The pattern for this outbreak as well as the 1918 outbreak has been the healthy people in their prime where the most likely to die. the healthier the person the better chance of the cytokine storm which kills them.

Of course having another condition that combines with H1N1 can easily kill anyone but this is the first time I have heard of being obese as a contributing factor.

Originally posted by xelamental

The thing is, while it's not "PC", we ARE selecting for the weak at the moment. At no other point in history has life been so easy for such large numbers of people with inferior natural survival ability.

While I agree to a certain degree, the problem I have with that type of thinking is looking at fellow human beings as "weak" or "inferior" or "unnecessary". Stephen Hawking is not a very good physical specimen either but life isn't just about "survival".

It's not "eugenic" to say this, it's a fact. Medical science + oil + food availability means that we save the weak and their genes can now replicate.

Are you suggesting that the herd be "culled"? I foresee a dark day in the NWO when all the weak and "useless eaters" have been removed from the gene pool. In that day those that remain will look around and find some other group unworthy of life. Maybe those whose biceps are freakishly large since that trait won't be needed in a technological utopia. We are not cows or dogs to be bred for service. Dogs have been selectively bred to the point of developing physical problems that the original stock did not have.

If you put bacteria in a closed system, something always happens to drastically alter population once it reaches a certain level. Why don't you think this will happen to us, and why don't you think the weak will go first?

Human beings are not bacteria. The universe is not a closed system and we have plenty of room and resources left. And the reason I don't think all the weak will go first is because children are innately weak and people still protect their children with their own physically superior survivable lives if needed.

Its pure logic, nothing sinister about it.

Didn't you learn anything from Spock? Pure logic is soulless, without beauty and ultimately self-defeating.

Originally posted by whitewave
Originally posted by xelamental

The thing is, while it's not "PC", we ARE selecting for the weak at the moment. At no other point in history has life been so easy for such large numbers of people with inferior natural survival ability.

While I agree to a certain degree, the problem I have with that type of thinking is looking at fellow human beings as "weak" or "inferior" or "unnecessary". Stephen Hawking is not a very good physical specimen either but life isn't just about "survival".

And 100 years ago he would already be dead.

It's not "eugenic" to say this, it's a fact. Medical science + oil + food availability means that we save the weak and their genes can now replicate.

Are you suggesting that the herd be "culled"? I foresee a dark day in the NWO when all the weak and "useless eaters" have been removed from the gene pool. In that day those that remain will look around and find some other group unworthy of life. Maybe those whose biceps are freakishly large since that trait won't be needed in a technological utopia. We are not cows or dogs to be bred for service. Dogs have been selectively bred to the point of developing physical problems that the original stock did not have.

No. I am saying that we are selecting for genetics that at no other point in history would have been selected for. Imagine if you bred retarded dogs, dogs that can't look after themselves, dogs that ate themselves to early death, and dogs that are left by their mothers in natural situations. What would happen to the population once those genes become disseminated?

If you put bacteria in a closed system, something always happens to drastically alter population once it reaches a certain level. Why don't you think this will happen to us, and why don't you think the weak will go first?

Human beings are not bacteria. The universe is not a closed system

No we aren't, but this happens with animal populations as well.
Earth is not a closed system. But, I think you will find that it will ACT as if it is one simply because we do have a finite rate of resource renewal, which we are completely ignoring.

and we have plenty of room and resources left.

Umm... read the news much?

And the reason I don't think all the weak will go first is because children are innately weak and people still protect their children with their own physically superior survivable lives if needed.

And what will happen to those groups that protect the genetically "weak" over time? They will become worse for it, and less likely to survive in the long term.

Its pure logic, nothing sinister about it.

Didn't you learn anything from Spock? Pure logic is soulless, without beauty and ultimately self-defeating.

I don't believe movies hold the answer to life, good as they may be