ecosophia | Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 29

The semi-open posts I've hosted here on the Covid-19 narrative, the inadequately tested experimental drugs for it, and the whole cascading mess surrounding them have continued to field a very high number of comments -- to understate the matter considerably! -- so I'm opening yet another space for discussion. The rules are the same as before:

1. If you plan on parroting the party line of the medical industry and its paid shills, please go away. This is a place for people to talk openly, honestly, and freely about their concerns that the party line in question is dangerously flawed and that actions being pushed by the medical industry et al. are causing injury and death. It is not a place for you to dismiss those concerns. Anyone who wants to hear the official story and the arguments in favor of it can find those on hundreds of thousands of websites.

2. If you plan on insisting that the current situation is the result of a deliberate plot by some villainous group of people or other, please go away. There are tens of thousands of websites currently rehashing various conspiracy theories about the Covid-19 outbreak and the vaccines. This is not one of them. What we're exploring is the likelihood that what's going on is the product of the same arrogance, incompetence, and corruption that the medical industry and its tame politicians have displayed so abundantly in recent decades. That possibility deserves a space of its own for discussion, and that's what we're doing here.

3. If you plan on using rent-a-troll derailing or disruption tactics, please go away. I'm quite familiar with the standard tactics used by troll farms to disrupt online forums, and am ready, willing, and able -- and in fact quite eager -- to ban people permanently for engaging in them here. Oh, and I also lurk on other Covid-19 vaccine skeptic blogs, so I'm likely to notice when the same posts are showing up on more than one venue.

4. If you don't believe in treating people with common courtesy, please go away. I have, and enforce, a strict courtesy policy on my blogs and online forums, and this is no exception. The sort of schoolyard bullying that takes place on so many other internet forums will get you deleted and banned here. No, I don't care if you disagree with that: my journal, my rules.

With that said, as Canadian officials launch a campaign of reprisals against citizens who supported a peaceful protest against government policy, and the words "died suddenly" become the favorite media euphemism of our time, the floor is open for discussion.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

This is what I'm expecting, as well. That, and a mysterious increase in fertility issues among the upper class that we just have nooooooo explanation for, nope, doesn't make sense at all.

"The birth rate is down because highly developed countries always have their birth rate go down because they're smarter and more educated and have better access to contraceptives. The advanced state of today's economy is the reason why people are having less babies."

There's your "answer". :p

I'm not sure who you are quoting or if your post is intended to be tongue-in-cheek but FWIW the birth rate goes down very predictably in 'highly developed countries' because the conditions of life in those countries make having children a burden and an economic deficit. In societies where the primary locus of production is within the home or a 'master's' workshop women's productive work is not curtailed by having children and children start contributing to the domestic economy at any early age.
The downward trend in birthrates in the early phases of industrialization in England is well documented and it long pre-dates the ready availability of modern birth-control.

Oh, it *is* a well documented phenomenon. And it is also tongue in cheek, as any reduction in fertility caused by the events of the past couple years can be very easy handwaved away by a lot of folks by pointing that out.

Having children also becomes more deadly as industrialization occurs, so women are more likely to be unable or unwilling to have children.

Industrial people are weak and sick:

https://www.bowdoin.edu/news/2021/04/pregnancy-and-rickets-in-victorian-britain-a-dangerous-combination.html

Women in industrial societies are also more likely to be capable of leaving the house and supporting themselves with a job on their own, and so be able to get away from the deadly, emotionally demanding, often heartbreaking, and, frankly, occassionally tedious, task of having children if they didn't want to.

Birth for humans is very dangerous compared to other animals as we have deeper placental connections (except IIRC I think it was one species of bat, and horses had an even deeper placental connection) as well as our narrow upright pelvis; in most animals the placenta attached directly on the surface, so they don't risk bleeding out. In humans, the dance between the placental arteries and the mother's body is very finely tuned; too shallow connection and the fetus dies, too deep and the mother does (I saw a paper on equine placentas once titled "marvelous organ and lethal weapon", and as someone who had an abruption exactly like a horse... yeah.)

More developed societies also have hospitals and doctors, making childbirth far more deadly than even the baseline for humans:

http://www.methodquarterly.com/2014/11/handwashing/

Putting Birth: The Surprising History of How We Are Born in hotel rooms would produce better population control than the Pill, with less estrogen in the water supply!

Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 29

Re: Hyper lethal varient

Re: Hyper lethal varient

Re: declining birthrate

Re: declining birthrate

Re: declining birthrate