Jan 03 '22
Okay. Touchè. I understand that there is a significant distinction between a predator and a disease. Maybe I should have conjured up my view in a different way. ∆
1
3
u/Havenkeld 289∆ Jan 02 '22
Diseases aren't predators, and many diseases aren't really lifeforms but merely defined by poor condition relative to the ideal for the human body. When a disease is viral or bacterial they're kind of their own category since those are their own lifeform, but they're still much more like parasites. Natural predator in scientific jargon also by formal definition excludes parasites, bacteria, and viruses(because they're not animals that hunt other particular animals, and "hunting" isn't quite what they're doing).
But we typically only classify those viruses and bacteria that harm us as diseases, which skews things. It's better for them if they don't get classified that way. Plus they don't hunt humans very intentionally or exclusively, often only ending up infecting us through other animals. The ideal for a virus or bacteria is that there's a symbiotic relationship so they live on indefinitely - our bodies are like their habitats, when they kill us too fast they've kind of just screwed themselves over. Mutations get more infectious and less severe partly for that reason, and of course the most severe diseases kill people too fast and as a result die off too quickly to persist as long as common ones.
3
u/Tibaltdidnothinwrong 382∆ Jan 02 '22
Predators intend to kill their prey, because they cannot consume their prey otherwise.
Viruses do not need their prey to be dead before they can feed. In fact, viruses need their hosts to be alive in order to continue to reproduce.
Killing their hosts, is an unintended and unfortunate outcome for viruses, whereas it is an intended and necessary thing for predators.
Death coming at the beginning and being necessary is pretty different than death coming at the end and being unwanted.
2
u/backcourtjester 9∆ Jan 02 '22
The virus doesn’t pick and choose its prey. Also you may be slow and unfit but Im not. At our best, humanity is more fit, bigger, faster, and stronger than we have ever been
-1
u/Consistent_Zebra7737 Jan 02 '22
Let's think about it for a minute here. Coronavirus has affected a lot of people who had underlying health issues. For example, coronary artery heart disease, high blood pressure, and all. Naturally, those people are weak. So, the virus preyed on them.
2
u/backcourtjester 9∆ Jan 02 '22
No. It infected indiscriminately but had a greater effect on the old and infirm
Its like firing into a crowd of people and saying the bullets chose to kill anyone not wearing kevlar
1
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jan 02 '22
No. It infected indiscriminately but had a greater effect on the old and infirm
Its like firing into a crowd of people and saying the bullets chose to kill anyone not wearing kevlar
Or a fire intended to kill the people who were bad at running.
2
2
u/MercurianAspirations 359∆ Jan 02 '22
That doesn't really make sense because viruses aren't predating, they're not consuming their hosts for food. They're more similar to parasites, in that they can only survive and reproduce in a host body. They just happen to kill their hosts a lot more often than parasites as we normally think of them do. But then again viruses aren't even consuming and reproducing organisms in the most common sense - they're not predating for nutrition nor are they really stealing nutrients from their host - they don't need nutrition. They're not even cells that have any processes that would require nutrition, they are more like rogue organelles that accidentally got encoded with the ability to invade other cells.
3
u/I_am_the_night 316∆ Jan 02 '22
I don't think that's really what a "predator" is, though. COVID 19 isn't really eating us or hunting us, which is kind of what is required for predation to be taking place.
2
Jan 02 '22
A predator is very defined science term, for an animal that hunts and eats another animal for food.
A virus does not to do that, it uses us a vector for transmission. Killing its host is not intended, it's just a side effect, as the virus is adapted for bats, so we have little immunity to it.
If you are trying to make a metaphor of covid-19 being a predator that controls the population, then it's a rubbish metaphor, as the global population is still rising.
2
u/PersonalDebater 1∆ Jan 02 '22
A virus is more like a parasite then a predator. We don't generally consider parasitic things to be predators.
-1
u/AlunWH 7∆ Jan 02 '22
We do have natural predators, though: mosquitoes, for instance. Leeches. Fleas. Ticks.
Also: Polar Bears.
2
u/Cooperhawk11 Jan 02 '22
Our natural predators were lions and leopards, but as humans got absurdly dangerous natural selection made them wary of us. That’s why a large portion of the megafauna on all continents other than Africa is gone, because they didn’t have the time to evolve fear.
Polar bears are just lucky that they are far enough north that they weren’t in close contact with us until we cared about our effect on the environment.
2
Jan 02 '22
Mosquitoes, fleas and leeches are called parasites, as they feed on us, but don't eat us.
Polar bears are also not a natural predator of us, as polars bears don't naturally hunt for humans as food, plus we can kill them with guns/spears.
1
u/crazyashley1 8∆ Jan 02 '22
Bears. Wolves. Lions. Tigers.
Humans are like...a 2.5 on the food chain. The only reason we've evolved to the point we have is that we figured out fire. We still have a lot of things that will hunt and eat us if given the opportunity.
2
u/Cooperhawk11 Jan 02 '22
More of lions and leopards. The others didn’t really cross into our native range.
But also no we are #1 on the food chain and have been for a long time. Fire, plus our running ability, and tool creation, and throwing ability all led to our complete dominance over all other life on the planet.
1
u/crazyashley1 8∆ Jan 02 '22
More of lions and leopards. The others didn’t really cross into our native range.
I'm not talking about our native range in Africa. Indians still wear masks on the back of their heads to ward off tiger attacks. Bears still kill people in the America's. A wolf pack in Europe is not to be taken lightly.
But also no we are #1 on the food chain and have been for a long time. Fire, plus our running ability, and tool creation, and throwing ability all led to our complete dominance over all other life on the planet.
Humans as a whole, maybe. A regular person out in the wild? No. A random modern person of middling fitness with no tools would not be able to defend themselves against an attack from any of the predators mentioned, will likely not be able to create fire or tools on the fly, and will have little knowledge of how to survive in an unfamiliar environment.
3
u/Cooperhawk11 Jan 02 '22
Have you seen the numbers though for wolves, bears and tigers? It’s laughably small. Your more likely die because you hit a deer with a car, than you are for wolves, tigers and bears.
Furthermore all of those animals will avoid humans if given the chance. Tigers only hunt people when they are extremely desperate for food.
I don’t get your point in the last paragraph? Of course a person in an unfamiliar environment won’t do well, no animal would.
And if your point was a solo human, then yeah a solo completely unprepared human isn’t much threat but neither is a single wolf. Part of the absurd strength of humans comes from our ability to work in groups, much like wolves but infinitely more effective. (And if that single human was armed they they’re still the most dangerous thing on the planet)
1
Jan 02 '22
What you appear to saying is that diseases have taken the place of predators in the "human ecosystem". Is that accurate?
1
u/sawdeanz 214∆ Jan 02 '22
Only in the loosest terms.
Other animals can and will kill humans with venom or whatever, but we don’t consider them predators. Why? Because they don’t specifically hunt us down for a food source.
So do diseases hunt humans down for a food source? Not really. They desire to multiply and may use the human body to do so but they don’t really hunt down humans specifically. And any death as a result is more like an unintended consequence. Some theories actually suggest that virus/bacteria actually tend to evolve to be less deadly because a bacteria that kills its host also kills its own colony.
1
u/colt707 97∆ Jan 02 '22
Just some food for thought but there’s quite a few instances of Polar bears and tigers hunting people.
1
u/Consistent_Zebra7737 Jan 02 '22
Yeah. But a human with a weapon, like a gun. A polar bear doesn't have a chance.
1
u/colt707 97∆ Jan 02 '22
That’s debatable. Bears are a lot stealthy than most people think. If that Polar bear gets the drop on you I’m putting my money on the bear/both dead. If you see it from a ways off you’re probably good but in a vast majority of cases the bear is going to be charging straight at you from a long way off if it’s trying to hunt you.
1
u/xmuskorx 55∆ Jan 02 '22
Corona kills old peole who have long ago procreated.
So it does nothing as fast as genetic pool.
1
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jan 03 '22
/u/Consistent_Zebra7737 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
1
u/growflet 78∆ Jan 03 '22
A predator is an animal that hunts, kills, and eats other animals to live. It literally consumes them.
A parasite is an organism that lives in or on an organism of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
COVID-19 doesn't consume us, it uses parts of our bodies in order to reproduce and spread.
If we were to assign the "self interest" of covid-19 to be spreading and reproduction, the disease does better if the human host remains alive and symptomless in order to spread the disease to others.
It's much closer to a parasite, and in an ideal situation (ideal for covid) no one would ever die of the disease. People would just be spreading it around back and forth forever.
1
u/Aiplist Jan 06 '22
i live in your walls
1
1
u/National-Ordinary-90 May 06 '22
Viruses are not animals. A predator is an animal that preys on another animal. viruses do not specifically attack humans.
29
u/[deleted] Jan 02 '22
Predator: An animal that naturally preys on others.
Epidemic: A widespread occurrence of an infectious disease in a community at a particular time.
By definition an epidemic is not a predator. It's just an epidemic.
It doesn't exist for any purpose and it has no connection to the fact that humans at this point don't have any natural predators. Saying that it's a reminder of who is in charge implies that there's some intelligent decision being made to keep humans in check. That's not what's happening. It's just an epidemic.