#Quality improvement in the workplace | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

aesethewitch · 4 months ago

Text

When Witching Goes Wrong: Basics

Not all spells that go wrong are “backfires.” A backfire occurs when a spell’s result is antithetical to the result you wanted to cause — it causes a negative outcome, often coming back onto you as the caster, but sometimes creating the opposite effect as was desired on the target. For example, casting a money attraction spell and losing a wallet full of cash as a result would be considered a backfire. A spell that fizzles, does nothing, or produces an unexpected (but not negative) side-effect wouldn’t be a backfire (in my opinion, that is).

Most spells that go wrong aren’t backfires. In general, you’re likelier to have a spell that acts unexpectedly or that simply fizzles than one that blows up in your face somehow. You shouldn’t be anxious about a backfire. But, as someone with lots of experience in the realm of worrying about worst-case scenarios, I understand the impulse.

The solution is to understand what can go wrong, how to prevent it, and what to do in the event of an actual worst-case scenario. My goal with this post (and with this WWGW series) is to help you feel less anxious about spells going wrong and more prepared to deal with whatever comes your way.

So, let’s start from the beginning.

Outcome Projection

Risk assessment, mitigation, and management. Fellow corporate drones (former or current) will know exactly what I’m talking about here. The idea is to predict possible ways that things can go wrong and either prevent them entirely or put strategies in place to deal with them ahead of time. It’s damage control before the damage occurs.

Now, the key here is to not go overboard. Fellow chronic worriers will know the horrible allure of going down every possible path of anxiety, only to find ourselves paralyzed entirely by the fear that something will go wrong. Remember that most spells do not backfire. In most cases, the worst thing (and most common negative outcome, in my experience) that can happen is that nothing happens. The next most common is unexpected side effects, but those are usually easily dealt with.

The goal is to ensure the success of the spell. For example, when you’re looking for a new place to live, you don’t want to just look for the number of bedrooms and the finishes in the kitchen. You want to account for the appliances, the heating/cooling systems, the quality of the flooring, signs of water damage, signs of mold… all sorts of things.

A similar concept applies to accounting for backfires/failures in spellwork. You want to close loopholes and think about the outcomes you specifically don’t want — and then incorporate ways to prevent those things from happening.

The Ways Spells Can Go Wrong

The spell fully backfires. By “fully backfires,” I mean that it completely fails and creates the exact opposite outcome to what you were going for. Using a love spell as an example, this could include the target leaving your life, forming negative opinions of you, or becomes interested in someone else (particularly if you were trying to pull attention from that someone else onto yourself).

The spell is bounced back to you. This is more unusual than you think! I often see the warning about spells being redirected back at the caster in arguments against hexing and cursing others. I’ve had exactly one spell reversed back at me, and it was because the target was 1. A witch, and 2. Expecting it.

The spell’s primary result is unexpected. Not necessarily bad, just not what you meant to do. For example, casting a spell to get a promotion at work and discovering that your close friend is getting a promotion instead.

The spell has unexpected side effects. Like casting a spell for good luck on yourself and having everyone around you experience good luck, too. Or casting a spell that successfully improves your workplace’s vibe, only to find out that the mean coworker nobody likes finally got fired, and that’s why everyone is more relaxed and cheerful. Or, more negatively, you do get that promotion you cast for, but now you’re saddled with more work than you can handle, because your bosses think you’re highly capable of it all!

The spell does absolutely nothing. Perhaps one of the more common ways a spell can go wrong, this is exactly what it says on the tin. You put the energy in, you did all the steps, but the spell just… doesn’t go anywhere. In other words, it fizzles and simply doesn’t work at all.

As with most topics in witchcraft, there’s an infinite amount of nuance to apply here. There are more ways spells can go wrong, and not all of these things would necessarily be considered “going wrong.”

It may be worth deducing why the spell went wrong. Was it the materials? The petition or incantation? A lack of energy, or maybe an overabundance? Spirit influence? Protections surrounding the target? Knowing what exactly went wrong can help you prevent the same issues in the future, but it can also help you to better fix the spell in the moment.

Preventatives

The particulars are going to depend heavily on your personal practice, the type of spell you’re doing, and how detailed you want to get. These suggestions are based on things I personally take into account when I’m trying to close loopholes and prevent unwanted outcomes.

Be specific in your wording. Especially if your spell has any kind of spoken or written component, be as specific as you can. “Draw money to me” is a general sentiment that could absolutely work, but what money is it bringing in? A bonus at work? A dollar on the street? A gift from grandma? Inheritance? It could be anything at that point. “Draw good, repeat customers to my small business to help me reach my profit goal of $10,000 before the end of the year” is specific, focused, and measurable. There isn’t much room for surprise side effects.

Choose ingredients carefully. Work with ingredients whose purposes you know. In my spell recipes, I list every ingredient’s correspondence, because in my practice, those things matter. Ensure that the “active ingredients” in your spell align with your goal properly. Rogue elements create rogue effects!

Include failsafe measures. As in, create ways you can cancel the spell at any point. This can have the side effect of making your spells easier to undo, particularly if your target is also a witch who understands how you construct your spells. If doing this, it’s best to create a method that is obscured and unique to you.

Add ingredients or instructions specifically to avoid particular side effects or outcomes. Find a component or two that can protect your working from unwanted effects, backfires, and interference. Include instructions for the spell for things it shouldn’t do. For example, trying to create issues for one particular person at work shouldn’t harm their innocent teammates.

Undo It

The first step to consider is undoing the spell. Not all paradigms allow for this, so it may not be possible for you. For me, it depends on the particular spell and how much change it’s created. The bigger the impact, the less likely a simple undo will work.

Still, it’s worth a try. Undoing a spell might take a few forms, depending on how you originally cast it:

Take the spell apart. Disassemble the spell into its components and cleanse them of the spell’s energy.

Destroy the vessel and components. Burning, tearing, burying, flushing, throwing away, and so forth. Be careful to not bury things that could harm the earth, animals, or people — including glass, salt, and plastics. Compost and recycle when you can.

Dismiss spirits working within the spell. End the contract around the spell’s working and request that the spirits stop powering it. You could also request their assistance in undoing the spell. You may have to make offerings either way, depending on the terms of your agreement.

Perform the spell in reverse. This includes speaking incantations backwards, performing all actions backwards, taking components apart, re-cleansing, and putting things away where you originally got them from.

Draw the spell’s energy/effects out of the target’s body and/or the affected area. Using energy work, absorb the spell’s energy into a vessel. Capture it and either allow it to dissipate or bottle it up to keep it in check. I don’t recommend absorbing the energy into yourself, as that may draw the spell’s unwanted effects to you (or make them worse).

I typically employ a combination of strategies to undo a spell, if it’s possible in the first place. If it’s a simple spell, performing it in reverse is the easiest method. I’ll then cleanse, destroy, and dispose of the materials.

But when it isn’t possible to simply undo the spell…

Cast Another Spell

…The answer might be to cast another one. In my mind, there are several ways to do this.

The first is to cast a spell to negate the original’s effects completely. I would approach this method the same way as any other spell. Focus on the effects you’re looking to negate, and cast accordingly. A banishing spell would work well for this to shoo away the spell’s energy, but a cleansing spell to clear the target would also work. Or, you can get more specific. For example, if a spell has generated a string of unlucky events, you could cast a spell for good luck in order to nullify the bad luck of the first spell. The goal would be to cancel out the original spell’s effects in some way.

The second way is to cast a spell to adjust the original’s outcome. There are a lot of ways to do this. You could directly modify the original spell by adding or removing ingredients that might’ve caused the negative outcome, redo written or spoken incantations/petitions, or cast a “companion spell” to redirect the original’s energy to a more favorable end. For example, in a money spell that’s giving everyone else good fortune, you could place a magnet with your personal information on it atop the spell vessel to draw money to you rather than the people around you. The idea here is not to end the original spell, but to realign it to your particular needs.

Another way is to cast a spell specifically to control side effects. Sometimes, a spell can’t be undone, and you can’t easily modify the main outcomes (particularly true if the negative events caused by the spell happen quickly or outside your control). Or maybe the bulk of the spell worked properly, but there’s one or two minor negative side effects you don’t want to continue. The method for this would be similar to adjusting the original spell’s outcome, but on a smaller scale and in a less direct fashion. For example, your job spell got you that promotion, hooray! But now you’re stressed out by training someone to take your place, and you’re learning your new position. You can cast a spell to reduce stress or prevent people from piling additional work on you while you adjust, controlling the side effects of the promotion.

A way I use for high-stakes spells is to cast wards or other protections before casting the main spell to prevent backfire or unwanted effects ahead of time. I often do this for spells surrounding situations that are delicate or that need extra care. In my case, it’s a general, long-term ward against bad luck on a wider scale, and it catches negative spell side effects as part of its job. You can set up temporary wards if you prefer, or make them for very specific purposes. Whatever works for you.

Cast the same spell again. This isn’t my usual go-to, unless I’m trying a new spell method or ingredient I’m unfamiliar with. I’ll usually recommend trying the same spell again when the first casting does absolutely nothing, since multiple castings can make a spell stronger and more effective. However, if a spell backfires or otherwise causes undesirable effects, I wouldn’t really recommend it, as the negative effects can compound, too, if it misfires again.

Ask for Help

If the problems caused by your spell are too big for you to handle on your own, it’s okay to reach out for help! Whether you’re looking for suggestions and advice or hands-on assistance, knowing when and how to ask for help is a critical skill.

Ask the witchcraft community (or your witchy friends) questions. Join a Discord, forum, Tumblr community, or other witchy space. Make a post to explain your situation and request suggestions, advice, and ideas to deal with the situation at large. Not all suggestions will be entirely helpful, but you’ll at least get some new perspectives to shed light on your situation. If people you know directly (in real life or online) practice witchcraft, see what they think.

Chat with spirits. Especially if you already work with spirits or if spirits helped you to cast/power the original spell, this can be a solid way to come up with a solution that will work. Use your preferred method of communication to discuss the situation. If possible, see if they’ll help you either undo or mitigate the spell’s unwanted results.

Ask non-witchy friends for advice. Their advice will probably be mundane, but sometimes, those are the best solutions. Outside perspectives are useful to recontextualize problems and come up with solutions you wouldn’t have otherwise considered.

Find books, videos, tutorials, blog posts, and other resources on the subject. When all else fails, or when you’re a little shy about asking for help directly, there are still resources out there to help you solve your dilemmas. Just remember to vet your sources before naively following instructions given to you.

Deal with Consequences Mundanely

Sometimes, there’s just nothing for it. Whether you don’t have time and energy or you’ve already tried more magic and had it fail, there are times when you have to turn to the mundane. Depending on the severity of the situation you’re in, solutions will vary in their successfulness. And honestly, that’s just how it is sometimes. Sometimes, things don’t wrap up nicely and easily and neatly.

With that said, here are a handful of mundane responses and solutions I’ve turned to after spells went wrong (and couldn’t be otherwise fixed):

Come clean and apologize. Particularly applicable when you’re doing a spell on or for another person, sometimes, there’s just nothing else to do but admit you fucked up. If the person impacted by the spell’s effects, directly or indirectly, isn’t a magical practitioner themselves, you could simply apologize for meddling in the situation. On the other hand, if you’ve harmed or offended a spirit with your spellwork, you might make an offering to apologize for the trouble you’ve caused.

Come up with mundane strategies for damage control. Depending on how severe the spell’s negative effects are, the level of effort for this is going to obviously vary. It could be anything from redoing your household budget to breaking out the toolbox for repairs to building an actual fence to making dinner. Your solution is going to depend on your problem. Think strategically.

Seek out new, improved coping mechanisms. Whether you’re looking to resolve feelings that are caused by the spell’s backfire or ones that made you cast in the first place, sometimes, a bit of self-care is the best solution. Consider why you cast the spell in the first place — lack of control, poor self-worth, low confidence? Or was it just because you felt it could help you with a little boost to the work you were already doing? It’s worth thinking about. What mundane safety nets do you have in place?

Let it go. Perhaps the most difficult option: Just letting the bad result be. Moving on from it. Taking the lumps and the lesson, and walking away. Giving up is a skill. It’s not a moral failing to let things go. If fighting will only make things worse, or if you’re tired of trying to fix it, it’s okay to just… let it be a failure.

Conclusions

Again, this is far from comprehensive. The suggestions here are basic ideas to help inspire you to form your own opinions and solutions. It’s smart to consider these things in advance! As my mother always says, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

I have plans to expand the idea of “When Witching Goes Wrong” into a wider series of posts, each focusing on a very specific problem, spell type, or solution (like a post just about ways to undo a spell, for example). Those are likely to include true stories about things I’ve personally fucked up… which are always the best witchy stories, in my opinion. Lol.

If you're interested in more WWGW entries, check out the masterpost.

Anyhow! If you got something out of this post or my other work, consider tossing a couple dollars in my tip jar. Support goes toward bills and keeping our household fed and healthy, so it’s very much appreciated. Supporters got to see this post a full week early!

If there’s a particular subject you want to see covered, feel free to send me an ask or leave a comment on this post (or any of the posts in the series!). As long as it’s something I actually have experience with, I’m happy to cover just about anything.

#aese speaks #witchcraft #witchcraft 101 #beginner witch #witchblr #witch community #spellwork #spell backfire #witchcraft advice #spells #wwgw #when witching goes wrong #witchcraft basics

125 notes · View notes

stellarwhisper · 3 months ago

Text

Examining the Depths of Love

The nourishing energy that Cancer personal planets convey encourages solace and emotional ties. They are excellent at designing cozy, welcoming environments that evoke a feeling of inclusion.

Pluto in the 12th house highlights the intense journey of self-discovery and transformation that can come from grappling with inner fears and desires.

In synastry, Venus in the eleventh house produces a lovely dynamic where love and friendship converge. It places a strong emphasis on social ties and common values, encouraging a partnership based on inspiration and support.

In synastry, Venus in the 12th house forges a strong emotional and frequently spiritual connection. This arrangement implies an intuitive comprehension that goes beyond language, enabling two people to jointly explore their innermost secrets.

In romantic relationships, Venus in Cancer represents a protecting and nurturing force. People with this placement value safety and stability in relationships and look for strong emotional bonds. They value home, family, and shared memories and are frequently intuitive, sensitive, and loving lovers. A great desire to provide for loved ones and create a cozy, welcoming environment may result from this placement.

Venus in Libra ethos is perfectly captured by the emphasis on elegance and beauty. Their yearning for balance can be complemented by a harmonious appearance created with delicate pastel colors and graceful forms. That elegant look is further enhanced by accessories like flowing skirts and gold hoops.

Venus impact on Capricorn highlights the link between success in the workplace and attractiveness. One's reputation can undoubtedly be improved by having a refined, elegant appearance. Investing in premium goods demonstrates ambition and sophistication, while traditional beauty options like red lipstick and bold eyeliner convey confidence.

Venus aspecting Mercury improves communication and appeal. This quality frequently leads to a pleasant voice and the capacity to show affection in an elegant manner, which warms and engages talks. People with this placement are naturally able to draw others in with their charming speech patterns.

Venus in Water signs (Cancer, Scorpio, and Pisces) frequently has intense emotional experiences with love. They can build strong bonds because of their devotion and empathy, but they can also become sensitive and a little needy because to their desire for emotional stability.

Aries degrees focus on strength, vigor, and sound judgment draws attention to their innate leadership abilities. These degrees imply a tendency to take advantage of chances and flourish via self-reliance, which results in noteworthy accomplishments.

#astrologyinsights #venusinlove #personalplanets #cosmicconnection #astrologicalrelationship #astrology #astro community #astro notes #astro observations #zodiac #astrology blog

63 notes · View notes

bitchlessdino · 11 months ago

Text

Would you like a receipt? Pt. 1

In Valentines collaboration with @svthub hosted by my wifey @wongyuseokie, pt 2 out now! Pairing: Childhood bf!junhui x working class gn!reader Genre: fluff, slight angst, slice of life Word count: 2.9k tags: second chances, exes to ???, childhood friend/boyfriend!junhui, spontaneous dates, misunderstandings, smut in part 2!!! Summary: Coming across a grade school ex-boyfriend while you worked a shitty seasonal job around Valentines was not in your 2024 bingo card. author note: to sweet mio at @skyechild i apologize in advance for making you wait for the second half. I promise it'll be worth the wait. but yes! i am your one and only cupid. I hope you enjoy what i have so far. And to answer your ask, idk if i have a favorite thing about myself? Maybe it's the constant desire to look for new things to improve on or my attitude in trying new things? What i look for other people is pretty simple tho. That would be ease. I'd like if someone felt comfortable with me and vice versa. if i can make someone's day by making them laugh or just existing then that would be great. happy valentines day mio! From yours Truly, Cupid💘

Tag: @shiningstar-byulxx @misssugarlips @tommolex @hoeforhao @dkakapizzaboy @junhui-recs @svtup @buffhoshi @meowmeowminnie @caratochan @lovebot4han @camisun93 @emmmui @toruro @jeonride @novalpha @nvmrljk @feat-sun @tinkerbell460 @aaniag @tacosandbitch @cottoncheol @embrace-themagic

Valentine's Day has always been a bit of a hit or miss for you. The last time you remember eagerly anticipating the holiday was back in high school. Since then, the allure of celebrating love and romance seemed to fade away, as you realized that not everything in the world is adorned in shades of pink and red. Valentine's Day became a luxury, a whimsical indulgence that felt distant and impractical for someone navigating a world that often left little room for such extravagances. Life, for you, was a series of tasks, responsibilities, and the constant juggling act of making ends meet.

From the time you were in high school, you entered the realm of adulthood, where dreams sometimes took a backseat to the more immediate needs of providing for your family. The dreams you put on hold lingered in the recesses of your mind, awaiting their turn to be fulfilled. Working tirelessly, you made sacrifices, dedicating yourself to a job that demanded your energy and time. Despite the challenges, you pressed on, ensuring the well-being of your family, who toiled alongside you, if not even harder.

Now, as an adult working a part-time job that offers a slightly better paycheck than your previous one, you’ve grown used to the matter. While the financial gains may not be monumental, every improvement counts, especially when compared to the downfalls of your previous workplace.

Amidst the whirlwind of your daily hustle, Valentine's Day transforms into a distant echo of the past–a time when celebrations were carefree and seemingly attainable. However, for you, navigating the world feels akin to maneuvering on an almost empty tank. In this moment, mere existence becomes a means to sustain yourself.

“Is this a gift? If so, would you like it to be gift-wrapped for you?”

The middle-aged man raises an eyebrow, smacking that mint gum that doesn’t seem to mask his nicotine-coated breath. “Is it extra?”

“It’s two dollars extra.”

Usually, you’d really sell the idea that the highest premium quality wrapping paper would be used to then be topped off with a satin ribbon that truly pulls it all together, but for such a customer, you know you’d be wasting your breath.

He scoffs, snatching the bag off the counter. “Are you trying to scam me? Fuck that shit.”

You let a sigh of relief slip past your lips the moment he made his way out the sliding door, muttering to yourself about the smell. You reach down for your Powerade hidden on a bottom shelf of the counter you stand behind, hoping this supposed ‘power’ would relinquish itself to you for another long shift.

It’s the day before Valentine's Day, which means the rush has become a regular occurrence since about a week ago. The store is bursting with vibrant displays of flowers, stuffed animals clutching oversized lollipops, and decadent heart-shaped boxes of chocolates. Not such a bad gig if you look at it.

However, the true predicament lies in the presence of aggressive customers, drawn to discounts like magnets. They're all about grabbing anything and everything that's on sale, making things more complicated than they need to be. It's like they're trying to see how far they can push things and make your day even crazier. Dealing with them adds an extra layer of chaos to the already busy scene as if you haven’t lost faith in humanity enough.

“I bought this yesterday and it’s DIGUSTING! I want a full refund and extra compensation for my time and taste buds being wasted on this disgusting excuse of a candy.”

Popping open the box revealed a sorry sight–almost half the candies were missing as if they'd gone on a little taste adventure without an invite. The poor box looked like it had been through a candy apocalypse, so messed up that I couldn't even be sure if it originally belonged to our store.

“Ma’am, I’m sorry you're dissatisfied with our products. However, because the box is so damaged and half of the contents have been consumed we cannot accept this return,” you respond in your most polite service voice.

“Are you fucking kidding me? Where the hell is your manager? The customer is always right!”

At last, a wave of relief crashes over you like a superhero arriving just in the nick of time during closing hours. The once bustling crowd has dwindled, allowing you to begin the task of rearranging items and securing the cash register, signaling the imminent conclusion of yet another busy day.

Just when you're on the verge of clocking out and calling it a day, a sudden interruption unfolds at the entrance. A lone figure materializes outside, softly tapping on the glass as if pleading to be granted entry.

"Please," his voice is all muffled through the glass, "I know you're about to close, but pretty please! I just need to grab something real quick. I already know exactly what I need!"

It’s not every day you see a man of his looks and caliber beg to be given access to a candy store as if he were a determined child. There's this undeniable air of urgency about him–as if he’d die if we didn’t get what he needed–but it doesn't overshadow his perfectly proportioned features that illuminate under the evening street lights. Ultimately, you decide to approach the door, swiftly undoing the top lock of the door and allowing him inside.

He expresses his gratitude with a grateful clasp of his hands, swiftly navigating through the inventory to grab what he urgently needs. Returning to the counter, you initiate the process of unraveling the closing procedures, all the while fervently hoping that no one else decides to join the stranger in last minute browsing.

"Sorry," he apologizes as he drops his items on the counter: several heart-shaped boxes and a bear clutching a mini Mylar balloon that shouts 'I love you,' with a small box of chocolates in its other paw. A classic and popular choice.

“That’s a lot of chocolate. Big family?”

He shakes his head, "Nah, these are for a company thing. I've been busting my butt for weeks, and the one simple task I get, I can't even manage it until the last minute."

"Got it. And the bear? Picking up a last-minute surprise for your girlfriend too?"

A slightly offended look crosses his face. "Oh, if I had a girlfriend, I’d do way more than make up my tardiness with a teddy bear.” He holds the fluffy creature in his hand, “This is just for my mom. So, if you ever spot a lady with my face and long hair, please, keep it on the down-low."

You chuckle softly, bagging up his purchases. "I'll remember that. Cash or credit?"

He extends his hand, revealing his credit card with his full name on display. As you sound out the name in your head, it strikes you as unique yet oddly familiar. You run the card through the machine, unaware that the customer is squinting at you, also trying to place where he might know you from.

"Hey, have we met before? You seem really familiar," he questions.

"Uh, not sure, but your name does ring a bell," you reply as you hand the card back. "Haven't come across too many Wen Junhuis."

"Wait, how do you know my name?" he questions.

"Well, it's on your credit card, sir," You respond with straightforward precision.

"True, but no one has picked it up as quickly and accurately as you did. Maybe we do know each other."

You shrug. "Maybe so. I think the last time I heard a name like that was back in elementary school. A classmate maybe."

"Hold on, you couldn't be Y/n, right?" he questions, his eyes widening with realization.

You take a brief pause to grasp the implication, acknowledging it with a nod. "Been a long time coming, hasn't it?"

His smile widened across his cheeks, evoking memories of a similar grin on a boy more than half his age. "Yeah. Well, I be damned. I'm surprised you remember my name."

"It's pretty distinctive; I'm surprised you remember mine."

He scoffs. "You are a core memory, thank you very much. One of the nicest and coolest people in our grade. God, remember our first Valentines?"

"Yes," you softly chuckle, the memories of childhood innocence flooding back. "I begged my mom to get these really nice scented Valentine cards to give to the class."

"And you gave me the lemon one because I love lemons, and I gave you one of the hologram cards of a cat that smiles when you flip it on its side."

"I was so excited to show my sister, and I just know she was so jealous."

"Yeah, where did the time go?" he sighs, his smile turning wistful on his lips.

You shake your head, still smiling from the unexpected trip down memory lane, and finally, hand off his gifts back to him. "Would you like a receipt?"

"No, I'm good. So,” He leans over the counter curiously, “What are you doing this Valentine's?"

"Working the day. I'll probably just grab takeout for dinner and head home. You?"

"It's a workday,” he says proceeding to grab his things. “So most of the day is spent in the office. But, I'm free the rest of the evening…would it be weird if I asked you out for Valentine's Day?" he nervously proposes.

You raise an eyebrow, slightly taken aback but intrigued. "You want me to be your Valentine?"

"Couldn't hurt," he nonchalantly shrugged, a wry grin playing on his lips. Then, as if a light bulb flickered to life above his head, an idea dawned on him, sparking mischief in his eyes.

"Unless you've got a 200-pound, all-muscle boyfriend ready to beat my ass," he quips, his tone laced with a hint of sarcasm. The words linger in the air, forming a playful challenge and a subtle admission that, just maybe, he wasn't entirely impervious to consequences.

It harks back to a past altercation, one of those rare 'couple quarrels' you had. The promise was made in jest—that you'd leave him if he ever pulled on your hair again, and he'd have to face a burly 200-pound muscle man. Though uttered in humor with no evidence of said muscle man, it struck a chord of genuine concern in his little boy heart, and he kept that promise until the end of your relationship. The memory lingered, manifesting now in an unmistakable charm, a blend of audacity, bravado, and humor that fills the air with laughter and unadulterated ease.

You chuckle. “Lucikly, I don’t, but I don’t know you. Who knows what kind of person you, or I, have become in the last fifteen or so years? Maybe I'm a bitch.”

"Well, as long as there’s no one else in the picture, I see no problem. Bitch all you want to me." he grins.

Your expression shifts into a playful contemplation, "Why me? I'm pretty sure there are plenty of people out there dying for a dinner date with you. I mean, the last thing we shared was a juice box."

"Maybe I'm hoping to reignite an old spark. If I recall our MASH game correctly, we were supposed to be living in a shack with 20 kids, a dog, and daily commutes on a scooter," Junhui retorts.

"Thank goodness that scenario never played out, but, um, I'm not sure dinner is a good idea."

As the banter unfolds, you realize it's been an eternity since you've experienced the thrill of a proper date. The mere thought of dressing up, the nervous excitement before meeting someone, and the shared laughter over a romantic meal become fragments of a distant past, like pages in a cherished novel stored away on a forgotten shelf.

“We never know unless we try, right?” He says, a teasing glint in his eyes.

“You always hit on exes that you stumble upon on a random Tuesday?”

“Only the pretty ones.” Junhui grins, swiftly extracting a candy box from the bag. With a quick scribble on the side, he hands it to you. “If you change your mind. Happy Valentine's Day.”

You roll your eyes playfully, a smile tugging at the corners of your lips as you accept the candy. “Happy Valentine's Day to you too, Jun.”

You depart with a box of candy in hand when your shift ends, Junhui's number hastily scribbled on the top, the ink still fresh as that abrupt encounter. As you make your way home, the city lights shimmering in the distance, you find your thoughts circling back to his audacious proposition.

The weight of the candy box seems to mirror the gravity of the decision before you. The city streets, now quieter in the late evening, echo with dilemma of pursuing his offer. You can't deny the charm that lingers in the air—a mix of confusion, nostalgia, and an unexpected connection. The mere act of considering his offer adds a layer of excitement to the night, anticipation for plans that have been yet set in motion.

As you unlock the door to your apartment, the scent of familiarity welcomes you warmly for once, likely due to the refreshing end of your night. You set the candy aside–already having memorized Junhui's number–and with a decisive tap, you enter his number into your phone. The screen lights up with his name, a digital beacon inviting you to venture into uncharted territory. As you send a quick message, the city outside continues its gentle hum, and you can't help but feel giddy. You’re eleven all over again.

The memory of Junhui's charismatic grin lingers in your mind, a subtle tug at the edges of your thoughts the moment you hit send, and you throw the phone aside, letting yourself get rid of the electrifying nerves running through your body. When you hear the notification going off–Junhui’s name on display–you realize there’s no going back.

The following day, you’re excited about living for once. Delighted to have something to look forward to after work, you board today's bus with a genuine smile on your face, a subtle change that doesn't escape the notice of the bus drivers, who have grown accustomed to your early presence by now.

As the bus carries you through the familiar townscape, you can't help but revel in the subtle shift in the air. The usual humdrum of daily life seems to have given way to a vibrant undercurrent of anticipation for the holiday. The ordinary scenes outside the window take on a slightly pink hue, and you find yourself savoring the details that often go unnoticed illuminated with festive decor.

Work hours also pass with a newfound energy, and the anticipation for the evening grows with each passing minute, even with the rambunctious customers buying more gifts just in the nick of time. The mundane tasks of the day become a mere backdrop to the vibrant scene that awaits you once the clock strikes the end of the workday.

Today, the world outside the candy store seems to radiate brighter than any other day has. The street lights gradually flickering on, usually just a backdrop to your daily grind, now beckon with a promise of surprises. As the day unfolds, you find yourself counting down the hours until your appointment time arrives and you quickly change into your Valentine's date attire, anticipating Junhui's reappearance.

Time moves forward—one hour, two hours, three hours. Doubts begin to creep in. Were you merely indulging in wishful thinking at this point?

The rose-tinted glasses, which once painted the day with a hopeful hue, must have started to expire. Now, a subtle gray takes over, bringing you back to the stark reality of the passing moments. The initial excitement begins to wane, replaced by a tinge of disappointment and a hint of uncertainty.

As the clock ticks away, doubts and questions swirl in your mind like a gathering storm. The vibrant anticipation that once filled the air begins to dissipate, leaving behind a quiet unease.

You glance at your reflection in the mirror, the Valentine's date attire now carrying a touch of wistfulness. The city outside, once alive with the promise of a special evening, now takes on a different tone. The street lights, initially beacons of excitement, cast shadows that dance with anxiety and unease. The imminent arrival of buses amplifies a fleeting thought–maybe, just maybe, you can still catch it if you run.

Taking a leap of faith, you hastily gather your belongings and make your way to the bus station, adhering to your initial plan—opting for takeout in the solitude of home, if restaurants are still an option at this hour. Amidst the uncertainty, your phone succumbs to the lack of power, its screen plunged into darkness, mirroring the tone of your night.

The familiarity of home brings no comfort, only disheartenment. You set aside the dinner you had envisioned for tonight, plugging in your phone to replenish its drained battery, intentionally avoiding any further interaction with the outside world for the remainder of the night.

When your phone finally regains its power, messages burst to life in an instant, one particular message standing out, beckoning attention. That is, of course, if you were still around to witness it.

Junhui: I’m so sorry! You will not believe the day I had. My office was bombarding me all day with extra work and i only left now. Please tell me its not too late.

P.S. and here's that valentine i wanted to give to you <3 i hope you like it as much as this fic so far

236 notes · View notes

hypnogold · 3 months ago

Text

The Golden Shift

Goldmarkt wasn’t always the sleek, upscale supermarket it was today. Years ago, it had been an ordinary grocery store, known for its fair prices and friendly atmosphere. Families came for their weekly shopping, greeted by employees in simple uniforms. The store had a mix of men and women, and everyone worked well together.

But things changed when GoldCorp, a mysterious corporate entity, bought the chain. The original owners were quietly replaced, and whispers spread among the staff about a new direction for the store. That’s when Richard arrived.

Richard was sent to oversee the transformation of Goldmarkt. His methods were subtle at first—just small changes, like improving efficiency and updating technology. But beneath the surface, there was a more sinister plan in motion. GoldCorp had discovered something powerful: the allure of gold. Not just as a symbol of wealth, but as a tool for control. The gold in the uniforms and décor was imbued with subliminal cues, designed to break down resistance and foster total loyalty.

When Richard arrived, he immediately began making sweeping changes. The employees noticed how sharply dressed he was—his uniform was nothing like theirs. Richard wore a shiny metallic golden AC Milan soccer jersey over a crisp white button-up shirt, with a bold red-and-black striped tie. The golden jersey caught the light, making him seem larger than life. Every detail of his appearance was perfect, from the way his tie was knotted to the way the gold on his sleeves shimmered under the store’s fluorescent lights.

Richard’s first order of business was to introduce a new system for organizing the store. “We need to make Goldmarkt a symbol of excellence,” he said in a meeting. “Efficiency, order, and discipline are key. We’ll begin by assigning each of you to the departments that suit you best.”

It all seemed reasonable enough, but the employees soon found out that Richard’s “assignments” were anything but ordinary.

The test was mandatory. Each employee, from cashiers to stock clerks, was called into Richard’s office to take it. The questions seemed harmless at first, but as they went on, they became more personal.

“How do you feel about wearing uniforms?”

“How much do you value structure and hierarchy in the workplace?”

“How proud would you feel representing Goldmarkt in gold?”

The answers didn’t matter. The test was designed to assess obedience, to see who would willingly embrace the new system and who might resist.

Once the test was completed, each employee received their new uniform. It wasn’t just any uniform—it was a shiny metallic golden AC Milan soccer jersey with a white button-up shirt underneath and a red-and-black striped tie.

The gold shimmered with a hypnotic quality, and each department had its own unique touch:

Bakery staff were given small golden bakery caps to wear with their uniforms, adding a touch of elegance to their roles.

Stock clerks wore golden aprons tied around their waists, the gleam of gold marking them as part of the new order.

Cashiers received golden blazers with their name and department embroidered in bold lettering.

The once colorful and varied staff now glimmered in gold, their names and numbers embroidered on the backs of their jerseys. It wasn’t just a uniform—it was a symbol of submission to the new Goldmarkt order.

Almost overnight, the female employees began disappearing. One day, Sarah didn’t show up for her shift. Then Lily, a cashier, was suddenly gone. No one questioned it at first. Richard had mentioned in passing that some employees had moved on to other opportunities, but soon, it became clear that all of the women had been quietly removed.

Alex noticed it one morning when he arrived for his shift. The store felt different—emptier, quieter. He glanced around at the rows of employees now filling the aisles, all men, all wearing their new golden uniforms.

“Where did everyone go?” Alex asked Ryan as they stood in the breakroom.

Ryan, now wearing the golden Assistant Manager’s uniform—a shiny AC Milan jersey with a special golden stripe down his sleeves—didn’t seem concerned. “Who cares? This new system’s working. Just look at us. We’re more organized than ever.”

But Alex couldn’t shake the feeling that something was terribly wrong.

For the employees who didn’t adapt quickly enough to the new system, Richard had another tool: subtle hypnosis. The test wasn’t just about assigning departments; it was also a way to gauge resistance. Those who showed reluctance to embrace the golden uniform or questioned the new rules were quietly called into Richard’s office for “one-on-one discussions.” Everyone obeys...

Tom, a stock clerk, had been vocal about his discomfort with the new uniforms. “I don’t get why we need to wear all this gold. It’s just a supermarket, right?”

Richard smiled, his golden tie gleaming as he gestured for Tom to sit. “It’s about pride, Tom. Don’t you want to feel proud of the work you do here?”

Tom hesitated but sat down, thinking it was just another conversation about job performance. But as the discussion went on, Tom felt his mind start to drift. Richard’s voice was calm, soothing, and the golden light reflecting off the walls seemed to dance in his vision. Before he knew it, Tom was nodding along, his resistance fading.

When Tom left Richard’s office, he was different. His eyes were glazed, and his movements were slow and deliberate. He no longer questioned the uniform. He wore his golden apron with pride, and his mind seemed entirely focused on his duties.

“I get it now,” Tom said later to Alex, his voice distant. “The gold... it’s what we need. It’s who we are.”

Tom and Richard made new promotion pictures for recruits, who would not fall for it? Ready to embrace the Gold?

As time passed, it became clear that those who embraced the gold the quickest were rewarded. Ryan, who had accepted the changes immediately, rose to Assistant Manager within weeks. His shiny golden jersey had additional golden details, marking him as part of the store’s leadership team.

Other employees who showed enthusiasm for their uniforms were promoted as well. Stock clerks like Ben were given special roles as inventory managers, their golden aprons bearing embroidered titles. Bakery staff who worked without question were allowed to wear special golden caps, a symbol of their higher rank.

The more obedient the employees were, the more gold they were given. It wasn’t long before the entire store was run by men in gleaming golden uniforms, each of them eager to serve.

Not everyone fell in line as easily as Ryan. Alex had noticed the changes in the store—the disappearance of the women, the sudden rise of employees who once resisted but now worked with eerie devotion. He knew something was wrong, and the gold wasn’t just a uniform anymore—it was a symbol of something darker.

One night, after closing, Alex snuck into Richard’s office. He had to find out what was going on. Inside, he found a folder labeled “Gold Implementation Plan.” As he flipped through the pages, his heart raced. The documents outlined the entire process: the tests, the hypnosis, and the gold’s power over the mind.

The gold uniforms weren’t just for show. They were part of a larger plan to control the workforce, breaking down resistance and fostering total obedience. Those who questioned the system were slowly reprogrammed through subtle hypnosis until they wore the gold with pride.

Alex slammed the folder shut, his heart pounding. He had to leave. He had to escape before the gold claimed him too.

But as he turned to leave, the door creaked open. Richard stood in the doorway, his eyes gleaming.

“You should have accepted the gold, Alex,” Richard said softly. “But don’t worry. We’ll take care of that.”

The next morning, Alex returned to work, but he was different. His shiny metallic golden AC Milan jersey hung neatly in his locker, waiting for him. Without hesitation, he put it on. The golden fabric clung to him, and as it did, he felt a wave of calm wash over him.

The doubts, the questions, the fear—they all melted away. The uniform wasn’t just clothing; it was part of him now. The gold was his identity.

Richard greeted him as he stepped onto the floor. “Looking good, Alex 13,” he said with a grin. “You’re one of us now.”

Alex smiled back, feeling the warmth of the gold coursing through him. He was part of Goldmarkt now, and he wore his shiny golden uniform with pride.

"We Obey Gold, We Obey Cap"

#male transformation #gold #soccer tf #hypnotised #golden army

64 notes · View notes

covid-safer-hotties · 3 months ago

Text

Also preserved on our archive

SARS-CoV-2 is now circulating out of control worldwide. The only major limitation on transmission is the immune environment the virus faces. The disease it causes, COVID-19, is now a risk faced by most people as part of daily life.

While some are better than others, no national or regional government is making serious efforts towards infection prevention and control, and it seems likely this laissez-faire policy will continue for the foreseeable future. The social, political, and economic movements that worked to achieve this mass infection environment can rejoice at their success.

Those schooled in public health, immunology or working on the front line of healthcare provision know we face an uncertain future, and are aware the implications of recent events stretch far beyond SARS-CoV-2. The shifts that have taken place in attitudes and public health policy will likely damage a key pillar that forms the basis of modern civilized society, one that was built over the last two centuries; the expectation of a largely uninterrupted upwards trajectory of ever-improving health and quality of life, largely driven by the reduction and elimination of infectious diseases that plagued humankind for thousands of years. In the last three years, that trajectory has reversed.

The upward trajectory of public health in the last two centuries Control of infectious disease has historically been a priority for all societies. Quarantine has been in common use since at least the Bronze Age and has been the key method for preventing the spread of infectious diseases ever since. The word “quarantine” itself derives from the 40-day isolation period for ships and crews that was implemented in Europe during the late Middle Ages to prevent the introduction of bubonic plague epidemics into cities.

Modern public health traces its roots to the middle of the 19th century thanks to converging scientific developments in early industrial societies:

The early industrial era generated horrendous workplace and living conditions for working class populations living in large industrial cities, dramatically reducing life expectancy and quality of life (life expectancy at birth in key industrial cities in the middle of the 19th century was often in the low 30s or even lower). This in turn resulted in a recognition that such environmental factors affect human health and life spans. The long and bitter struggle for workers’ rights in subsequent decades resulted in much improved working conditions, workplace safety regulations, and general sanitation, and brought sharp increases in life expectancy and quality of life, which in turn had positive impacts on productivity and wealth.

Florence Nightingale reemphasized the role of ventilation in healing and preventing illness, ‘The very first canon of nursing… : keep the air he breathes as pure as the external air, without chilling him,’ a maxim that influenced building design at the time.

These trends continued in the 20th century, greatly helped by further technological and scientific advances. Many diseases – diphtheria, pertussis, hepatitis B, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, etc. – became things of the past thanks to near-universal highly effective vaccinations, while others that used to be common are no longer of such concern for highly developed countries in temperate climates – malaria, typhus, typhoid, leprosy, cholera, tuberculosis, and many others – primarily thanks to improvements in hygiene and the implementation of non-pharmaceutical measures for their containment.

Furthermore, the idea that infectious diseases should not just be reduced, but permanently eliminated altogether began to be put into practice in the second half of the 20th century on a global level, and much earlier locally. These programs were based on the obvious consideration that if an infectious agent is driven to extinction, the incalculable damage to people’s health and the overall economy by a persisting and indefinite disease burden will also be eliminated.

The ambition of local elimination grew into one of global eradication for smallpox, which was successfully eliminated from the human population in the 1970s (this had already been achieved locally in the late 19th century by some countries), after a heroic effort to find and contain the last remaining infectious individuals. The other complete success was rinderpest in cattle9,10, globally eradicated in the early 21st century.

When the COVID-19 pandemic started, global eradication programs were very close to succeeding for two other diseases – polio and dracunculiasis. Eradication is also globally pursued for other diseases, such as yaws, and regionally for many others, e.g. lymphatic filariasis, onchocerciasis, measles and rubella. The most challenging diseases are those that have an external reservoir outside the human population, especially if they are insect borne, and in particular those carried by mosquitos. Malaria is the primary example, but despite these difficulties, eradication of malaria has been a long-standing global public health goal and elimination has been achieved in temperate regions of the globe, even though it involved the ecologically destructive widespread application of polluting chemical pesticides to reduce the populations of the vectors. Elimination is also a public goal for other insect borne diseases such as trypanosomiasis.

In parallel with pursuing maximal reduction and eventual eradication of the burden of existing endemic infectious diseases, humanity has also had to battle novel infectious diseases40, which have been appearing at an increased rate over recent decades. Most of these diseases are of zoonotic origin, and the rate at which they are making the jump from wildlife to humans is accelerating, because of the increased encroachment on wildlife due to expanding human populations and physical infrastructure associated with human activity, the continued destruction of wild ecosystems that forces wild animals towards closer human contact, the booming wildlife trade, and other such trends.

Because it is much easier to stop an outbreak when it is still in its early stages of spreading through the population than to eradicate an endemic pathogen, the governing principle has been that no emerging infectious disease should be allowed to become endemic. This goal has been pursued reasonably successfully and without controversy for many decades.

The most famous newly emerging pathogens were the filoviruses (Ebola, Marburg), the SARS and MERS coronaviruses, and paramyxoviruses like Nipah. These gained fame because of their high lethality and potential for human-to-human spread, but they were merely the most notable of many examples.

Such epidemics were almost always aggressively suppressed. Usually, these were small outbreaks, and because highly pathogenic viruses such as Ebola cause very serious sickness in practically all infected people, finding and isolating the contagious individuals is a manageable task. The largest such epidemic was the 2013-16 Ebola outbreak in West Africa, when a filovirus spread widely in major urban centers for the first time. Containment required a wartime-level mobilization, but that was nevertheless achieved, even though there were nearly 30,000 infections and more than 11,000 deaths.

SARS was also contained and eradicated from the human population back in 2003-04, and the same happened every time MERS made the jump from camels to humans, as well as when there were Nipah outbreaks in Asia.

The major counterexample of a successful establishment in the human population of a novel highly pathogenic virus is HIV. HIV is a retrovirus, and as such it integrates into the host genome and is thus nearly impossible to eliminate from the body and to eradicate from the population (unless all infected individuals are identified and prevented from infecting others for the rest of their lives). However, HIV is not an example of the containment principle being voluntarily abandoned as the virus had made its zoonotic jump and established itself many decades before its eventual discovery and recognition, and long before the molecular tools that could have detected and potentially fully contained it existed.

Still, despite all these containment success stories, the emergence of a new pathogen with pandemic potential was a well understood and frequently discussed threat, although influenza viruses rather than coronaviruses were often seen as the most likely culprit. The eventual appearance of SARS-CoV-2 should therefore not have been a huge surprise, and should have been met with a full mobilization of the technical tools and fundamental public health principles developed over the previous decades.

The ecological context One striking property of many emerging pathogens is how many of them come from bats. While the question of whether bats truly harbor more viruses than other mammals in proportion to their own species diversity (which is the second highest within mammals after rodents) is not fully settled yet, many novel viruses do indeed originate from bats, and the ecological and physiological characteristics of bats are highly relevant for understanding the situation that Homo sapiens finds itself in right now.

Another startling property of bats and their viruses is how highly pathogenic to humans (and other mammals) many bat viruses are, while bats themselves are not much affected (only rabies is well established to cause serious harm to bats). Why bats seem to carry so many such pathogens, and how they have adapted so well to coexisting with them, has been a long-standing puzzle and although we do not have a definitive answer, some general trends have become clear.

These are characteristics that might have on one hand facilitated the evolution of a considerable set of viruses associated with bat populations. In order for a non-latent respiratory virus to maintain itself, a minimal population size is necessary. For example, it is hypothesized that measles requires a minimum population size of 250-300,000 individuals. And bats have existed in a state of high population densities for a very long time, which might explain the high diversity of viruses that they carry. In addition, the long lifespan of many bat species means that their viruses may have to evolve strategies to overcome adaptive immunity and frequently reinfect previously infected individuals as opposed to the situation in short-lived species in which populations turn over quickly (with immunologically naive individuals replacing the ones that die out).

On the other hand, the selective pressure that these viruses have exerted on bats may have resulted in the evolution of various resistance and/or tolerance mechanisms in bats themselves, which in turn have driven the evolution of counter strategies in their viruses, leading them to be highly virulent for other species. Bats certainly appear to be physiologically more tolerant towards viruses that are otherwise highly virulent to other mammals. Several explanations for this adaptation have been proposed, chief among them a much more powerful innate immunity and a tolerance towards infections that does not lead to the development of the kind of hyperinflammatory reactions observed in humans, the high body temperature of bats in flight, and others.

The notable strength of bat innate immunity is often explained by the constitutively active interferon response that has been reported for some bat species. It is possible that this is not a universal characteristic of all bats – only a few species have been studied – but it provides a very attractive mechanism for explaining both how bats prevent the development of severe systemic viral infections in their bodies and how their viruses in turn would have evolved powerful mechanisms to silence the interferon response, making them highly pathogenic for other mammals.

The tolerance towards infection is possibly rooted in the absence of some components of the signaling cascades leading to hyperinflammatory reactions and the dampened activity of others.

An obvious ecological parallel can be drawn between bats and humans – just as bats live in dense colonies, so now do modern humans. And we may now be at a critical point in the history of our species, in which our ever-increasing ecological footprint has brought us in close contact with bats in a way that was much rarer in the past. Our population is connected in ways that were previously unimaginable. A novel virus can make the zoonotic jump somewhere in Southeast Asia and a carrier of it can then be on the other side of the globe a mere 24-hours later, having encountered thousands of people in airports and other mass transit systems. As a result, bat pathogens are now being transferred from bat populations to the human population in what might prove to be the second major zoonotic spillover event after the one associated with domestication of livestock and pets a few thousand years ago.

Unfortunately for us, our physiology is not suited to tolerate these new viruses. Bats have adapted to live with them over many millions of years. Humans have not undergone the same kind of adaptation and cannot do so on any timescale that will be of use to those living now, nor to our immediate descendants.

Simply put, humans are not bats, and the continuous existence and improvement of what we now call “civilization” depends on the same basic public health and infectious disease control that saw life expectancy in high-income countries more than double to 85 years. This is a challenge that will only increase in the coming years, because the trends that are accelerating the rate of zoonotic transfer of pathogens are certain to persist.

Given this context, it is as important now to maintain the public health principle that no new dangerous pathogens should be allowed to become endemic and that all novel infectious disease outbreaks must be suppressed as it ever was.

The death of public health and the end of epidemiological comfort It is also in this context that the real gravity of what has happened in the last three years emerges.

After HIV, SARS-CoV-2 is now the second most dangerous infectious disease agent that is 'endemic' to the human population on a global scale. And yet not only was it allowed to become endemic, but mass infection was outright encouraged, including by official public health bodies in numerous countries.

The implications of what has just happened have been missed by most, so let’s spell them out explicitly.

We need to be clear why containment of SARS-CoV-2 was actively sabotaged and eventually abandoned. It has absolutely nothing to do with the “impossibility” of achieving it. In fact, the technical problem of containing even a stealthily spreading virus such as SARS-CoV-2 is fully solved, and that solution was successfully applied in practice for years during the pandemic.

The list of countries that completely snuffed out outbreaks, often multiple times, includes Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Taiwan, Vietnam, Thailand, Bhutan, Cuba, China, and a few others, with China having successfully contained hundreds of separate outbreaks, before finally giving up in late 2022.

The algorithm for containment is well established – passively break transmission chains through the implementation of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as limiting human contacts, high quality respirator masks, indoor air filtration and ventilation, and others, while aggressively hunting down active remaining transmission chains through traditional contact tracing and isolation methods combined with the powerful new tool of population-scale testing.

Understanding of airborne transmission and institution of mitigation measures, which have heretofore not been utilized in any country, will facilitate elimination, even with the newer, more transmissible variants. Any country that has the necessary resources (or is provided with them) can achieve full containment within a few months. In fact, currently this would be easier than ever before because of the accumulated widespread multiple recent exposures to the virus in the population suppressing the effective reproduction number (Re). For the last 18 months or so we have been seeing a constant high plateau of cases with undulating waves, but not the major explosions of infections with Re reaching 3-4 that were associated with the original introduction of the virus in 2020 and with the appearance of the first Omicron variants in late 2021.

It would be much easier to use NPIs to drive Re to much below 1 and keep it there until elimination when starting from Re around 1.2-1.3 than when it was over 3, and this moment should be used, before another radically new serotype appears and takes us back to those even more unpleasant situations. This is not a technical problem, but one of political and social will. As long as leadership misunderstands or pretends to misunderstand the link between increased mortality, morbidity and poorer economic performance and the free transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the impetus will be lacking to take the necessary steps to contain this damaging virus.

Political will is in short supply because powerful economic and corporate interests have been pushing policymakers to let the virus spread largely unchecked through the population since the very beginning of the pandemic. The reasons are simple. First, NPIs hurt general economic activity, even if only in the short term, resulting in losses on balance sheets. Second, large-scale containment efforts of the kind we only saw briefly in the first few months of the pandemic require substantial governmental support for all the people who need to pause their economic activity for the duration of effort. Such an effort also requires large-scale financial investment in, for example, contact tracing and mass testing infrastructure and providing high-quality masks. In an era dominated by laissez-faire economic dogma, this level of state investment and organization would have set too many unacceptable precedents, so in many jurisdictions it was fiercely resisted, regardless of the consequences for humanity and the economy.

None of these social and economic predicaments have been resolved. The unofficial alliance between big business and dangerous pathogens that was forged in early 2020 has emerged victorious and greatly strengthened from its battle against public health, and is poised to steamroll whatever meager opposition remains for the remainder of this, and future pandemics.

The long-established principles governing how we respond to new infectious diseases have now completely changed – the precedent has been established that dangerous emerging pathogens will no longer be contained, but instead permitted to ‘ease’ into widespread circulation. The intent to “let it rip” in the future is now being openly communicated. With this change in policy comes uncertainty about acceptable lethality. Just how bad will an infectious disease have to be to convince any government to mobilize a meaningful global public health response?

We have some clues regarding that issue from what happened during the initial appearance of the Omicron “variant” (which was really a new serotype) of SARS-CoV-2. Despite some experts warning that a vaccine-only approach would be doomed to fail, governments gambled everything on it. They were then faced with the brute fact of viral evolution destroying their strategy when a new serotype emerged against which existing vaccines had little effect in terms of blocking transmission. The reaction was not to bring back NPIs but to give up, seemingly regardless of the consequences.

Critically, those consequences were unknown when the policy of no intervention was adopted within days of the appearance of Omicron. All previous new SARS-CoV-2 variants had been deadlier than the original Wuhan strain, with the eventually globally dominant Delta variant perhaps as much as 4× as deadly. Omicron turned out to be the exception, but again, that was not known with any certainty when it was allowed to run wild through populations. What would have happened if it had followed the same pattern as Delta?

In the USA, for example, the worst COVID-19 wave was the one in the winter of 2020-21, at the peak of which at least 3,500 people were dying daily (the real number was certainly higher because of undercounting due to lack of testing and improper reporting). The first Omicron BA.1 wave saw the second-highest death tolls, with at least 2,800 dying per day at its peak. Had Omicron been as intrinsically lethal as Delta, we could have easily seen a 4-5× higher peak than January 2021, i.e. as many as 12–15,000 people dying a day. Given that we only had real data on Omicron’s intrinsic lethality after the gigantic wave of infections was unleashed onto the population, we have to conclude that 12–15,000 dead a day is now a threshold that will not force the implementation of serious NPIs for the next problematic COVID-19 serotype.

Logically, it follows that it is also a threshold that will not result in the implementation of NPIs for any other emerging pathogens either. Because why should SARS-CoV-2 be special?

We can only hope that we will never see the day when such an epidemic hits us but experience tells us such optimism is unfounded. The current level of suffering caused by COVID-19 has been completely normalized even though such a thing was unthinkable back in 2019. Populations are largely unaware of the long-term harms the virus is causing to those infected, of the burden on healthcare, increased disability, mortality and reduced life expectancy. Once a few even deadlier outbreaks have been shrugged off by governments worldwide, the baseline of what is considered “acceptable” will just gradually move up and even more unimaginable losses will eventually enter the “acceptable” category. There can be no doubt, from a public health perspective, we are regressing.

We had a second, even more worrying real-life example of what the future holds with the global spread of the MPX virus (formerly known as “monkeypox” and now called “Mpox”) in 2022. MPX is a close relative to the smallpox VARV virus and is endemic to Central and Western Africa, where its natural hosts are mostly various rodent species, but on occasions it infects humans too, with the rate of zoonotic transfer increasing over recent decades. It has usually been characterized by fairly high mortality – the CFR (Case Fatality Rate) has been ∼3.6% for the strain that circulates in Nigeria and ∼10% for the one in the Congo region, i.e. much worse than SARS-CoV-2. In 2022, an unexpected global MPX outbreak developed, with tens of thousands of confirmed cases in dozens of countries. Normally, this would be a huge cause for alarm, for several reasons.

First, MPX itself is a very dangerous disease. Second, universal smallpox vaccination ended many decades ago with the success of the eradication program, leaving the population born after that completely unprotected. Third, lethality in orthopoxviruses is, in fact, highly variable – VARV itself had a variola major strain, with as much as ∼30% CFR, and a less deadly variola minor variety with CFR ∼1%, and there was considerable variation within variola major too. It also appears that high pathogenicity often evolves from less pathogenic strains through reductive evolution - the loss of certain genes something that can happen fairly easily, may well have happened repeatedly in the past, and may happen again in the future, a scenario that has been repeatedly warned about for decades. For these reasons, it was unthinkable that anyone would just shrug off a massive MPX outbreak – it is already bad enough as it is, but allowing it to become endemic means it can one day evolve towards something functionally equivalent to smallpox in its impact.

And yet that is exactly what happened in 2022 – barely any measures were taken to contain the outbreak, and countries simply reclassified MPX out of the “high consequence infectious disease” category in order to push the problem away, out of sight and out of mind. By chance, it turned out that this particular outbreak did not spark a global pandemic, and it was also characterized, for poorly understood reasons, by an unusually low CFR, with very few people dying. But again, that is not the information that was available at the start of the outbreak, when in a previous, interventionist age of public health, resources would have been mobilized to stamp it out in its infancy, but, in the age of laissez-faire, were not. MPX is now circulating around the world and represents a future threat of uncontrolled transmission resulting in viral adaptation to highly efficient human-to-human spread combined with much greater disease severity.

Rat climbing a ship's rigging. Modern public health traces its roots to the middle of the 19th century thanks to converging scientific developments in early industrial societies:

The germ theory of diseases was firmly established in the mid-19th century, in particular after Louis Pasteur disproved the spontaneous generation hypothesis. If diseases spread through transmission chains between individual humans or from the environment/animals to humans, then it follows that those transmission chains can be interrupted, and the spread stopped. The science of epidemiology appeared, its birth usually associated with the 1854 Broad Street cholera outbreak in London during which the British physician John Snow identified contaminated water as the source of cholera, pointing to improved sanitation as the way to stop cholera epidemics. Vaccination technology began to develop, initially against smallpox, and the first mandatory smallpox vaccination campaigns began, starting in England in the 1850s. The early industrial era generated horrendous workplace and living conditions for working class populations living in large industrial cities, dramatically reducing life expectancy and quality of life (life expectancy at birth in key industrial cities in the middle of the 19th century was often in the low 30s or even lower2). This in turn resulted in a recognition that such environmental factors affect human health and life spans. The long and bitter struggle for workers’ rights in subsequent decades resulted in much improved working conditions, workplace safety regulations, and general sanitation, and brought sharp increases in life expectancy and quality of life, which in turn had positive impacts on productivity and wealth. Florence Nightingale reemphasized the role of ventilation in healing and preventing illness, ‘The very first canon of nursing… : keep the air he breathes as pure as the external air, without chilling him,’ a maxim that influenced building design at the time. These trends continued in the 20th century, greatly helped by further technological and scientific advances. Many diseases – diphtheria, pertussis, hepatitis B, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, etc. – became things of the past thanks to near-universal highly effective vaccinations, while others that used to be common are no longer of such concern for highly developed countries in temperate climates – malaria, typhus, typhoid, leprosy, cholera, tuberculosis, and many others – primarily thanks to improvements in hygiene and the implementation of non-pharmaceutical measures for their containment.

Furthermore, the idea that infectious diseases should not just be reduced, but permanently eliminated altogether began to be put into practice in the second half of the 20th century3-5 on a global level, and much earlier locally. These programs were based on the obvious consideration that if an infectious agent is driven to extinction, the incalculable damage to people’s health and the overall economy by a persisting and indefinite disease burden will also be eliminated.

The ambition of local elimination grew into one of global eradication for smallpox, which was successfully eliminated from the human population in the 1970s6 (this had already been achieved locally in the late 19th century by some countries), after a heroic effort to find and contain the last remaining infectious individuals7,8. The other complete success was rinderpest in cattle9,10, globally eradicated in the early 21st century.

When the COVID-19 pandemic started, global eradication programs were very close to succeeding for two other diseases – polio11,12 and dracunculiasis13. Eradication is also globally pursued for other diseases, such as yaws14,15, and regionally for many others, e.g. lymphatic filariasis16,17, onchocerciasis18,19, measles and rubella20-30. The most challenging diseases are those that have an external reservoir outside the human population, especially if they are insect borne, and in particular those carried by mosquitos. Malaria is the primary example, but despite these difficulties, eradication of malaria has been a long-standing global public health goal31-33 and elimination has been achieved in temperate regions of the globe34,35, even though it involved the ecologically destructive widespread application of polluting chemical pesticides36,37 to reduce the populations of the vectors. Elimination is also a public goal for other insect borne diseases such as trypanosomiasis38,39.

In parallel with pursuing maximal reduction and eventual eradication of the burden of existing endemic infectious diseases, humanity has also had to battle novel infectious diseases40, which have been appearing at an increased rate over recent decades41-43. Most of these diseases are of zoonotic origin, and the rate at which they are making the jump from wildlife to humans is accelerating, because of the increased encroachment on wildlife due to expanding human populations and physical infrastructure associated with human activity, the continued destruction of wild ecosystems that forces wild animals towards closer human contact, the booming wildlife trade, and other such trends.

The most famous newly emerging pathogens were the filoviruses (Ebola44-46, Marburg47,48), the SARS and MERS coronaviruses, and paramyxoviruses like Nipah49,50. These gained fame because of their high lethality and potential for human-to-human spread, but they were merely the most notable of many examples.

Pigs in close proximity to humans. Such epidemics were almost always aggressively suppressed. Usually, these were small outbreaks, and because highly pathogenic viruses such as Ebola cause very serious sickness in practically all infected people, finding and isolating the contagious individuals is a manageable task. The largest such epidemic was the 2013-16 Ebola outbreak in West Africa, when a filovirus spread widely in major urban centers for the first time. Containment required a wartime-level mobilization, but that was nevertheless achieved, even though there were nearly 30,000 infections and more than 11,000 deaths51.

The major counterexample of a successful establishment in the human population of a novel highly pathogenic virus is HIV. HIV is a retrovirus, and as such it integrates into the host genome and is thus nearly impossible to eliminate from the body and to eradicate from the population52 (unless all infected individuals are identified and prevented from infecting others for the rest of their lives). However, HIV is not an example of the containment principle being voluntarily abandoned as the virus had made its zoonotic jump and established itself many decades before its eventual discovery53 and recognition54-56, and long before the molecular tools that could have detected and potentially fully contained it existed.

Still, despite all these containment success stories, the emergence of a new pathogen with pandemic potential was a well understood and frequently discussed threat57-60, although influenza viruses rather than coronaviruses were often seen as the most likely culprit61-65. The eventual appearance of SARS-CoV-2 should therefore not have been a huge surprise, and should have been met with a full mobilization of the technical tools and fundamental public health principles developed over the previous decades.

The ecological context One striking property of many emerging pathogens is how many of them come from bats. While the question of whether bats truly harbor more viruses than other mammals in proportion to their own species diversity (which is the second highest within mammals after rodents) is not fully settled yet66-69, many novel viruses do indeed originate from bats, and the ecological and physiological characteristics of bats are highly relevant for understanding the situation that Homo sapiens finds itself in right now.

Group of bats roosting in a cave. Another startling property of bats and their viruses is how highly pathogenic to humans (and other mammals) many bat viruses are, while bats themselves are not much affected (only rabies is well established to cause serious harm to bats68). Why bats seem to carry so many such pathogens, and how they have adapted so well to coexisting with them, has been a long-standing puzzle and although we do not have a definitive answer, some general trends have become clear.

Bats are the only truly flying mammals and have been so for many millions of years. Flying has resulted in a number of specific adaptations, one of them being the tolerance towards a very high body temperature (often on the order of 42-43ºC). Bats often live in huge colonies, literally touching each other, and, again, have lived in conditions of very high density for millions of years. Such densities are rare among mammals and are certainly not the native condition of humans (human civilization and our large dense cities are a very recent phenomenon on evolutionary time scales). Bats are also quite long-lived for such small mammals70-71 – some fruit bats can live more than 35 years and even small cave dwelling species can live about a decade. These are characteristics that might have on one hand facilitated the evolution of a considerable set of viruses associated with bat populations. In order for a non-latent respiratory virus to maintain itself, a minimal population size is necessary. For example, it is hypothesized that measles requires a minimum population size of 250-300,000 individuals72. And bats have existed in a state of high population densities for a very long time, which might explain the high diversity of viruses that they carry. In addition, the long lifespan of many bat species means that their viruses may have to evolve strategies to overcome adaptive immunity and frequently reinfect previously infected individuals as opposed to the situation in short-lived species in which populations turn over quickly (with immunologically naive individuals replacing the ones that die out).

On the other hand, the selective pressure that these viruses have exerted on bats may have resulted in the evolution of various resistance and/or tolerance mechanisms in bats themselves, which in turn have driven the evolution of counter strategies in their viruses, leading them to be highly virulent for other species. Bats certainly appear to be physiologically more tolerant towards viruses that are otherwise highly virulent to other mammals. Several explanations for this adaptation have been proposed, chief among them a much more powerful innate immunity and a tolerance towards infections that does not lead to the development of the kind of hyperinflammatory reactions observed in humans73-75, the high body temperature of bats in flight, and others.

The notable strength of bat innate immunity is often explained by the constitutively active interferon response that has been reported for some bat species76-78. It is possible that this is not a universal characteristic of all bats79 – only a few species have been studied – but it provides a very attractive mechanism for explaining both how bats prevent the development of severe systemic viral infections in their bodies and how their viruses in turn would have evolved powerful mechanisms to silence the interferon response, making them highly pathogenic for other mammals.

The tolerance towards infection is possibly rooted in the absence of some components of the signaling cascades leading to hyperinflammatory reactions and the dampened activity of others80.

Map of scheduled airline traffic around the world, circa June 2009 Map of scheduled airline traffic around the world. Credit: Jpatokal An obvious ecological parallel can be drawn between bats and humans – just as bats live in dense colonies, so now do modern humans. And we may now be at a critical point in the history of our species, in which our ever-increasing ecological footprint has brought us in close contact with bats in a way that was much rarer in the past. Our population is connected in ways that were previously unimaginable. A novel virus can make the zoonotic jump somewhere in Southeast Asia and a carrier of it can then be on the other side of the globe a mere 24-hours later, having encountered thousands of people in airports and other mass transit systems. As a result, bat pathogens are now being transferred from bat populations to the human population in what might prove to be the second major zoonotic spillover event after the one associated with domestication of livestock and pets a few thousand years ago.

The death of public health and the end of epidemiological comfort It is also in this context that the real gravity of what has happened in the last three years emerges.

The implications of what has just happened have been missed by most, so let’s spell them out explicitly.

Oklahoma’s Strategic National Stockpile. Credit: DVIDS Understanding of airborne transmission and institution of mitigation measures, which have heretofore not been utilized in any country, will facilitate elimination, even with the newer, more transmissible variants. Any country that has the necessary resources (or is provided with them) can achieve full containment within a few months. In fact, currently this would be easier than ever before because of the accumulated widespread multiple recent exposures to the virus in the population suppressing the effective reproduction number (Re). For the last 18 months or so we have been seeing a constant high plateau of cases with undulating waves, but not the major explosions of infections with Re reaching 3-4 that were associated with the original introduction of the virus in 2020 and with the appearance of the first Omicron variants in late 2021.

The long-established principles governing how we respond to new infectious diseases have now completely changed – the precedent has been established that dangerous emerging pathogens will no longer be contained, but instead permitted to ‘ease’ into widespread circulation. The intent to “let it rip” in the future is now being openly communicated84. With this change in policy comes uncertainty about acceptable lethality. Just how bad will an infectious disease have to be to convince any government to mobilize a meaningful global public health response?

We have some clues regarding that issue from what happened during the initial appearance of the Omicron “variant” (which was really a new serotype85,86) of SARS-CoV-2. Despite some experts warning that a vaccine-only approach would be doomed to fail, governments gambled everything on it. They were then faced with the brute fact of viral evolution destroying their strategy when a new serotype emerged against which existing vaccines had little effect in terms of blocking transmission. The reaction was not to bring back NPIs but to give up, seemingly regardless of the consequences.

Critically, those consequences were unknown when the policy of no intervention was adopted within days of the appearance of Omicron. All previous new SARS-CoV-2 variants had been deadlier than the original Wuhan strain, with the eventually globally dominant Delta variant perhaps as much as 4× as deadly87. Omicron turned out to be the exception, but again, that was not known with any certainty when it was allowed to run wild through populations. What would have happened if it had followed the same pattern as Delta?

UK National Covid Memorial Wall. Credit: Dominic Alves Logically, it follows that it is also a threshold that will not result in the implementation of NPIs for any other emerging pathogens either. Because why should SARS-CoV-2 be special?

We had a second, even more worrying real-life example of what the future holds with the global spread of the MPX virus (formerly known as “monkeypox” and now called “Mpox”) in 2022. MPX is a close relative to the smallpox VARV virus and is endemic to Central and Western Africa, where its natural hosts are mostly various rodent species, but on occasions it infects humans too, with the rate of zoonotic transfer increasing over recent decades88. It has usually been characterized by fairly high mortality – the CFR (Case Fatality Rate) has been ∼3.6% for the strain that circulates in Nigeria and ∼10% for the one in the Congo region, i.e. much worse than SARS-CoV-2. In 2022, an unexpected global MPX outbreak developed, with tens of thousands of confirmed cases in dozens of countries89,90. Normally, this would be a huge cause for alarm, for several reasons.

First, MPX itself is a very dangerous disease. Second, universal smallpox vaccination ended many decades ago with the success of the eradication program, leaving the population born after that completely unprotected. Third, lethality in orthopoxviruses is, in fact, highly variable – VARV itself had a variola major strain, with as much as ∼30% CFR, and a less deadly variola minor variety with CFR ∼1%, and there was considerable variation within variola major too. It also appears that high pathogenicity often evolves from less pathogenic strains through reductive evolution - the loss of certain genes something that can happen fairly easily, may well have happened repeatedly in the past, and may happen again in the future, a scenario that has been repeatedly warned about for decades91,92. For these reasons, it was unthinkable that anyone would just shrug off a massive MPX outbreak – it is already bad enough as it is, but allowing it to become endemic means it can one day evolve towards something functionally equivalent to smallpox in its impact.

Colorized transmission electron micrograph of Mpox virus particles. Credit: NIAID And yet that is exactly what happened in 2022 – barely any measures were taken to contain the outbreak, and countries simply reclassified MPX out of the “high consequence infectious disease” category93 in order to push the problem away, out of sight and out of mind. By chance, it turned out that this particular outbreak did not spark a global pandemic, and it was also characterized, for poorly understood reasons, by an unusually low CFR, with very few people dying94,95. But again, that is not the information that was available at the start of the outbreak, when in a previous, interventionist age of public health, resources would have been mobilized to stamp it out in its infancy, but, in the age of laissez-faire, were not. MPX is now circulating around the world and represents a future threat of uncontrolled transmission resulting in viral adaptation to highly efficient human-to-human spread combined with much greater disease severity.

This is the previously unthinkable future we will live in from now on in terms of our approach to infectious disease.

What may be controlled instead is information. Another lesson of the pandemic is that if there is no testing and reporting of cases and deaths, a huge amount of real human suffering can be very successfully swept under the rug. Early in 2020, such practices – blatant denial that there was any virus in certain territories, outright faking of COVID-19 statistics, and even resorting to NPIs out of sheer desperation but under false pretense that it is not because of COVID-19 – were the domain of failed states and less developed dictatorships. But in 2023 most of the world has adopted such practices – testing is limited, reporting is infrequent, or even abandoned altogether – and there is no reason to expect this to change. Information control has replaced infection control.

After a while it will not even be possible to assess the impact of what is happening by evaluating excess mortality, which has been the one true measure not susceptible to various data manipulation tricks. As we get increasingly removed from the pre-COVID-19 baselines and the initial pandemic years are subsumed into the baseline for calculating excess mortality, excess deaths will simply disappear by the power of statistical magic. Interestingly, countries such as the UK, which has already incorporated two pandemic years in its five-year average, are still seeing excess deaths, which suggests the virus is an ongoing and growing problem.

It should also be stressed that this radical shift in our approach to emerging infectious diseases is probably only the beginning of wiping out the hard-fought public health gains of the last 150+ years. This should be gravely concerning to any individuals and institutions concerned with workers and citizens rights.

This shift is likely to impact existing eradication and elimination efforts. Will the final pushes be made to complete the various global eradication campaigns listed above? That may necessitate some serious effort involving NPIs and active public health measures, but how much appetite is there for such things after they have been now taken out of the toolkit for SARS-CoV-2?

We can also expect previously forgotten diseases to return where they have successfully been locally eradicated. We have to always remember that the diseases that we now control with universal childhood vaccinations have not been globally eradicated – they have disappeared from our lives because vaccination rates are high enough to maintain society as a whole above the disease elimination threshold, but were vaccination rates to slip, those diseases, such as measles, will return with a vengeance.

The anti-vaccine movement was already a serious problem prior to COVID-19, but it was given a gigantic boost with the ill-advised vaccine-only COVID-19 strategy. Governments and their nominal expert advisers oversold the effectiveness of imperfect first generation COVID-vaccines, and simultaneously minimized the harms of SARS-CoV-2, creating a reality gap which gave anti-vaccine rhetoric space to thrive. This is a huge topic to be explored separately. Here it will suffice to say that while anti-vaxxers were a fringe movement prior to the pandemic, “vaccination” in general is now a toxic idea in the minds of truly significant portions of the population. A logical consequence of that shift has been a significant decrease in vaccination coverage for other diseases as well as for COVID-19.

This is even more likely given the shift in attitudes towards children. Child labour, lack of education and large families were the hallmarks of earlier eras of poor public health, which were characterized by high birth-rates and high infant mortality. Attitudes changed dramatically over the course of the 20th century and wherever health and wealth increased, child mortality fell, and the transition was made to small families. Rarity increased perceived value and children’s wellbeing became a central concern for parents and carers. The arrival of COVID-19 changed that, with some governments, advisers, advocacy groups and parents insisting that children should be exposed freely to a Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome virus to ‘train’ their immune systems.

Infection, rather than vaccination, was the preferred route for many in public health in 2020, and still is in 2023, despite all that is known about this virus’s propensity to cause damage to all internal organs, the immune system, and the brain, and the unknowns of postinfectious sequelae. This is especially egregious in infants, whose naive immune status may be one of the reasons they have a relatively high hospitalization rate. Some commentators seek to justify the lack of protection for the elderly and vulnerable on a cost basis. We wonder what rationale can justify a lack of protection for newborns and infants, particularly in a healthcare setting, when experience of other viruses tells us children have better outcomes the later they are exposed to disease? If we are not prepared to protect children against a highly virulent SARS virus, why should we protect against others? We should expect a shift in public health attitudes, since ‘endemicity’ means there is no reason to see SARS-CoV-2 as something unique and exceptional.

We can also expect a general degradation of workplace safety protocols and standards, again reversing many decades of hard-fought gains. During COVID-19, aside from a few privileged groups who worked from home, people were herded back into their workplaces without minimal safety precautions such as providing respirators, and improving ventilation and indoor air quality, when a dangerous airborne pathogen was spreading.

Can we realistically expect existing safety precautions and regulations to survive after that precedent has been set? Can we expect public health bodies and regulatory agencies, whose job it is to enforce these standards, to fight for workplace safety given what they did during the pandemic? It is highly doubtful. After all, they stubbornly refused to admit that SARS-CoV-2 is airborne (even to this very day in fact – the World Health Organization’s infamous “FACT: #COVID19 is NOT airborne” Tweet from March 28 2020 is still up in its original form), and it is not hard to see why – implementing airborne precautions in workplaces, schools, and other public spaces would have resulted in a cost to employers and governments; a cost they could avoid if they simply denied they needed to take such precautions. But short-term thinking has resulted in long-term costs to those same organizations, through the staffing crisis, and the still-rising disability tsunami. The same principle applies to all other existing safety measures.

Worse, we have now entered the phase of abandoning respiratory precautions even in hospitals. The natural consequence of unmasked staff and patients, even those known to be SARS-CoV-2 positive, freely mixing in overcrowded hospitals is the rampant spread of hospital-acquired infections, often among some of the most vulnerable demographics. This was previously thought to be a bad thing. And what of the future? If nobody is taking any measures to stop one particular highly dangerous nosocomial infection, why would anyone care about all the others, which are often no easier to prevent? And if standards of care have slipped to such a low point with respect to COVID-19, why would anyone bother providing the best care possible for other conditions? This is a one-way feed-forward healthcare system degradation that will only continue.

Finally, the very intellectual foundations of the achievements of the last century and a half are eroding. Chief among these is the germ theory of infectious disease, by which transmission chains can be isolated and broken. The alternative theory, of spontaneous generation of pathogens, means there are no chains to be broken. Today, we are told that it is impossible to contain SARS-CoV-2 and we have to "just live with it,” as if germ theory no longer holds. The argument that the spread of SARS-CoV-2 to wildlife means that containment is impossible illustrates these contradictions further – SARS-CoV-2 came from wildlife, as did all other zoonotic infections, so how does the virus spilling back to wildlife change anything in terms of public health protocol? But if one has decided that from here on there will be no effort to break transmission chains because it is too costly for the privileged few in society, then excuses for that laissez-faire attitude will always be found.

And that does not bode well for the near- and medium-term future of the human species on planet Earth.

(Follow the link for more than 100 references and sources)

#mask up #covid #pandemic #covid 19 #wear a mask #public health #coronavirus #sars cov 2 #still coviding #wear a respirator

77 notes · View notes