Natures way of culling the population

[ExD1938]

Am I being unreasonable to be shocked by a neighbour's remark that this pandemic is natures was of reducing the overpopulation of the planet?
I was gobsmacked at first, then I began to wonder ................?. .

Our ability to be an omnivore often comes back to bite us on the bottom.

But it's also pulled us through to get to here ?

High population + mobile population = high number people infected with any disease that arises.

Cause and effect.

Not a value judgement.

Btw, we as a species might not have had so many deaths if all world leaders were more like this:

edition.cnn.com/2020/04/14/asia/women-government-leaders-coronavirus-hnk-intl/index.html

Perhaps this is nature's way of telling us it's time to dismantle the patriarchy.

@alloutoffucks

I think it is the choice or variations on those two, we cannot continue Lockdown, we don't have a vaccine or treatment, so sooner rather than later, once we have mass testing in place & HC systems can manage further outbreaks, that decision will have to be made.

Yes your right, i don't want to die but neither do i want my DD to live in some sort dystopian world, where is no economy and we are allowed out for an hour a day for fear of being reported for breaking the "rules"

The death toll isn’t that big, seriously. Most countries will barely notice a spike

I saw some figures yesterday which showed that the figures did represent a spike in death rates. The rates for non CV related deaths are higher than usual, the theory is that people aren’t accessing hospital quickly enough.

How stupid.

Totally based on the idea that nature has a plan. (It doesn’t)

Nature just does it thing. Viruses develop and spread all the time. Some of them have a higher death rate than others. That is literally it. There is no scheme or plot or conspiracy. Not by trump, not by China, not by the inventors of 5G and not by nature. Be less ridiculous.

@DGRossetti totally agree.

We humans have many such double edged swords. It has made us fantastically versatile - we spread out to inhabit many varied environments the fact we can eat everything from spiders to blubber, as well as coconuts and potatoes. No we just have to use our big brains to get us out of the mess we sometimes get ourselves into by stacking ferrets and chickens in the same environs. Or bats and pangolins.

Just a bit of good old Malthusian theory.

I saw some figures yesterday which showed that the figures did represent a spike in death rates. The rates for non CV related deaths are higher than usual, the theory is that people aren’t accessing hospital quickly enough.

On a week-by-week basis they're significant, but they won't be on yearly basis.

It may well be that there's a borrowing effect, where this week or last week or next has claimed some deaths from later this year.

@ChandlerIsTheBestFriend
That's true up to a point but how "successful" viruses are also depends on us and how we behave. Destroying natural habitats leads to animals living in closer contact with humans...which leads to the greater spread of viruses to humans...which are then spread further and wider in heavily-populated areas. So yes, you could say that it is nature's way of culling the population. HOWEVER, this doesn't mean that anyone is happy about it or wants to see it happen. It seems on this thread that some people are trying to see a link between accepting that human behaviour influences a pandemic (true) and believing that this means some people deserve to die (not true!)

Honestly isn't this just a stupid small-talk phrase for people to fill in the awkward silence with? Bit like talking about the weather or plans for the weekend.

I mean, it's just a clunky way of saying "the virus is natural and these things occur in nature". Well duh. Thanks for the wisdom.

It seems on this thread that some people are trying to see a link between accepting that human behaviour influences a pandemic (true) and believing that this means some people deserve to die (not true!)

Exactly. And not just on this thread either.
It's also linked to the vilification of those who understand that the economy is important. We don't think that money is more important than lives. We just know that poverty also kills.

MarginalGain, there may be some of that. But then there will be the NHS staff and other carers who might have gone on to live another 50 years if they had not been bombarded with high doses of this particular virus. There will be the cancer patients who might have been fully restored to health if their cancer had been detected in time.

How do we know that they won't be on a yearly basis? Not everybody who dies is so elderly or frail that they would necessarily have died this year or even the next.

Noone has mentioned the cost to the economy if large parts of the population are incapacitated with the longterm effects of the illness, such as lung damage.

I'm not a 100% it was nature's way...... We humans do like growth and greed though so at some point, something has to give however unpleasant it is.

Exactly. And not just on this thread either.It's also linked to the vilification of those who understand that the economy is important. We don't think that money is more important than lives. We just know that poverty also kills

The taxes those working pay also fund the nhs. We cant pretend people wont die if we dont at some point so long return to work.

I agree, I think in a simplistic way it is.

Look how nature recovered in days without the pollution. New and never seen birds in my garden, baby rabbits in DDs hospital campus, clear clear blue skies.

I hope as many as possible people come out safe, and i hope we review the way the planet is treated.

In my simplistic view of course and I make no apologies.

Our ability to be an omnivore often comes back to bite us on the bottom.

But it's also pulled us through to get to here ?
Exactly DGR. Also we are omnivores. It's not an ability. How did the Inuit people survive?

Yeah I've heard several say this too and it's possibly true. Science doesn't have feelings I'm afraid

Destroying natural habitats leads to animals living in closer contact with humans...which leads to the greater spread of viruses to humans...which are then spread further and wider in heavily-populated areas. So yes, you could say that it is nature's way of culling the population.

No that’s not nature’s way of culling the population. It’s the natural consequences of moving lots of hosts closer together meaning viruses spread faster and to more people than it would otherwise.

And many of them on this thread and elsewhere are positively revelling in getting rid of those pesky pensioners.

I disagree. I think people are discussing scientific fact and reality, and others can’t separate their emotions.

"Nature's way of..." is an odd phrase because it implies nature acts deliberately. Which it obviously doesn't.

Nature's way of..." is an odd phrase because it implies nature acts deliberately. Which it obviously doesn't.

This^

It probably does seem like that op. Although I expect there will be a baby boom after this as well.

Isn't another way of current thinking that the virus jumped from animals to humans as a result of the eating habits of certain humans?

So not a cull at all but an accident caused by a certain type of eating?

As to the number of people it will kill worldwide, at the moment it is probably not significant- but only when/if it's over will we know.