Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by Fnord666 on Monday May 18 2020, @10:08AM   Printer-friendly

COVID-19 Has Blown Away the Myth About 'First' and 'Third' World Competence:

One of the planet's – and Africa's – deepest prejudices is being demolished by the way countries handle COVID-19.

For as long as any of us remember, everyone "knew" that "First World" countries – in effect, Western Europe and North America – were much better at providing their citizens with a good life than the poor and incapable states of the "Third World". "First World" has become shorthand for competence, sophistication and the highest political and economic standards.

[...] So we should have expected the state-of-the-art health systems of the "First World", spurred on by their aware and empowered citizens, to handle COVID-19 with relative ease, leaving the rest of the planet to endure the horror of buckling health systems and mass graves.

We have seen precisely the opposite.

[...] [Britain and the US] have ignored the threat. When they were forced to act, they sent mixed signals to citizens which encouraged many to act in ways which spread the infection. Neither did anything like the testing needed to control the virus. Both failed to equip their hospitals and health workers with the equipment they needed, triggering many avoidable deaths.

The failure was political. The US is the only rich country with no national health system. An attempt by former president Barack Obama to extend affordable care was watered down by right-wing resistance, then further gutted by the current president and his party. Britain's much-loved National Health Service has been weakened by spending cuts. Both governments failed to fight the virus in time because they had other priorities.

And yet, in Britain, the government's popularity ratings are sky high and it is expected to win the next election comfortably. The US president is behind in the polls but the contest is close enough to make his re-election a real possibility. Can there be anything more typically "Third World" than citizens supporting a government whose actions cost thousands of lives?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday May 19 2020, @04:04AM (8 children)

    by Reziac (2489) on Tuesday May 19 2020, @04:04AM (#996166) Homepage
    --
    And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday May 19 2020, @01:05PM (7 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday May 19 2020, @01:05PM (#996309)

    If reality has shifted enough that the "first world" no longer acknowledges that our rates of Polio were MUCH higher than India, Africa and other nations from the time of FDR until the vaccine was developed, it's time to stop reading those sources altogether.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday May 19 2020, @01:52PM (6 children)

      by Reziac (2489) on Tuesday May 19 2020, @01:52PM (#996340) Homepage

      I'd like to see that as per-capita (during that period, the first world was vastly more populous than most of the third world. Did you know that as of 1900, the estimated population of all of Africa was only 10 million? and that was the high estimate.) I'd also like to know how you compare a nation with good communication and disease reporting... to one with poor or absent communication and no reporting.

      From a source in Pakistan, a few years back I learned that they average 50,000 new cases per year, and this continues even today. Do you really think it was any better before the vaccine?

      --
      And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday May 19 2020, @02:24PM (5 children)

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday May 19 2020, @02:24PM (#996352)

        The story I've always been taught:

        Polio reached epidemic proportions in the early 1900s in countries with relatively high standards of living, at a time when other diseases such as diphtheria, typhoid, and tuberculosis were declining. Indeed, many scientists think that advances in hygiene paradoxically led to an increased incidence of polio. The theory is that in the past, infants were exposed to polio, mainly through contaminated water supplies, at a very young age. Infants’ immune systems, aided by maternal antibodies still circulating in their blood, could quickly defeat poliovirus and then develop lasting immunity to it. However, better sanitary conditions meant that exposure to polio was delayed until later in life, on average, when a child had lost maternal protection and was also more vulnerable to the most severe form of the disease.

        https://www.historyofvaccines.org/timeline/polio [historyofvaccines.org]

        --
        🌻🌻 [google.com]
        • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday May 19 2020, @02:46PM (4 children)

          by Reziac (2489) on Tuesday May 19 2020, @02:46PM (#996360) Homepage

          I think it's more likely that 3rd world juvenile polio got rolled into general infant mortality, and that later cases often went undiagnosed, and no one really has any idea how many died of it.

          --
          And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
          • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday May 19 2020, @03:19PM (3 children)

            by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday May 19 2020, @03:19PM (#996373)

            I'm not implying that overall mortality is higher in the first world.

            What I'm wondering is whether or not baseline immunity for this relatively novel disease is higher in the "third" world? May not be for COVID, or it might, thus the question.

            I would bet that there are parts of Africa where the human population does have better immunity to ebola than the first world - just like Europeans had better immunity to small pox than Americans did in the 1600s.

            --
            🌻🌻 [google.com]
            • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday May 19 2020, @05:24PM (2 children)

              by Reziac (2489) on Tuesday May 19 2020, @05:24PM (#996418) Homepage

              Oh, there's probably all kinds of variation on that front. But with some diseases it makes no difference (eg. rabies). And with truly novel diseases, it can't make a difference, because there IS no baseline immunity. (Or do you refer to how much generic stimulation their immune systems get? in that case, first world farmers should be equally immune.)

              Native Americans mostly lived in what we'd call third-world squalor, yet they had no baseline immunity to smallpox, to them a novel virus. I'd guess most of the better European immunity was due less to historic smallpox exposure (remember many Europeans still died from it) as from living in close proximity to their cattle, and thereby frequent exposure to cowpox, which does produce some cross-immunity with smallpox.

              It does occur to me to wonder if dogs, while readily infected by CV19, are generally asymptomatic because of cross-protection from the ubiquitous canine coronavirus. Nearly all dogs older than six weeks have immunity to canine CV, either through early exposure or vaccination. (Canine CV is not a serious disease, and is only a concern when there's inadequately-good parvovirus vaccination, because CV knocks down the immune system and serves as a gateway for parvo.)

              --
              And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
              • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday May 19 2020, @05:55PM (1 child)

                by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday May 19 2020, @05:55PM (#996426)

                do you refer to how much generic stimulation their immune systems get? in that case, first world farmers should be equally immune.

                Yes, and no. First world farmers may kick the shit, but they're also exposed to a wide spectrum of stuff that screws with immunological profiles - chlorinated water (or not), first world vaccine schedules, pesticides, heavy antibiotic doses in their food animals, etc.

                So, this "novel" Coronavirus, crossed over from bats we are told, how novel is it, really? As you say, canine coronavirus... do dog owners have better immunity? Apparently cats also contract and spread COVID-19 asymptomatically... whatever that's worth.

                --
                🌻🌻 [google.com]
                • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday May 19 2020, @06:46PM

                  by Reziac (2489) on Tuesday May 19 2020, @06:46PM (#996456) Homepage

                  CV19: Cats get seriously ill about on par with humans, just have not had many cases yet. Dogs, far as I've heard, only very rarely become ill (again not enough samples) and do not spread it to humans. Ferrets and mink get seriously ill at much higher rates than humans do. At this point it's still mostly field observation, better'n anecdotal but not exactly solid stats, tho contagion studies with cats and ferrets were both in the above ballpark.

                  My observation is that getting vaccinated more often confers better immunity -- after all, vaccine is just a controlled challenge to the immune system, and when it's challenged regularly, it keeps the troops on their toes, so to speak. This is why I get the flu vaccine every year and don't worry if it's the 'right' one or not... having noticed back in the early days that after I'd had a few years of flu shots, I stopped getting the flu even when the vaccine was the wrong one for that season. Even a near miss is useful, or so it appears.

                  Pesticides and antibiotics are very much targeted, they're not just sprayed over everything as you imply. If I have to dose a cow, I certainly don't dose myself too. How would I get exposed? and if it's such a problem, why aren't all the livestock dying, given they're regularly injected with vaccines and parasite controls, and antibiotics at need (tho with the new restrictive regs, gonna be a lot more calves dying of spring scours for lack of immediately-available antibiotics, cuz the $50 profit margin on that calf is not worth the cost of the vet for a ranch call, and when he can't get there today, it's too late anyway).

                  --
                  And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.