The Chinese food market at the centre of the deadly Sars-like virus outbreak has claimed they sold live koalas, snakes, rats and wolf pups to locals to eat.
The Huanan Seafood market in Wuhan in China is under investigation with officials believing the coronavirus originated from a wild animal that was sold at the venue.
So far the highly-contagious virus has killed 17 people and infected hundreds around Asia.
According to the South China Morning Post, the market’s advertising board had live foxes, crocodiles, wolf puppies, salamanders, snakes, rats, peacocks, porcupines and koalas.
E1, E2 and E3 by Jerry Emanuelson, B.S.E.E. Futurescience, LLC
This page is based upon a section that I wrote for Wikipedia. Since future modifications to that article are out of my control, I thought it would be a good idea to archive that material on this web site.
The case of a nuclear electromagnetic pulse differs from other kinds of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) in being a complex electromagnetic multi-pulse. The complex multi-pulse is usually described in terms of three components, and these three components have been defined as such by the international standards commission called the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).1
The three components of nuclear EMP, as defined by the IEC, are called E1, E2 and E3.
The E1 pulse is the very fast component of nuclear EMP. The E1 component is a very brief but intense electromagnetic field that can quickly induce very high voltages in electrical conductors. The E1 component causes most of its damage by causing electrical breakdown voltages to be exceeded. E1 is the component that can destroy computers and communications equipment; and it changes too fast for ordinary lightning protectors to provide effective protection against it. Consumer transient protectors are becoming increasingly able to handle faster rise-time pulses, though. There are special transient protectors that are fast enough to suppress nuclear EMP.
The E1 component is produced when gamma radiation from the nuclear detonation knocks electrons out of the atoms in the upper atmosphere. The electrons begin to travel in a generally downward direction at relativistic speeds (more than 90 percent of the speed of light). In the absence of a magnetic field, this would produce a large pulse of electric current vertically in the upper atmosphere over the entire affected area. The Earth’s magnetic field acts on these electrons to change the direction of electron flow to a right angle to the geomagnetic field. This interaction of the Earth’s magnetic field and the downward electron flow produces a very large, but very brief, electromagnetic pulse over the affected area.2
Physicist Conrad Longmire has given numerical values for a typical case of the E1 pulse produced by a second generation nuclear weapon such as those used in high altitude tests of Operation Fishbowl in 1962. According to Longmire, the typical gamma rays given off by the weapon have an energy of about 2 MEV (million electron volts). When these gamma rays collide with atoms in the mid-stratosphere, the gamma rays knock out electrons. This is known as the Compton effect, and the resulting electrons produce an electric current that is known as the Compton current. The gamma rays transfer about half of their energy to the electrons, so these initial electrons have an energy of about 1 MEV. This causes the electrons to begin to travel in a generally downward direction at about 94 percent of the speed of light. Relativistic effects cause the mass of these high energy electrons to increase to about 3 times their normal rest mass.2
If there were no geomagnetic field, and no additional atoms in the lower atmosphere for additional collisions, the electrons would continue to travel downward with an average current density in the stratosphere of about 48 amperes per square meter.2
Because of the downward tilt of the Earth’s magnetic field at high latitudes, the area of peak field strength is a U-shaped region to the equatorial side of the nuclear detonation. For nuclear detonations over the continental United States, this U-shaped region is south of the detonation point. Near the equator, where the Earth’s magnetic field is more nearly horizontal, the E1 field strength is more nearly symmetrical around the burst location.
The Earth’s magnetic field quickly deflects the electrons at right angles to the geomagnetic field, and the extent of the deflection depends upon the strength of the magnetic field. At geomagnetic field strengths typical of the central United States, central Europe or Australia, these initial electrons spiral around the magnetic field lines in a circle with a typical radius of about 85 meters (about 280 feet). These initial electrons are stopped by collisions with other air molecules at a average distance of about 170 meters (a little less than 580 feet). This means that most of the electrons are stopped by collisions with air molecules before the electron can complete one full circle of its spiral around the Earth’s magnetic field lines.2
This interaction of the very rapidly moving negatively charged electrons with the magnetic field radiates a pulse of electromagnetic energy. The pulse typically rises to its peak value in about 5 nanoseconds. The magnitude of this pulse typically decays to half of its peak value within 200 nanoseconds. (By the IEC definition, this E1 pulse is ended at one microsecond (1000 nanoseconds) after it begins.) This process occurs simultaneously with about 1025 other electrons.2
There are a number of secondary collisions which cause the subsequent electrons to lose energy before they reach ground level. The electrons generated by these subsequent collisions have such reduced energy that they do not contribute significantly to the E1 pulse.2
These 2 MEV gamma rays will normally produce an E1 pulse near ground level at moderately high latitudes that peaks at about 50,000 volts per meter. This is a peak power density of 6.6 megawatts per square meter.
The process of the gamma rays knocking electrons out of the atoms in the mid-stratosphere causes this region of the atmosphere to become an electrical conductor due to ionization, a process which blocks the production of further electromagnetic signals and causes the field strength to saturate at about 50,000 volts per meter. The strength of the E1 pulse depends upon the number and intensity of the gamma rays produced by the weapon and upon the rapidity of the gamma ray burst from the weapon. The strength of the E1 pulse is also somewhat dependent upon the altitude of the detonation.
There are many reports of super-EMP nuclear weapons that are able to overcome the 50,000 volt per meter limit by the very nearly instantaneous release of a burst of gamma radiation of much higher energy levels than are known to be produced by second generation nuclear weapons. The construction details of these weapons are classified, and therefore cannot be confirmed by scientists in the open scientific literature.3
The E2 component is generated by scattered gamma rays and inelastic gammas produced by weapon neutrons. This E2 component is an “intermediate time” pulse that, by the IEC definition, lasts from about one microsecond to one second after the beginning of the electromagnetic pulse. The E2 component of the pulse has many similarities to the electromagnetic pulses produced by lightning, although the electromagnetic pulse induced by a very close lightning strike may be considerably larger than the E2 component of a nuclear EMP. Because of the similarities to lightning-caused pulses and the widespread use of lightning protection technology, the E2 pulse is generally considered to be the easiest to protect against.
According to the United States EMP Commission, the main potential problem with the E2 component is the fact that it immediately follows the E1 component, which may have damaged the devices that would normally protect against E2.
According to the EMP Commission Executive Report of 2004, “In general, it would not be an issue for critical infrastructure systems since they have existing protective measures for defense against occasional lightning strikes. The most significant risk is synergistic, because the E2 component follows a small fraction of a second after the first component’s insult, which has the ability to impair or destroy many protective and control features. The energy associated with the second component thus may be allowed to pass into and damage systems.”3
The E3 component is very different from the other two major components of nuclear EMP. The E3 component of the pulse is a very slow pulse, lasting tens to hundreds of seconds, that is caused by the nuclear detonation heaving the Earth’s magnetic field out of the way, followed by the restoration of the magnetic field to its natural place. The E3 component has similarities to a geomagnetic storm caused by a very severe solar coronal mass ejection (CME).4, 5, 6 Like a geomagnetic storm, E3 can produce geomagnetically induced currents in long electrical conductors, which can then damage or destroy components such as power line transformers.5 These currents are often called quasi-DC currents because they resemble the direct current from a battery more than what most people think of as a pulse. Nearly all of the damage from E3 in modern systems occurs to the AC power grid, which is generally not designed to handle direct currents, especially in critical devices such as power transformers.
Because of the similarity between solar-induced geomagnetic storms and nuclear E3, it has become common to refer to solar-induced geomagnetic storms as “solar EMP.” At ground level, however, “solar EMP” is NOT known to produce an E1 or E2 component. The phrase “solar EMP” has caused a huge amount of confusion in the general public.
1. Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) — Part 2: Environment — Section 9: Description of HEMP environment — Radiated disturbance. Basic EMC publication, IEC 61000-2-9
2. Longmire, Conrad L. Justification and Verification of High-Altitude EMP Theory, Part 1 LLNL-9323905, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. June 1986.
3. Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack. Volume 1. Executive Report. 2004. Page 6.
4. High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP): A Threat to Our Way of Life, 09.07, By William A. Radasky, Ph.D., P.E. – IEEE.
6. Meta-R-321: The Late-Time (E3) High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and Its Impact on the U.S. Power Grid by James Gilbert, John Kappenman, William Radasky and Edward SavageBack to the Index of Futurescience EMP pages.
Original post can be found http://www.futurescience.com/emp/E1-E2-E3.html
By Marc Lipsitch and Tom Inglesby February 27 at 6:50 PM
Marc Lipsitch is a professor of epidemiology and director of the Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Tom Inglesby is director of the Center for Health Security and an environmental health and engineering professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
In 2014, U.S. officials imposed a moratorium on experiments to enhance some of the world’s most lethal viruses by making them transmissible by air, responding to widespread concerns that a lab accident could spark a global pandemic. Most infectious-disease studies pose modest safety risks, but given that these proposed experiments intended to create a highly contagious flu virus that could spread among humans, the government concluded the work should not go on until it could be approved through a specially created, rigorous review process that considered the dangers.
Apparently, the government has decided the research should now move ahead. In the past year, the U.S. government quietly greenlighted funding for two groups of researchers, one in the United States and the other in the Netherlands, to conduct transmission-enhancing experiments on the bird flu virus as they were originally proposed before the moratorium. Amazingly, despite the potential public-health consequences of such work, neither the approval nor the deliberations or judgments that supported it were announced publicly. The government confirmed them only when a reporter learned about them through non-official channels.
This lack of transparency is unacceptable. Making decisions to approve potentially dangerous research in secret betrays the government’s responsibility to inform and involve the public when approving endeavors, whether scientific or otherwise, that could put health and lives at risk.
We are two of the hundreds of researchers, medical and public-health professionals, and others who publicly opposed these experiments when they were first announced. In response to these concerns, the government issued a framework in 2017 for special review of “enhanced” pathogens that could become capable of causing a pandemic. Under that framework, reviewers must consider the purported benefits and the potential risks and, before approving the work, determine “that the potential risks as compared to the potential benefits to society are justified.”
The framework also requires that experts in public-health preparedness and response, biosafety, ethics and law, among others, evaluate the work, but it is unclear from the public record if that happened. No description of who reviewed these proposals has been provided. It is not stated what evidence was considered, how competing claims were evaluated or whether there were potential conflicts of interest.
This secrecy means we don’t know how these requirements were applied, if at all, to the experiments now funded by the government. A spokesperson from the Department of Health and Human Services told Science magazine that the agency cannot make the reviews public because doing so might reveal proprietary information about the applicants’ plans that could help their competitors. This bureaucratic logic implies that it is more important to maintain the trade secrets of a few prominent scientists than to let citizens — who bear the risk if an accident happens and who fund their work — scrutinize the decisions of public officials about whether these studies are worth the risk.
As researchers, we understand the usual logic for keeping scientific grant reviews confidential. But this is not ordinary science. The overwhelming majority of scientific studies are safe; even the worst imaginable accident, such as an infection of a lab worker or an explosion, is unlikely and would harm only a handful of people. But creating potentially pandemic pathogens creates a risk — albeit a small one — of infecting millions of people with a highly dangerous virus. For this kind of research, there is no justification for keeping risk-benefit deliberations secret.
Waiving confidentiality when lives are at stake is a standard practice. Health-care providers must report if their patients present an imminent threat to themselves or others, and drugmakers must disclose many facts about their products before approval in service of protecting public health and safety.
We have serious doubts about whether these experiments should be conducted at all. We also suspect that few members of the public would find compelling the rationale that the best way to fight the flu is to create the most contagious, lethal virus possible in a lab. But with deliberations kept behind closed doors, none of us will have the opportunity to understand how the government arrived at these decisions or to judge the rigor and integrity of that process.
Ultimately, public awareness is not enough. The debate in the United States over the past five years took place mainly among a small group of scientists and made only token efforts to inform or engage the wider citizenry. We need public discussion and debate about the risks and benefits of these kinds of experiments. And because viruses do not respect borders, the conversation must move beyond the national level, to coordinate the regulation of dangerous science internationally.
At stake here is the credibility of science, which depends on public support to continue. Science is a powerful driver of human health, well-being and prosperity, and nearly all of it can be done without putting populations at risk. If governments want to fund exceptionally risky science, they should do so openly and in a way that promotes public awareness and engagement.
JAN 25, 2019 6:30 AMBY LOIS YOKSOULIAN | PHYSICAL SCIENCES EDITOR | 217-244-2788
CHAMPAIGN, Ill. — Microplastics contaminate the world’s surface waters, yet scientists have only just begun to explore their presence in groundwater systems. A new study is the first to report microplastics in fractured limestone aquifers – a groundwater source that accounts for 25 percent of the global drinking water supply.The study identified microplastic fibers, along with a variety of medicines and household contaminants, in two aquifer systems in Illinois. The findings are published in the journal Groundwater.“Plastic in the environment breaks down into microscopic particles that can end up in the guts and gills of marine life, exposing the animals to chemicals in the plastic,” said John Scott, a researcher at the Illinois Sustainable Technology Center and study co-author. “As the plastics break down, they act like sponges that soak up contaminants and microbes and can ultimately work their way into our food supply.”Groundwater flows through the cracks and voids in limestone, sometimes carrying sewage and runoff from roads, landfills and agricultural areas into the aquifers below, Scott said.The researchers collected 17 groundwater samples from wells and springs – 11 from a highly fractured limestone aquifer near the St. Louis metropolitan area and six from an aquifer containing much smaller fractures in rural northwestern Illinois.All but one of the 17 samples contained microplastic particles, with a maximum concentration of 15.2 particles per liter from a spring in the St. Louis area, the study reports. However, deciphering what that concentration means is a challenge, Scott said. There are no published risk assessment studies or regulations.
The researchers did find, however, that concentrations from their field areas are comparable to those of surface water concentrations found in the rivers and streams in the Chicago area, said Samuel V. Panno, an Illinois State Geological Survey researcher and lead author of the study.
Researchers said the amoebas likely got into the woman’s brain through the tap water she used to fill a neti pot, rather than using saline or sterile water. The organisms entered her brain after she squirted the water up into her upper nasal cavity.
When a 69-year-old Seattle woman underwent brain surgery earlier this year at Swedish Medical Center, her doctors were stumped.
Last January, the woman was admitted to the hospital’s emergency department after suffering a seizure. Doctors took a CT scan of her brain to determine the cause, finding what they initially thought was a tumor. But an examination of tissue taken from her brain during surgery a day later showed she was up against a much deadlier attack, one that had been underway for about a year and was literally eating her alive.
“When I operated on this lady, a section of her brain about the size of a golf ball was bloody mush,” Dr. Charles Cobbs, neurosurgeon at Swedish, said in a phone interview. “There were these amoeba all over the place just eating brain cells. We didn’t have any clue what was going on, but when we got the actual tissue we could see it was the amoeba.”
The woman died a month later from the rare organisms that entered her brain after being injected into her nasal cavity by way of a neti pot, a teapot-shaped product used to rinse out the sinuses and nasal cavity, according to a case study recently published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases.
The study was authored by Swedish doctors and researchers who worked on her case, including Cobbs. The publication doesn’t identify the victim.
The woman’s infection is the second ever reported in Seattle — the first came in 2013 — but the first fatality to be caused by it. In 1990, researchers first became aware that this type of amoeba can cause disease in people, according to a study published in Clinical Infectious Diseases in November. That report found there have been 109 cases of the amoeba reported in the U.S. between 1974 and 2016. Ninety percent of those cases were fatal.
Amoebas are single-celled organisms, some of which can cause disease. Since they thrive in warm soil and water, some local doctors are growing concerned that the woman’s deadly infection could be among other southern-hemisphere diseases that may become spread northward toward the Pacific Northwest amid warming temperatures. The organisms are commonly found in South America and Central America, but may now have a better chance of survival in other, usually cooler places, such as Washington.
“I think we are going to see a lot more infections that we see south (move) north, as we have a warming of our environment,” said Dr. Cynthia Maree, a Swedish infectious-disease doctor who co-authored the case study about the woman’s condition. “Considering the mortality associated with this infection, my hope was that I was wrong. But my fear was that I was right.”
In the case of the Seattle woman, she likely became infected with the amoebas from her tap water, according to the researchers. Rather than filling her neti pot with saline or sterile water, she used tap water filtered through a store-bought water filter. She then shot the contaminated water far up her nasal cavity toward olfactory nerves in the upper part of her nasal cavity, causing the brain-eating infection called granulomatous amoebic encephalitis (GAE).
Amoebas may be found in fresh-water sources around Puget Sound such as wells, but aren’t present in city-treated water, according to Liz Coleman, a spokeswoman for the Environmental Public Health division of the state’s Department of Health. The researchers weren’t able to test the woman’s tap water, but people cannot be infected by simply swallowing water contaminated with the amoebas, according to Cobbs.
After contracting the amoebas, the woman developed a red sore on her nose. For about a year, the sore was misdiagnosed and being treated as a common, treatable skin condition known as rosacea, the study said. Cobbs said this was likely the first symptom of the amoeba, but its rarity makes the amoeba difficult to quickly diagnose.
“It’s such an incredibly uncommon disease it was not on anyone’s radar that this initial nose sore would be related to her brain,” Piper said.
The woman’s infection is the first to be linked to improper nasal lavage, according to Piper. Although the risk of infection to the brain is extremely low, people who use neti pots or other nasal-irrigation devices can nearly eliminate it by following directions printed on the devices, including using only saline or sterilized water, Maree said.
Three types of amoebas have been identified as causing fatal brain infections, according to Dr. Jennifer Cope, an epidemiologist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s unit that focuses on foodborne, waterborne and environmental diseases.
While infections remain rare, the Seattle woman died from the least-known of them all: Balamuthia mandrillaris. That’s a type of amoeba that moves more slowly and can take weeks or months to cause death. The other slow-acting amoeba is called Acanthamoeba spp.
Naegleria fowleri is the most documented, Cope said, because it acts quickly, causing an infection that leads to death in just a few days. New Jersey health officials linked a man’s death to N. fowleri in October. He was believed to have gotten infected while surfing in an indoor water park in Texas. N. fowleri is present in Puget Sound waters and other freshwater sources, Maree said. She wasn’t immediately aware of any other local cases of infection.
Cope said all three amoeba types have similar rates of prevalence, but Balamuthia mandrillaris is the least-recognized among the medical community because it is rarely documented, providing limited opportunity for research.
It is thought the amoebas are primarily soil-based, but the “exact environmental niche is really unknown”, Cope said in an email.
“From my understanding it’s everywhere. There are molds and fungi that can kill you if it infects your brain. MRSA (a treatable bacterial infection) is everywhere, but we don’t have a mechanism of injecting it into our brain,” Cobbs said. “It’s always going to be an uphill battle because people learn by seeing things over and over again, but I don’t think that there are going to be an increase in cases in the future. At least I hope not.”
Correction: The image of severe hemorrhaging in the woman’s brain is a CT scan. An earlier version of this story had incorrectly referred to the image in its caption as an MRI. This correction was made Dec. 6 at 12:08 p.m.
When it comes to global health policy, Bill Gates has never been known for subtlety. So it’s hardly surprising that his charitable foundation’s latest report on the greatest challenges facing mankind might make some readers want to lock themselves in an indefinite quarantine.
Readers familiar with Gates’ previous warnings about the rising risk of a global pandemic will recognize the top three risks: antibiotic resistance, governmental reluctance to fund health-care solutions and the next global contagion. The latter risk factor has become so universally feared by health professionals that the World Health Organization already has a name for it: “Disease X”. The likelihood of an explosive global pandemic breaking out in the relatively near future increases along with the population in the world’s poorest countries, which are presently experiencing explosive population growth even as birth rates in the developed world plummet. And if the world’s wealthiest countries don’t invest resources to combat these issues in Africa, South America and Asia now, it will be infinitely more expensive grappling with the consequences on the back-end, as Gates explained in an interview with the Telegraph.
“We are not fully prepared for the next global pandemic,” he says. “The threat of the unknown pathogen – highly-contagious, lethal, fast-moving – is real. It could be a mutated flu strain or something else entirely. The Swine Flu and 2014 Ebola outbreaks underscored the threat.”
The risks associated with the population boom in the poorest countries in Africa has long been treated as “the elephant in the room” by global policy makers. Even if one sets aside the risk of disease, the developing world must step up to monitor the economic impacts of rapidly increasing populations, confronting issues like political instability to ensure that the expansion will yield unbridled growth like similar periods in China and India.
According to demographers projections, the population of Africa is set to explode to 4 billion by the end of the century.
While the story includes few references to world leaders, Gates paused to praise UK Prime Minister Theresa May for her recent tour of Africa, during which she re-committed to UK aide spending…
Gates commends Theresa May’s recent Africa tour where she recommitted to Britain’s aid spending target of 0.7 per cent of gross national income. He says he has attempted to meet with Jeremy Corbyn, although so far failed, due to a schedule clash.
…And tried what looked to be her first attempt at dancing.
“They will step up in a pretty strong way to all those things. People who are super-successful need to be held to a very high standard. Some of that will lead to a very unfair personalisation as though these mistakes are somehow down to flaws in Mark’s character, or something like that. Mark knows he is in a position of responsibility and is trying to learn about this stuff.”
We imagine Mark Zuckerberg will be thrilled to hear that.
What would Yellowstone Exploding look like? No place on Earth would be safe. The average earth temperature could plummet by 26 degrees from all the ash ejected into the atmosphere.
Last week, the USGS released an updated threat assessment for U.S. volcanoes. The first assessment was published in 2005. The 2018 update refined the original assessment by accounting for new research and observations during the past 13 years. Some volcanoes moved up the ranking, and some moved down. A few volcanoes were added to the list, and a few were removed. But what does this mean for Yellowstone?
First, let’s review what the assessment is and what it isn’t. The assessment is not a list of which volcanoes are most likely to erupt, nor is it a ranking of the most “active” volcanoes. Instead, the assessment is a quantification of the relative threat posed by the volcanoes in the United States. Threat is defined as the combination of a volcano’s hazard potential, and the exposure of people and property to those hazards. In other words, a volcano that only erupts lava flows but doesn’t have anyone living on it has very low threat, since even though there is a hazard (lava), there are no people or property at risk from that hazard. A volcano that might experience only small explosions but that is surrounded by towns and near an airport has a higher threat, since lots of people and property are exposed to the hazard (even if the hazard might be a relatively small one).
It turns out that, in addition to volcanoes that have erupted in the Holocene, the report also considers caldera systems that show unrest — for example, earthquake activity, ground deformation or gas discharge — even if they have not erupted recently. There are three such caldera systems in the United States: Valles caldera, New Mexico (which last erupted more than 50,000 years ago); Long Valley caldera, California (last eruption was more than 15,000 years ago); and Yellowstone.
Now that we have established which volcanoes are considered, we need to address how “scores” are tabulated. In the report, 24 factors that describe a volcano’s hazard potential and the exposure of people and property to those hazards are considered. The hazard factors include such categories as the size of the largest explosion to have occurred at the volcano, the average recurrence of eruptions, what types of eruptions have taken place, and whether or not the volcano shows signs of unrest. Exposure factors include nearby population, nearby aviation activity, and nearby infrastructure (like power and transportation resources).
The overall threat score is determined by multiplying the sum of the hazard factors by the sum of the exposure factors. The top three volcanoes, in order, are Kīlauea (Hawaii), Mount St. Helens (Washington), and Mount Rainier (Washington). A general categorization was also introduced — “very high threat,” “high threat,” “moderate threat,” “low threat” and “very low threat.”
Despite the fact that Yellowstone has not experienced any magmatic eruptions in 70,000 years, the system reached its lofty ranking (compared to other volcanoes in the country) because of the long-past history of very large explosions, more recent history of steam explosions, observed seismic, deformation, and degassing activity, and the presence of a population (over 4 million people visit Yellowstone National Park each year).
The threat ranking is intended as a guide in terms of which volcanoes should be prioritized for upgrades in monitoring capabilities. Yellowstone is already among the best-monitored volcanoes in the world, but we expect that the upgraded threat assessment will be helpful in refining the monitoring plan, which is due for revision.
The full report is available at https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/sir20185140.
If you have any questions about the threat assessment or how Yellowstone fits in to the 2018 report, feel free to contact us any time at email@example.com
The intent of my article is to first, bring to view the reluctance issues we have that keep us from securing our stuff, and also to think ahead when actually doing it. The only thing worse than not hiding your preps, is hiding them poorly! Common Arguments About Caching (continued) In part 1, we began listing and addressing some of the common arguments against caching. Let’s continue with this. I Will Defend My Stuff If Necessary Will you defend your stuff? Have you thought all of that through? If you are caught off guard with a couple of nasty people …
Twas a night after SHTF, when all through the house, Not a creature was stirring, except for the louse; The rifle was hung over the chimney with care, In hopes not to use it, but to know it was there; The children were nestled all snug in their beds, While visions of normalcy, danced in their heads; And mamma still canning, and I getting undressed, Had just been discussing how we felt so blessed; When out on the lawn there arose such a clatter, I sprang with my rifle to see what was the matter; Away to the …
You may have missed a few brief mentions of an emerging threat in the mainstream news: The face of the sun has gone mostly blank in the past few years, with an extremely low number of sunspots. There have only been sunspots visible on the the sun for 133 days in the past year. The last three solar cycles have become progressively weaker. There is now a legitimate concern that because there have been several very weak solar cycles in succession, that we could tip over into another Grand Solar Minimum (GSM). This potentially developing GSM could be something similar …
Fresh Ebola Outbreak Discovered In Sierra Leone
A new Ebola virus has been found in bats in Sierra Leone, two years after the end of an outbreak that killed over 11,000 across West Africa, the government said on Thursday.
It is not yet known whether the new Bombali species of the virus — which researchers say could be transmitted to humans — can develop into the deadly Ebola disease.
“At this time, it is not yet known if the Bombali Ebola virus has been transmitted to people or if it causes disease in people but it has the potential to infect human cells,” Amara Jambai, a senior ministry of health official, told AFP.
“This is early stages of the findings,” Jambai added, calling on the public to remain calm while awaiting further research.
A health ministry spokesman and a researcher who worked on the discovery confirmed the findings to AFP.
Researchers who found the new virus in the northern Bombali region are now working with the Sierra Leone government to determine whether any humans were infected.
“As precautionary measures, people should refrain from eating bats,” Harold Thomas, health ministry spokesman told AFP.
The worst-ever Ebola outbreak started in December 2013 in southern Guinea before spreading to two neighbouring west African countries, Liberia and Sierra Leone.
The West African outbreak was caused by the Zaire species, which has historically been the most deadly in humans since it was first identified in 1976.
That outbreak killed more than 11,300 people out of nearly 29,000 registered cases, according to World Health Organization estimates.
The WHO declared the epidemic over in January this year, but this was followed by flare-ups in all three countries.
What does it mean to survive? Obviously, humans have survived countless natural and man-made disasters and continue to survive and thrive on planet earth. However, in this blog, we are focusing on surviving a SHTF situation. We Prepare All around us we see our freedoms being eroded and many of our systems being corrupted. So we prepare. But for what? So many scenarios could play out– a false epidemic, fires (natural or man made), SWAT teams in the early hours in small communities where they can knock out power and cell, preventing us from spreading the alarm. And, there are …
The post Mental, Emotional, and Spiritual Preparation for Survival, by S.L. appeared first on SurvivalBlog.com.
There has been a longstanding narrative in economic circles that no matter what crisis occurs the U.S. dollar is essentially invincible. I have never been one to buy into this assumption. Reason 1: Because I remember distinctly just before the derivatives and credit crisis in 2007/2008 the majority of mainstream economists were so certain that U.S. housing and debt markets were invincible, and they were terribly wrong. Whenever the mainstream financial media are confident of an outcome, expect the opposite to happen. Reason 2: Because karma has a way of crushing grand illusions. When you proudly declare a Titanic “unsinkable,” …
The post Guest Article: America Loses When The Trade War Becomes A Currency War, by Brandon Smith appeared first on SurvivalBlog.com.
What are you prepping for? Is it a natural disaster like a wildfire, tornado or hurricane? Those are perfect examples of common events that occur every day. Nature has a way of dealing us unexpected circumstances from time to time and we, as humans try to roll with the situation as best we can. That is one of the benefits of prepping in that you are proactively planning for events, and the fallout of events now before you find yourself possibly affected by disaster. There are large and small examples of emergencies but prepping gives you a method of working through examples and making potentially lifesaving decisions all from the comfort of your computer or as in Sideliner’s case; the easy chair.
From a big-picture perspective we can look at regions where certain types of natural disasters are more common. If you live in areas where you have identified many potential risks as part of your prepping plan, some people advocate designing your own threat matrix. A threat matrix is really just a decision-making system where you assign a level of risk and probability to each disaster. This is supposed to help you decide which disaster is more likely or impactful to your life and thus should be worked on first. For example, California has routinely seen floods, earthquakes, mudslides, wildfires and you have to throw in the risk of blackouts, riots, nuclear fallout and most recently drought. You could line all of these threats up on a page, assign them a number and a risk and start making plans accordingly. Now that I think of it, why would anyone want to live in California anyway?
As a resident of California this might make sense because you have seen the first-hand effects of these disasters, but what if there was a different type of emergency that we haven’t really seen in this country before? What preparations would you make if you knew now that the FEMA tents weren’t going to be popping up, truckloads of relief supplies weren’t headed your way and that sooner or later scores of news media and Red Cross volunteers weren’t going to be descending on your town to document the devastation?
What would a WROL world look like?
WROL is a term that means Without Rule of Law. I don’t know who coined it first but it seems to accurately describe the worst type of scenario preppers imagine. A WROL world could spring up spontaneously or it could grow out of some relatively common natural disaster. To imagine a WROL world you would simply have to imagine no police, fire or ambulances coming to your aid. In a WROL world you would be on your own or left with your band of friends and neighbors to provide for yourself all of the services that are now gone.
If you look around you might have seen glimpses of a WROL world even if they are quickly controlled. Looting is an example of WROL behavior and so are riots. The two go hand in hand but the police rely on controlling the crowd to a large extent to keep these events from growing much larger than they are. If the police are not available or are overwhelmed, what happens then? When the rioters and looters don’t have any reason to stop the spread of rage and violence, what do they move on to next?
Imagine something as benign as the power grid failing for some arbitrary period. Let’s say a fluke takes out the power for the entire eastern seaboard for one month. This could be a terrorist caused outage, solar flare or some random chain of events that causes a domino effect of failures to equipment and systems. Imagine also that this happens in August and the east coast is also experiencing warmer than usual weather.
Without power, what could possibly happen in the US? Do you think riots would break out? Could you see looting of stores? Without power there would be no way to refrigerate food. You wouldn’t be able to pump gas, run credit card machines or ATM’s, air conditioners or ice makers. Cell towers would be ineffective. Would you be able to go to work? Not likely unless your job involved something manual that was completely not reliant on electricity or fuel. My job is 100% dependent on the internet and electricity. Public transportation would be down and even government services would be unable to help. So what would millions of hot, hungry and panicked people do?
What would you have to worry about in a WROL world?
Is this all a fairytale? Maybe. There are a lot of people who believe nothing bad like this will ever happen and that our way of life will keep on chugging along in more or less the same fashion it always has. I have said many times that I hope that is our shared reality, but I am planning for the chance that it doesn’t. My own threat matrix is my gut. You will find no shortage of people who say worrying about things like this is a waste of effort.
By very definition WROL means there is law and order so normalcy is pretty much out the window. With a failure like this there wouldn’t be enough police, National Guard or military combined to help everyone out. All of these soldiers, police and firemen would have their own families to watch over most likely and I could see many of them, if forced to choose between going to work stopping a riot or staying at home to defend their wife and kids would choose the latter. Again, there will be those who disagree and say that the professional soldier, police officer or fireman would never abandon their post and communities will rally together to take care of one another in times of crisis. Maybe when the crisis is over, but not while everyone is going through it.
What can you do now to prepare for WROL?
My WROL scenario above is relatively short-lived. There have certainly been natural disasters where the destruction caused power outages for a long time. In my example, presumably we would have half a country that could rally to help us but assume for a second help isn’t on the way. You are on your own for a month of potential lawlessness. Imagine a month of the Purge lived out in real life?
Limit your exposure
Who makes the best target? They guy right in front of you. If there is widespread violence being carried out in the name of rage or of need, stay far away from it. You don’t want to be anywhere near the chaos that is going on and it would be better to let it burn out as much as possible before it gets to you. In this case bugging out may be your best option so have a plan for that contingency in your back pocket. In my scenario you would have plenty of time to make that decision, but you should have prepping supplies together before the ability to acquire them has passed. This includes everything you need for food, water, shelter, security and hygiene for a minimum of 6 months. Start small if you have to.
Use the buddy system
If you do have to travel or bug out, you don’t want to go it alone. Someone needs to be there to watch your six and potentially pull you out of trouble. In a without rule of law world, I foresee deadly force as being much more prevalent and warranted if your life is in danger. I am not saying to go out and shoot people walking down your street, but if they are threatening your life then you have a choice to make. It is better to consider this now as opposed to in the moment even though I realize and admit that thinking about killing someone is a lot different from actually pulling the trigger.
- Neighborhood watch on Steroids
- Thinking of your neighborhood from a tactical perspective
- Coordinating a neighborhood response plan
Keep an eye out
If there is a real threat of violence in your neighborhood, you won’t be able to simply lock the door and hope they will go away. If you haven’t already, post-event you should form up with your neighbors immediately to draw up plans for security and address any needs of anyone in your local group. Whatever you did or didn’t do before the event will need to go out the window if you want to survive. It takes more than one person to stand guard all night.
- Protecting your family when the bad guys come down the street
- Looter Defense Tactics
Arm yourself responsibly
And legally. I am a big advocate of responsible firearm ownership. This assumes you have the training and knowledge of how and when you should discharge that firearm in the course of defending your life. It has been said that the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun and I believe that. Just make sure you are the good guy in this situation.
A WROL world is what I envision as a mixture of a war zone and a mad-max movie rolled all into your favorite disaster flick. Essentially, I never want to go through anything like this but if something this catastrophic comes your way, you better make sure you have a plan and you are ready to go.
Metal art pieces now available to buy in store only.
We have for sale 2 Dragonflies. May be purchased together or individual. These pieces will rust throughout time. Handmade by our awesome welder. More pieces to come. Stop by and take a look. You can make a request for a certain item and he can try his best to make it for you. No guarantee.
940 S Pine St. #1
Burlington, WI 53105
We should be especially careful when communicating electronically: it’s little more than trivial for a government, a corporation, or even a couple of well-equipped criminals to intercept phone calls, emails, or text messages. This article explains how to use simple, secure tools that do only encryption and do it right. These are based upon a tool that is significantly better than the name suggests, Pretty Good Privacy (PGP), and offers excellent communications security for preppers. Part 1 covered PGP and how it is used. Now, we are continuing. Setting an Expiration Date Now that you have created a key, there …
Introduction We all have a need for private communication. Whether it’s details of our preparations that we want to share with others in a group, discussing tactics, carrying on trade, or any of a hundred other matters, we should be concerned about keeping our communication private. We should be especially careful when communicating electronically: it’s little more than trivial for a government, a corporation, or even a couple of well-equipped criminals to intercept phone calls, emails, or text messages. We can use encryption, which transforms data into a form that can only be read with a secret key, to help …
The chances are that if you turn on your television or scan your local news sources, you will hear about infectious diseases like HIV/AIDS, Ebola, Tuberculosis, Hepatitis and Measles. Now, can you say the same for Buruli ulcers? How about Guinea Worm disease? Chagas disease? Yaws or Schistosomiasis? Your response might not be as certain.
This is not because the diseases only infect a few people each year or are not as dangerous. Actually, combined, these diseases categorized as Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) impact more than one billion people every year . According to the World Health Organization (WHO), NTDs include communicable diseases that exist in tropical and subtropical climates of nearly 150 countries, and mostly impact those living in poverty with close proximity to infectious vectors . The WHO has created a roadmap to treat, prevent and eliminate the burden of NTDs, which includes five strategies of control: Preventative chemotherapy; Vector and intermediate host control; Veterinary public health; Intensified disease management; and Procurement of safe water, sanitation and hygiene . The goal of incorporating these strategies is to reduce disease burden and eradicate at least two NTDs by 2020 .
As of 2017, WHO recognized 17 diseases as neglected tropical diseases [1,2], including:
- Dengue and Chikungunya
- Blinding Trachoma
- Buruli Ulcer
- Endemic Treponematoses (Yaws)
- Leprosy (Hansen Disease)
- Chagas Disease
- Human African Trypanosomiasis (Sleeping Sickness)
- Dracunculiasis (Guinea Worm Disease)
- Foodborne Trematode Infections
- Lymphatic Filariasis
- Onchocerciasis (River Blindness)
- Schistosomiasis (Bilharziasis)
- Soil-Transmitted Helminthiases (including Ascariasis, Hookworm and Whipworm)
“Neglected” is a powerful word. Most of these diseases occur in areas of economic hardship, strife, and are just a small part of the challenges faced by the affected communities. Those most affected by NTDs have insecurities far beyond what we can effectively grasp in the majority of the United States. While the threat of disease is high, it is miniscule to the challenges of poverty, food insecurity, lack of medical care and poor sanitation. This summer, the Disease Daily will be hosting a Neglected Tropical Disease Series, where it is my goal to introduce you to these lesser-known diseases. The series hopes to raise awareness to their global impact. While NTDs might not be running rampant in your community, our global community is in need. Addressing NTDs requires awareness, policy changes, medical access and community support to provide the tools necessary for treatment and hopefully one day, eradication.
Neglected Tropical Diseases NTDs WHO Outbreak News CC Image Courtesy of RTI Fights NTDs on Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/rtifightsntds/34949843103/in/photolist-Vfp5HM-26tiqDw-nxM4gF-nghuyJ-fkoX9y-22Dyscq-26wQ9Dp-XyD2eZ-qD9GYg-JMxg7K-nxws3Q-nghrSZ-nghBdJ-26tinbQ-nghAQw-nghmEr-nghy1m-nghNNE-nghiEX-nghsXB-nghSWQ-E5eqcF-WdYcpQ-nghQuf-23FtfgE-WtYu1Z