#Role of information technology in environment and Human health

[covid-safer-hotties]

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 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 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.

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 mammals – 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 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.

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 cities1.

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.

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 (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.

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 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.

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 countries81-83.

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.

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.

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 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?

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.

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 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 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)

[ultimate-worldbuilding]

Creating a Space Station

Name and Location:

Name of the space station

Orbital location (e.g., around a planet, moon, or in deep space)

Any unique features or characteristics of the location

Background and Purpose:

Brief history and reasons for the station's construction

Primary purpose or mission of the station (e.g., research, colonization, defense, trade, mining, etc.)

Key organizations or entities involved in its establishment

Design and Structure:

Overview of the station's architectural design and layout

Different modules or sections of the station (e.g., living quarters, research labs, docking bays, etc.)

Key engineering feats or technological advancements used in its construction

Size and Population:

Dimensions of the space station (length, width, height)

Estimated population and demographics (humans, aliens, robots, etc.)

Capacity for expansion and accommodating future growth

Systems and Resources:

Life support and Resource systems: Air generation and filtration, Water purification and recycling, Waste management, Artificial gravity, Temperature and air pressure control, Radiation protection, Fire suppression systems, Medical supplies and tools, Food production, Maintenance and Repair tools and facilities

Energy source and storage: Solar power, Nuclear fusion, Advanced batteries, Fusion reactors, Harvesting solar flares

Living Quarters and Facilities

Description of residential areas (individual quarters, communal spaces, recreational facilities)

Water block

Medical facilities and healthcare services available

Education and training facilities for residents and their families

Scientific Research and Laboratories

Different types of laboratories and equipment available depending on the stations’s mission

Astronomical observatories, Biological Laboratory, Climate and Environmental Studies, Planet observation and Research, Rock Analysis Facility

Transportation and Docking:

Docking bays for spacecraft and shuttle services

Transportation systems within the station (elevators, maglev trains, etc.)

Maintenance and repair facilities for visiting spacecraft

Security and Defense:

Security measures and protocols

Defense systems against potential threats: Shielding technology, Defensive satellites & space drones, Cloaking Technology, Countermeasures (flares, countershots, etc), Intruder Detection Systems, Surveillance and AI protection, Protection by AI or Hacker from outside hacks, Self-Repair System

Security personnel and their roles and ranks

Communication and Information Systems:

Communication technology used for inter-station and interstellar communication

Data storage and retrieval systems

Access to networks anddatabases

Trade and Economy:

Types of goods and resources traded on the station

Cargo of the space station

Economic systems

Currency used

Marketplaces within the station

Social and Cultural Aspects:

Societal norms and cultural diversity among the station's residents

Recreational and entertainment facilities (cinemas, sports arenas, etc.)

Events or celebrations unique to the station's culture

Governance and Administration:

Station hierarchy and governing bodies (administrators, council, etc.)

Laws and regulations specific to the station

Interactions with external governing entities (planetary governments, interstellar alliances, etc.)

Exploration and Discovery:

Expeditions or missions launched from the station

Discoveries made during exploration and sample gathering efforts

Spacecrafts and vehicles associated with the station's exploration activities

Environmental Considerations:

Measures taken to mitigate the effects of microgravity or radiation on residents' health

Environmental controls and simulations for recreating gravity and natural environments

Preservation of ecosystems and biodiversity on the station (if applicable)

Emergency Response and Crisis Management:

Protocols for handling emergencies (fires, system failures, medical emergencies, etc.)

Emergency evacuation plans and escape pods

Training programs for emergency response teams

Relations with Other Space Stations or Entities:

Collaborative projects or joint initiatives with other space stations

Trade agreements or diplomatic relations with neighboring stations or colonies

Conflict resolution mechanisms for inter-station disputes

Notable Individuals or Figures:

Prominent leaders from the station

Accomplishments and contributions of notable residents

Astronauts, scientists, or pioneers who have called the station home

Challenges and Risks:

Environmental and technological risks faced by the station

Political and social tensions within the station's community

External threats and conflicts affecting the station's stability

Future Expansion and Development:

Plans for future expansion and upgrades (where are they gonna get the resources for this?)

Integration of new technologies, scientific advancements into the station's infrastructure

Long-term goals for the station

[jaycrr]

Blog Post Due 9/12

How has digital technology evolved over time to where we give it decision-making power in everyday life?

According to Eubanks, since the start of the digital technology world, decision making such as politics, health, employment, finance has gone through extreme change over the last 40 years. Before, the ones in charge of deciding who gets offered a mortgage, employment, who gets a credit card or even who qualifies for a government service were actual human beings. Present day, "we have ceded much of that decision-making power to sophisticated machines" (pg. 13). Also, the families in need of resources, which neighborhoods are getting policed, gets determined by automated eligibility, ranking algorithms, and predictive risk models.  

2. What role did technology help play a part in helping and harming lower-income communities?

According to Eubanks, technology played a double role in enabling and oppressing lower-income communities. In her research with the poor and working class women, they used information technology to embrace their stories with others and to be able to connect with one another. It was able to better and strengthen their communities. She found that the women from her hometown were not "technology poor" as would be assumed by policy makers in her city. It showed technology was not absent from their lives.

On the other hand, technology was also harming these lower-income communities. Eubanks found many trends that were troubling such as high-tech economic development and this led to an increase of inequality in the economy. Technology was also being used for surveillance in public housing and programs. Leading to systemic inequality and policy makers were not addressing the problems and needs of the people in the low income communities.

3. How would automated-decision making damage the values of society?

Automated decision-making affects societies values in a bad way by turning social choices into problems. The way these systems think is instead of focusing on fairness, they focus on efficiency and being controlling. Eubanks also states that this approach affects marginalized groups of people that face less accountability in a low rights environment. The systems once they are tested on vulnerable populations, they eventually affect everyone and this method shows a less humane way of decision-making, almost compromising core values of a society. 

4. What could be some negative impacts of digital poverty management tools on lower-income individuals? 

EuBanks describes multiple negative impacts of these property management tools, and how they create barriers to access essential public resources by sort of blocking people from claiming benefits. Complex databases are involved and they collect personal formation. Predictive models and algorithms identify these individuals as problematic and surveillance systems start to notify their actions to the government and what not. ultimately breaching privacy and could even have consequences for those affected.

Eubanks, Automating Inequality: how high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor.

[ambushingghostart]

Blog numero 3

How has cyberfemism disrupt barriers that oppresses women from adapting in a world of technology?  

Technology has connected people globally, interlinking networks with economical wealth but to this day women are being marginalized in a system that favors men. Cyberfeminism empowerment in digital technology has transform the structure in the framework and distributed a system that has oppressed women. Donna Haraway’s “cyborg” theory of becoming part human and part machine has given women the ability to challenge traditional gender roles or resist oppressive patriarch structure. The influence of cyberfeminism has help protect women with technology and is demonstrated on the website Hollabacknyc that encourage women to document and report unwanted harassment. The platform brought awareness to the unsafe environment for women and a protection to combat unwanted advances. 

Why do we create bias algorithms? 

Technology was supposed to help humanity share information quicker and improve people's lives but instead technology and its algorithms help corporations, health care and banking systems with the ability to target and marginalized groups of people. These specialized algorithms that monitor your data and retrieve your information are automated to deny benefits to people of color in a higher percentage and can create economic hardships such in the reading in Automating Inequality (Eubanks). A system that is programmed to make money instead of helping is a flawed tool and shows that technology is manipulated to create barriers especially in underserved communities. 

We need policies by government and social groups to monitor how healthcare is being provided and administered to communities.  

Why is technology leaving minority women behind? 

In the United States technology is more accessible to certain communities than others but women are the most affected, especially women of color. In Rethinking Cyberfeminism, women in countries with developing infrastructure are being left behind in technology and not being integrated to the economic system. Development and innovation are being manufactured in a high rate, but the power continue to create barrier to women because of systemic issues that affect gender roles in many developing countries.  

Is technology our new security system?  

In the video Race and Technology by Nicole Brown highlights how technology has been automated to police citizens and minorities communities in many different sectors of daily life. These algorithms are created to monitor and target groups with biased data, and it can be considered racial profiling. Surveillance has been implemented with technology by using artificial intelligence which is a flawed system known to make mistakes. How secure should we feel when the systems in place to make you feel safe can end up targeting you because of how you look? 

How do we combat facial recognition when it is wrong? 

How do you prove your innocence when a system is programmed to be correct 99 percent of the time? In the Nijeer Parks story of how he was wrongly accused and jailed for a crime he did not commit because of the mistake of facial recognition technology was used to find a suspect. Another Arrest and Jail Time Dude to a Bad Facial Recognition Match by Kashmir Hill covers how technology and police surveillance is not being criticized by any outside safety nets. We need accountability and a system that protects people from being detained for data and manipulated algorithms. 

Brown, N (2020). Race and Technology.  

Daniels, J (2009). Rethinking Cyberfeminism(s): Race, Gender, and Embodiment. The Feminist Press 

Eubanks, Automating Inequality. Pdf 

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Social Media

The philosophy of social media examines the profound impact of social media platforms on human interaction, identity, and society. This interdisciplinary field intersects with ethics, epistemology, sociology, and media studies, exploring how digital technologies shape our communication, perceptions, and behaviors. By analyzing the philosophical implications of social media, we gain insights into the nature of digital life and its influence on contemporary society.

Key Themes in the Philosophy of Social Media

Digital Identity and Self-Presentation:

Social media allows users to construct and curate their online personas, raising questions about authenticity, self-expression, and the nature of identity.

Philosophers explore how the digital environment influences self-perception and the distinction between online and offline selves.

Epistemology and Information:

The spread of information and misinformation on social media platforms presents challenges to traditional epistemology.

Discussions focus on the credibility of sources, the role of algorithms in shaping information, and the impact of echo chambers on knowledge and belief formation.

Ethics of Communication and Behavior:

The ethical implications of online behavior, including issues of privacy, cyberbullying, and digital harassment, are central to this field.

Philosophers examine the moral responsibilities of individuals and platforms in fostering respectful and ethical online interactions.

Social Media and Society:

Social media's role in shaping public discourse, political engagement, and social movements is a significant area of inquiry.

The influence of social media on democracy, public opinion, and collective action is critically analyzed.

Privacy and Surveillance:

The balance between privacy and surveillance on social media platforms raises important ethical and philosophical questions.

The implications of data collection, user tracking, and digital surveillance on personal freedom and autonomy are explored.

The Nature of Virtual Communities:

Social media creates new forms of community and social interaction, prompting philosophical inquiries into the nature and value of virtual communities.

The concepts of digital solidarity, community building, and the social dynamics of online interactions are examined.

Aesthetics of Social Media:

The visual and aesthetic dimensions of social media, including the impact of images, videos, and memes, are considered.

Philosophers analyze how aesthetic choices and digital art forms influence perception and communication in the digital age.

Addiction and Mental Health:

The psychological effects of social media use, including addiction, anxiety, and the impact on mental health, are significant areas of study.

Philosophers explore the ethical considerations of designing platforms that may contribute to addictive behaviors.

Algorithmic Bias and Justice:

The role of algorithms in shaping social media experiences raises questions about bias, fairness, and justice.

Philosophers critically assess the implications of algorithmic decision-making and its impact on social equality and discrimination.

Commercialization and Consumerism:

The commercialization of social media platforms and the commodification of user data are key concerns.

Discussions focus on the ethical implications of targeted advertising, consumer manipulation, and the economic dynamics of social media companies.

The philosophy of social media provides a comprehensive framework for understanding the complexities of digital interaction and its impact on contemporary life. By examining issues of identity, epistemology, ethics, and societal influence, this field offers valuable insights into the ways social media shapes our world. It encourages a critical and reflective approach to digital life, emphasizing the need for ethical considerations and responsible use of technology.

[doumadono]

I've read in one of the replies to precious asks that you're a doctor. How would you describe the experience of being a doctor, what type of doctor are you, and what aspects of the profession do you find particularly engaging or compelling?!

Hey, Nonnie :) Well, you've hit on a topic that I could talk about for hours on end, because I'm so passionate about my work. So if you're ready for a bit of a rant, I'm more than happy to oblige!

Being a doctor can be a rewarding and challenging experience. We play a crucial role in the healthcare system, working to diagnose and treat illnesses and injuries, and improve the overall health and well-being of our patients.

Those who know me personally are aware that I'm a certified neurosurgeon, but I haven't limited myself to just one specialization - I'm currently working towards completing my second specialization, which is clinical neuropsychiatry ❤️ 👩‍⚕️

PROS:

Ability to help people: One of the most fulfilling aspects of being a doctor is the ability to make a difference in people's lives by helping them overcome illnesses and injuries

People and their stories: Another great aspect of being a doctor is the opportunity to work closely with people and to learn about their unique stories and experiences. As a doctor, you become intimately involved in the lives of your patients, and you have the privilege of helping them through some of the most challenging and difficult times of their lives. You get to witness firsthand the resilience and strength of the human spirit, and you have the opportunity to make a real difference in the lives of others. There is truly no greater feeling than helping a patient overcome a serious illness or injury, and seeing the joy and relief on their face as they recover ❤️

Dealing with critical situations: Another imprtant aspect of being a doctor is the training you receive to handle extreme situations. I have seen and dealt with a lot of drastic things in my career and life overall, and I can confidently say that nothing really scares me anymore. It's a unique skill set that you develop as a doctor, being able to remain calm and focused in high-stress situations (it helped me oh so many times!)

Job security: The demand for doctors will always exist, which means there will always be job opportunities for qualified professionals

Opportunities for lifelong learning: As a doctor, you never stop learning. New treatments, technologies, and procedures are constantly being developed, and we must stay up-to-date on the latest advances in our field. This can be intellectually stimulating and rewarding!

Varied career paths: There are numerous specializations within medicine, which allows doctors to pursue a career path that aligns with their interests and strengths

Respect and prestige: Doctors are often held in high regard by society, which can provide a sense of respect and prestige

Collaborative work environment: Neurosurgeons work closely with other healthcare professionals, such as neurologists, radiologists, and nurses, to provide the best possible care to their patients. This collaborative environment can be both challenging and fulfilling

Deathbed phenomena: As a neurosurgeon, I am frequently confronted with the reality of death. Many of my patients come to me in critical condition, and while I always do my best to save their lives, sometimes the outcome is not what we hoped for. Working with dying patients has given me the opportunity to explore the intricacies of the human body and mind during the dying process. It might sound morbid to some, but understanding the physiological and psychological changes that occur in a person's brain as they near death is a fascinating area of study. It's not just the physical processes that interest me, but also the psychological and spiritual aspects of death. I'm currently working with my team to gain a better understanding of what happens in the brain as a person approaches death, and how we can use this information to provide better care for our patients and their families

CONS

Long working hours: (OMG, how much I hate the night shifts!) We often work long and irregular hours, including nights, weekends, and holidays. This can make it difficult to maintain a healthy work-life balance and can lead to burnout, and it becomes even more challenging when you have young children at home

High stress: The job of a doctor can be incredibly stressful. We are responsible for the health and well-being of our patients and may have to make life-or-death decisions on a regular basis

Emotional toll: We are often exposed to the suffering of our patients and their families. This can be emotionally draining and can lead to compassion fatigue. As a doctor, it feels like a personal failure when I am unable to save someone's life. I often experience intense remorse and replay the entire situation in my head, on and on. I constantly question whether there was something more I could have done? Maybe I could have applied a different medication, or ordered another blood test? The what-ifs can be exhausting, but they drive me to constantly learn and improve so that I can provide the best possible care for those in need

High expectations: Doctors are held to a high standard of performance and are expected to be knowledgeable, skilled, and compassionate. This can be a lot of pressure to live up to 🤷‍♀️

High cost of education: Becoming a doctor requires a significant investment of time and money. Medical school and residency programs can be very expensive (I would like to express my gratitude to my beloved grandmother here, who sadly passed away last year. Her unwavering support (also the financial one), encouragement, and unwavering faith in me have played a significant role in getting me to where I am today. Despite doubts and skepticism from others, including my own parents, she never wavered in her belief in me. She often told me, "If you ever think about giving up on your dreams, just remember that I'll be watching you from the other side, so make sure to think twice before making any rash decisions - or I'll come back and haunt you until you change your mind." Thank you, Nanna ❤️❤️❤️)

So, that's the end of my long rant. For those who made it through to the end, I want to say thank you for reading!

[ihenvs3000w23]

Unit 10: Final Blog

After ten weeks of studying various approaches and topics that aid in our integrity as nature interpreters, I believe that my personal ethic has shifted to a more environmentally conscious one. Prior to taking this course, I recognized to some extent the importance of our role in nature, but not to the depth I understand now. When the course first started, my background was solely science based, not so much of my knowledge came from other aspects such as technology, art and history. I will however like to mention that studying how nature intertwines with many different disciplines actually allowed me to draw comparisons to prior course work I have completed in my undergrad. For example, when I look back at a philosophy course I took, I remember touching base on how Greek ancestors viewed art and how it was based on their interpretation of their environment. They would recreate scenes or objects they found beautiful and used their art as a way of representing their meaning of beauty.

Moving forward, I want to encourage more of my life to understanding nature and why we learn about it from the moment our academic careers begin to when they end.  One of the most important things that I found about nature interpretation is the way that information is presented to an audience. Throughout course material, blog posts and even our podcasts, the use of many learning styles have been tackled.

Personally, I believe that it is significant that I answer the questions posed in relation to my personal ethic and what I bring to the table. To begin, I am a firm believer in everyone having the opportunity and right to an education. My family came from an ex-communist country and when they were growing up, education was free for those who wanted to learn and pursue their undergraduate, graduate and Ph. D’s. With this being said, I believe that children especially should be granted opportunities to learn and see what nature has to offer, no matter the gender, ethnicity and status. Even though certain aspects of nature interpretation are due to privileges, but there should be certain aspects that are available to all to some degree. Furthermore, I feel that I acquire a sense of responsibility to ensure that I am using my knowledge to inform and teach those around me. Whether it be as simple as having people tune out other noises and listen to the sound of birds or as difficult as having people learn about the impact our environment has on human health. Lastly, I have found that the most suitable approach for me is interpreting nature through science. I have always been a very logical person and prefer knowing exactly how and why something is occurring. I’ve never been extremely creative and prefer actual answers to phenomenon’s not miracles or magic. However, I do wish that I was able to be more open-minded when it came to certain topics as it keeps it fun and allows for many different answers.

If I could carry my knowledge and skills from this course and others that have similarly focused on the significance of nature, I would want to focus on the direct relationship between human health and nature. My audience would involve students and adults who are determined to stay healthy and build their relationship with nature due to the many positive health impacts it has. I believe that I am a personable person and am quite outgoing which would make it easier for me to attract a larger range of audience. I also find that my work experience, from a family clinic to an apple farm to bartending would allow me to use multiple learning styles to educate my audience (i.e. those who are willing to learn about nature and health). In addition, I have experience with many different age groups as I was a gymnastics coach for a number of years so understand how an array of age groups develop skills and learn.

Even though I do not see my future career in environmental sciences, or anything related, I do believe that the skills and knowledge I have developed in ENVS*3000 will be useful anywhere and everywhere. I truly believe that our role as nature interpretations is significant in creating a sustainable environment for generations to come. I think that if other students were grnated the opportunity to learn about their role as nature interpreters, the idea of our environment would be much different. In today’s society, the only topics that are brought up frequently are climate change and sometimes wildlife. We are taught that our actions have consequences are that we are all guilty of attaining to climate change. We have individuals who do not believe in it at all and others that are devoting their lives to improving sustainability for future generations. I think the most prominent example of this is the ban of single use plastics and the transfer to electric cars. One of the greatest issues though is the cost to become sustainable, whether it be buying cold cuts over grass-fed raised beef, filtration systems over water bottles, or whatever it may be. In Canada it is expensive to eat organic, drive an electric car, and have a life built around the idea of sustainability. Even though the benefits to this lifestyle are at large, many people do not care and simply cannot afford this. I believe that the future will provide more affordable opportunities for Canadians to improve their lifestyles and acquire one that is based on sustainability and positive ecological impacts. All in all, I am grateful for the privilege of being able to learn and discuss with classmates about the role of nature interpretation and how we will all carry this in our future.

How will you carry knowledge from this course into your future?

[onlineassignmentshelp]

Exploring the Latest PTE Essay Writing Topics for Academic Success

The Pearson Test of English (PTE) Academic is a widely recognized English language proficiency test that assesses the language skills of non-native English speakers. One of the key components of the PTE Academic exam is the writing section, which includes tasks such as essay writing. Staying updated on the latest essay writing topics is crucial for test-takers to prepare effectively and achieve success in the exam. In this article, we'll explore some of the latest PTE essay writing topics for academic purposes, providing insights and tips for tackling these tasks.

The Impact of Technology on Education:

Technology has revolutionized the field of education, transforming the way students learn and educators teach. This essay topic explores the various ways in which technology has impacted education, including the integration of digital tools in the classroom, online learning platforms, and the accessibility of educational resources. Test-takers can discuss the advantages and disadvantages of technology in education, as well as its potential implications for the future of learning.

Climate Change and Its Effects on the Environment:

Climate change is a pressing global issue that poses significant threats to the environment and human societies. Test-takers may be asked to write an essay discussing the causes and effects of climate change, as well as potential solutions to mitigate its impact. This topic requires critical analysis and a comprehensive understanding of environmental science, policy, and sustainability initiatives.

The Role of Social Media in Modern Society:

Social media has become an integral part of contemporary life, shaping communication, culture, and social interactions. Test-takers may be tasked with writing an essay examining the role of social media in modern society, including its influence on relationships, politics, business, and mental health. This topic invites test-takers to explore the opportunities and challenges posed by social media platforms and to critically evaluate their impact on individuals and communities.

The Importance of Cross-Cultural Understanding in a Globalized World:

In an increasingly interconnected world, cross-cultural understanding and communication are essential skills for navigating diverse societies and contexts. Test-takers may be asked to write an essay discussing the importance of cross-cultural understanding in a globalized world, including its relevance in business, education, diplomacy, and social integration. This topic encourages test-takers to reflect on the value of cultural diversity and to explore strategies for fostering intercultural competence.

The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence:

As artificial intelligence (AI) technologies continue to advance, ethical considerations surrounding their development and deployment have come to the forefront. Test-takers may be prompted to write an essay exploring the ethical implications of AI, including issues related to privacy, automation, job displacement, and bias. This topic challenges test-takers to critically evaluate the ethical dimensions of AI technologies and to propose frameworks for responsible innovation and governance.

Staying informed about the latest PTE essay writing topics is essential for test-takers preparing for the exam. By familiarizing themselves with diverse subject matter and practicing essay writing skills, test-takers can enhance their ability to effectively analyze complex issues, articulate coherent arguments, and demonstrate proficiency in English language communication. With diligent preparation and a solid understanding of key topics, test-takers can approach the PTE Academic Writing section with confidence and achieve their desired scores.

[rametarin]

True leadership is agnostic.

Just letting my mind wander on the subject of the role of government and authority.

There’s nothing written in the stars that says any particular kind of government or institution has to be shaped a certain way to function or be moral. Outliers can exist that work, if they have the right people.

The problem is that certain systems and setups with government and economics lend themselves more towards corruption, in their environment and times. The same setup for one culture and group might not be as successful as another, and there are a million and one unknown reasons, large and small, direct and indirect, that might happen.

No matter what scenario, however, you’re limited by your ultimately known levels of sciences, interdisciplinary specialties, markets to properly exploit, utilize and employ them, and your access to material resources to properly utilize them.

What is ‘society’ for? Essentially, convenience. A single human on their own doesn’t need it, provided they have enough easy access to their needs from the environment and no expectations for an easy life, or a comfortable death spiral towards an inevitable aging end. But that’s the trick, isn’t it. How do you feed yourself, acquire the resources and knowledge and culture to know how to get the right tools to protect and provide for yourself, without knowledge of the ages and other people?

This consensus of convenience to not expire is about the only real reason humans confederate or federalize for an easy truce. In theory, a properly empowered person that doesn’t need an army of people to live a life full of modern conveniences, is a person that doesn’t need to exist on property ultimately owned by an institution or social structure. They can fuck off and go wherever they want.

But in real life, a human being is a short lived, naked, squishy pink thing limited by their own mortality, vulnerability and near trapped living on the 2d plane of an entire planet full of hostile beasts, effectively blind without technology or artificial light half the time, and still dependent on scarce food to survive.

But suppose you accommodated these vulnerabilities in the name of liberal self-empowerment. Suppose you advanced mathematics and material science to such a degree where you have a machine that could absorb rocks and sunlight and turn any concentration of any mineral into clothes, structure for fabricated tools, or complex mechanical or electronic parts, from simple dirt. Suppose you knew the blueprint of every single allele, gene and protein in the body, had the means to use AI to study and derive all new information from every single mutation as it occurs in a genome in real time, and accommodate for it with synthetic medicine to repair or recover.

That effectively, every chemical need of a human body could be solved for the equivalent of the cost of buying a wash rag and soap, without involving a medical establishment or the government for permission from this amazing techology. No mysteries of any organ or cell cluster left. The road map for what they are, their common parlance names and how to manipulate them for optimal health was solved.

And for that matter, the dross of an entire system and establishment’s monopoly removed from it, as well. The way you no longer even need a true doctor’s visit to buy pregnacy tests or birth control. If those products and services came out today, insurance companies and the government would want a complete monopoly on those where you’re required to get them through official channels, not from the corner store on your own dime, and then raise the price internally so each product was extremely artificially expensive.

If that predatory system of government and government-anointed corporatism was removed from the equation, suddenly the medical industry makes substantially less money than the great big gorging mainline arterial feed to the public’s money, either directly from gouging consumers or from the government, just to necessitate insurance, which just necessitates government mandated control over it. This system that is set up is done so, specifically to monopolize people’s access to healthcare and require they buy into a system and live in accordance to those institutional mandates in order to reap the benefits, or pay obscene robbery fees. And then be told, “Well look at how greedy capitalism is. You should totally socialize medicine the rest of the way to fix it. :^)”

Because objectively speaking, we’re just a few surgical amodeuses away from having AI and machines that do even complex and sophisticated surgery for a pittance of a price, extremely intelligent fabricators that can make any imaginable medicine and go through the phases of testing in a matter of hours, and lab equipment that’s so flexible and cheap that by all rights the only thing preventing end users from owning them at home would be artificial corporate monopoly under the bogus line of, “public safety.” Not even from patent trolling, just compromising regulation and legislation to protect the financial interests and monopoly of providers of certain products and services.

But suppose you could cut this dross out and every imagined, finite, perceptible biological problem could be analyzed, quantified and handled today the way the common person handles influenza or a cold. You would still need medical doctors to service the population, no doubt, but the necessity of enormous hospitals as institutions would go away. You would not need any sort of representative or governing body to provide your healthcare for you; at that level of knowledge and self-determinism and resources, monitoring yourself for cancers would be like checking yourself for ticks. No part of your anatomy or mortal frailty would be beyond your ability to do something about, and thus, control and liberation over your own physical autonomy would be achieved. That handles healthcare.

Then we get to the subject of an individual needing to acquire a certain quota of food per day of their lives, in cycle. The Daily Bread, as they say.

In the past, this has meant you either dedicated yourself to the life of property owning for susstenance farming, or you lived off of a dedicated section of your society that handled that and just interacted with the market. You could have a life where you owned land and worked it to provide food, or you just purchased from market and weren’t obligated to have anything, but seldom both.

Making food is a very stressful process that requires a great deal of open space and materials. At least, the conventional ways we’ve been doing it. And in cities, realestate is at a premium, due to the necessity of space. You need to be blessed regionally with good, arable space and land to stick your crops in and rotate it, as crops deplete minerals in the soil and drain it of life over time. And if you aren’t, you don’t get good food. Not having the resources laying around means you either pay to import the food, you pay to import the soil, or you pay ludicrous amounts for the scarce land that by nature isolates you, because no one can afford to be that far from the ease of civilization for long without compromise.

But suppose we developed our knowledge to where self-sufficiency was possible without this entire system. All it’d take is cultivating a source of decomposers to make fertilizer (worm caps) and micro gardens. Aeroponics, vertical farms, hydroponics. It’d mean that conceivably, with the right access to proper low tech machines and AI, you could provide enough food for yourself with a minimum amount of sunlight.

Now imagine we plan cities this way. Condos, for example, designed to let in enough light on one side of the condo to sustain the needs of a self-sufficiency garden. Or, compensate those that don’t live in properly sunned places by giving them access to the energy to use grow lights. Suddenly you have a democratized and individualized source of agrarian sufficiency, not dependent on natural abundance of resources and real estate. The extreme burden of feeding entire cities from a countryside is vastly reduced, individuals become able to sustain themselves through environment controlled greenhouses in their own homes optionally nannied by machines, you do away with the problem of prison cell sized apartment complexes that herd people living too concentrated together.

In fact, if we considered farming to be a kind of human right and demanded places where regulated housing was the norm to accommodate for the option of farming practices, we would remove the necessity of people to either pay exorbitant fees for food, or starve, and the possibility that military raids could starve out cities entirely. Refining farming practices, from creation and maintenance of soil, heirloom seed and land rights, would mean whether someone chooses to buy food and use the rest of the space as luxury or use the extra space for production, property ownership in cities would be large amounts of land, as a norm.

Whereas by contrast, self-sufficiency outside of a city is much easier. Especially if, with the right materials, you could either purchase (YAY CAPITALISM) or manufacture solar cells, or micro geothermal on your own property. And with the same knowledge that makes vertical farming, aeroponics and hydroponics possible inside of a city, with the benefits of more land and space and air in more suburban or rural areas, you could even cut down on exactly how much land you need for the same one-person susstenance farming you do, with minimal wasted water and minimal fertilizer pollution or wasted soil.

Suddenly when the science and knowledge and technology is there, and the resources, and the mechanical means to operate them are privately owned by individuals and sold by other private enterprises, it becomes possible to free governments from the necessity of nationalizing food production or providing it. They can merely assume their role as quality control and regulation of that which is sold to others on the markets and acquire taxed shares that way, minimizing paperwork, labor and management of human resources for all. Each individual person on average becoming capable of providing for themselves, in a pinch, for dynamic and changing markets when needed. Ways to cut and mitigate shortages.

Electrical power?

While safety and regulatory bodies that answer to the government are a given, there’s no reason why privately owned and registered power companies that offer everything from installed solar and wind turbines, to nuclear reactors, couldn’t be possible. And in fact, there’s no reason why individual people with the proper qualifications couldn’t possess and start their own. Clearly, not everybody can own a coal mine, or an oil field. But millions of geothermal vents using heat from the depths of the earth to turn water to steam and back again to power generators means millions of tons of coal left unburnt or thousands of acres of solar panels per day that are needed less, as they meet an individual’s requirements and all the surplus they could need.

In short, there really shouldn’t BE any monopolized service that the government necessitates itself to provide for you in return for a hefty premium of your money. I’m not saying it should charge society to provide it for free, I’m saying that the necessity for it to provide shouldn’t be a thing; with the right level of access to the market and the ability to publish and print the knowledge, access to the internet, everything from medicine, to access to electrical power, to a million labor saving devices, their manufacturing and engineering and your ability to feed yourself, should all be things you can reasonably and reliably DO on the small scale, allowing yourself to not NEED an enormous, active society, nor the social contracts required by them in the form of taxation or forced participation.

This isn’t to say I’m against nationalism. I am, actually, a big proponent of nationalism. And borders, for purposes of law. But exactly how much control and compromise those governments and nations get to exert over our personal lives and decisions and ability to associate, not so big a fan.

The government’s role, when we do it properly, should be simple oversight of the bureaucracy to judiciously govern it in accordance to the principles of liberalism. The true, best role of government is not to manage people, but enable them to create and construct and govern themselves with a minimum of intrusion and maximum effectiveness. Regulation based on what is most sensible and least invasive.

And for that matter, it should only count for property inhabited and voluntary association in the form of citizenship. I disagree, vehemently, with the Sovereign Citizen concept. Absolutely abhor it. You do not get to enjoy the conveniences of a nation by living in it without registering to be part of it, nor do you get to engage in commerce or wealth building without participating in the one everybody else is engaging in. That’s just regional parasitism.

With this in mind, clearly for the purposes of provisions and liberty, some forms of government and society are more adequate than others. In short, governments that try to combine society with culture and institution and economy just become big lumbering authoritarian shitboxes that believe it’s in the group and the nation’s best interests if you live according to what it thinks is best for you, and what it thinks is best for you is what would be most convenient to its growth and power. This is unacceptable to me. That’s not about liberty or prosperity, that’s about controlling your neighbor and managing them into a cell.

Socialism in my eyes tries to get around the whole, “directly commanding people” problem by instituting itself as the provider of your rights and then monopolizing access and management and provision of them. Regulation to a socialist is simply pretending you aren’t wearing a leash, when in fact, it’s just a leash by proxy. It still belives itself the rightful owner of the air that you breathe, and you’ve been complimentarily taxed to afford it. You need air to breathe, you’re materially unlikely to be able to provide your own air, so they think they have you there; “air is a human right, we need all your money so you can breathe, therefore, you owe us labor and submission as per the social contract.”

Communism in concept and practice is just absolutely ridiculous and antithetical to sense and reality that I have absolutely zero respect for it. Many of the supposed merits are just window dressing and this entire idea can only exist on paper, because it has so much baggage tied to it relating to crackpot theories on human nature, psychology and pseudo-intellectualism on “the inevitable progression of the humanities” that it makes my blood boil. A million babbling bullshit artists trying to justify a secular religious view and communually deciding to listen and believe in an asshole. It cultivates a specific variety of person that sincerely believes you can be a conniving, parasitic used car salesman/mob hatchetman and be an emphatic individual because you like the IDEA of people and structures which allegedly are meant to service the idea of the public, while in practice being completely ineffectual to them. And overall only seems suited as the Rock Candy Mountain dreams of narcotics addicted hobos that want to sell participation in a perfect society where the hobo doesn’t have to work, to people that would be forced to work.

Anarchy and hard anarcho-capitalism are just sad, dystopian states where regulation is corporate and enforced by Pinkertons and rapidly devolves into the only people that have the means or care to exert control over it are nepotistic gangland feudal families that inevitably become warring states on the micro and macro scale of organization. Inevitably, you will statistically get people that see no harm in shooting you in the head and stealing your stuff because you’re less important than they are in their minds, whether it’s because they don’t care about anyone, only care about their bloodline, only care about their social family, only care about their race, or only care about their spirituality. Organization on the basis of population that seeks to subdue and destroy other populations is the bane of anarchism.

For my money, if we are to have a government and society at all, I prefer it to be one of minimalism. Secular modernity operated and regulated under a liberal legal framework that allows for the participation but does not entrench the values of people. Whatever culture or community they envision for themselves, whatever associations of family. This makes no assumptions about what the human groups are or aren’t composed of, it only accommodates them.

If, technologically, scientifically, we could have all the benefits of modern society that the individual could near effortlessly provide for themselves, we should have the option and not be pigeonholed into a centralized system where resources are provided via a monopoly.

Militarily, I am wholeheartedly in favor of a nationalized military force. And in my eyes, national property is part of the nation but owned by the states, with a minimum of federal criteria the states must follow. A military should reflect the population that inhabits the country and its people, with the knowledge that if that military ever starts being turned on unorganized people to proactively impose force on them, on behalf of the government or its own power, that military becomes illegitimate. Militaries should be subserviant to the government and general public. I’ll never dispute or feel bad about a bill from Uncle Sam when it comes to the price of missiles or engineering.

Private property is absolutely amazing and good and wonderful and a human right. And in an ideal universe, you would not have to pay property tax to own land. Ideally, the family homestead should be owned by a person forever. Sadly, we do not live in a world where others will respect this; nothing is sacred in a secular, material universe with entropy. People will game the system to snatch up all the land either personally or in the name of an organization, or even a vague and abstract ideal, one way or another.

So in my eyes, the only proper way to handle property ownership is to scale taxation based on amount of it owned, based on region, with a bias towards those that have no property at all to incentivize ownership of it and participation in civil society as a land owner, steward and landlord. The more people with their own legal nirvanha, the more engaged the citizenry and more self-sufficient the society, able to handle their own needs and take the load of management and control off the government, back into the individuals’ hands, not some vague body of them.  Regulation shouldn’t be there to punish small business or browbeat them into participation and encourage them to be corporate to function at all; Government should prize small business as vital parts of society that can operate and change in ways that large businesses cannot. If you are a nuclear family of 2-8, you shouldn’t have to pay a tax to own so much land, merely have it on legal record that you own the deed to the land, signed certified and acknowledged by the government.

If done properly, the consequences of a less regulated market would be mitigated by knowledge of best practices and a strong legal system and framework. It shouldn’t matter if Potato Crunchies (made up company) goes under; those 80,000 people can re-employ and re-train quickly and new businesses can emerge. No company should ever be so essential that it’s too big to fail, and the proper way to prevent that isn’t nationalizing a resource, it’s by enabling many independent hands to be able to operate equally on it and compete to provide the best possible product. Failure of this is simply failure of knowledge of the subject matter.

And for fucks sake, this government/university bedroom partnership needs to STOP. Universities either need to become more democratic and the communities need to be able to hire/fire teachers based on their subjects and curriculum and education outcomes, or they need to disentangle with the government and stop allowing colleges and universities to keep raising prices, necessitating tuition hikes, necessitating government loans for college, which necessitate tuition hikes, etc. Colleges and universities have too much power and it is a manipulation of a socialized system by necessity simply to exploit federalism, which they then wave the, “don’t blame me, blame capitalism” fan.

Certification should be handled by private industry and the government, and not necessitate the institutional bodies of education in order to validate or certify that an individual can operate in their suggested task. That necessitates 1-10 years of education, no matter how much it costs, and allows the higher educational institution to shape tuition and curriculum as a kind of purity test based on social and cultural values. Mandating you need certain numbers of credits in things you are not interested in, is robbery. Education in unrelated fields should not be mandatory for certification in an occupation. And colleges definitely are padding out curriculum specifically to pay tenured professors and cliques in their own psycho-social interests and ambitions. This needs to stop.

 Anything less than this is simply trying to treat an individual as a pawn in someone elses idea of how you should live, whom you should live for, and whom gets to dictate or regulate over your life.

[bigbearpartnersblog]

11 Trends Transforming the Future of Human Resources

As we move further into the 21st century, the field of human resources is changing faster than ever before. With new technologies and shifting demographics, the way that businesses recruit and manage employees is rapidly evolving. Here are 11 trends that will shape the future of human resources:

Data-driven Decision Making: Companies are increasingly turning to data analytics and artificial intelligence (AI) to make decisions about hiring, training, performance management, and compensation. Businesses can use AI to quickly gain large amounts of data to identify trends and insights that can help inform their decision-making processes.

Automation: Companies are increasingly turning to automation to streamline and simplify processes like payroll, scheduling, recruitment, onboarding and more. This allows HR departments to focus on higher-level tasks and strategic planning while ensuring that all processes run efficiently.

Digital Recruiting: Traditional methods of recruiting like newspaper ads and job fairs are becoming less popular as businesses turn to digital tools like job boards, social media and video interviewing. This makes it easier to connect with a broader range of qualified candidates faster and more efficiently.

Flexible Work Schedules: More and more companies are embracing flexible work schedules that allow employees to work from home, come in late or leave early, take extended vacations, and more. This shift is a response to the demands of the modern workforce for greater autonomy, balance, and control over their lives. This trend is allowing companies to access a larger, more diverse pool of talent while also saving money on overhead costs associated with running an office.

Increased Emphasis on Soft Skills: Companies are looking for employees with more than just technical know-how. Soft skills such as communication, problem-solving, and critical thinking are now essential qualities that employers look for when deciding who to hire.

Talent Acquisition Strategies: Companies are focusing more on their talent acquisition strategies to ensure they’re recruiting the best and brightest employees. This includes initiatives such as targeting specific educational institutions and professional networks in order to find the most qualified candidates.

HR’s Role in the C-Suite: In the past, human resources often had no seat at the table when it came to strategic decision-making. However, with a greater focus on employee engagement and retention, HR is now seen as a key business partner that can help drive innovation and growth. As such, more companies are bringing HR into the C-Suite and involving them in important strategic planning discussions.

Performance Management: Companies are shifting their focus from simply tracking employee inputs (like sick days and vacation time) to measuring their outputs (such as productivity and engagement). This includes using data analytics to monitor performance, setting up feedback systems, and employees based on their results.

Human-Centered Approach: Companies are beginning to recognize the importance of treating their employees with respect and compassion. This includes providing opportunities for professional development, creating a positive work culture, and investing in initiatives that prioritize employee health and well-being. By taking a more human-centred approach to HR, businesses can create an environment where employees feel valued and inspired to do their best work.

Agile HR: Companies are embracing agile HR principles to design and implement changes quickly and efficiently. This involves understanding the needs of employees, rolling out initiatives in small increments, and taking feedback seriously to ensure that the changes being made are meaningful and effective. By taking an agile approach to HR, companies can stay ahead of the curve when it comes to adapting to a rapidly changing world.

Coaches, Mentors, and Leaders: HR is no longer solely responsible for enforcing policy and procedure. Instead, HR professionals are playing a more active role in developing their employees, fostering innovation, and driving positive change within the organization. 

By embracing these new trends in human resources management, businesses of all sizes can create an environment that attracts and retains top talent while ensuring the success of their organization for years to come. With the right strategies in place, businesses can create a competitive advantage by leveraging the future of human resources.

Website : https://bigbearpartners.com/sb/11-trends-transforming-the-future-of-human-resources/

[messier45-suporte]

Arcturians

Place of Origin: A planet of the star Arcturus 36.7 light years from us.

Dimensional Perspectives:  Exist from 4D to 6D

Appearance: Arcturians are humanoid, but have different features than us. I see the 6D Arcturians  as tall white glowing figures with angled and intense eyes. These Arcturians may be what have been termed Tall Whites.  Others who have contact with lower dimensional 4D forms describe them as short with wider faces and denser stature. These could be a different race of Arcturians or simply be their 4th dimension appearance.

Evolution:  Not yet aware of Arcturian evolution, other than they evolved to become a highly spiritual species and are considered to be among the most technically advanced in the galaxy. They may actually have come from Andromeda originally.

Qualities:  Precise intellect, telepathic, alchemists, analytical, scientific, reserved, deep structured thinkers, code breakers, mathematical, healers, interdimensional travelers.  

Abilities:  Experts in use of geometry, color and sound vibrations for altering time, space, atmosphere, and states of being.  Energetic alchemist, architects, builders and healers. They see beneath the surface of things and use precise methods to create and alter environments including the health of a vessel.

Specialties: Using sacred geometry to move through space and time and shift realities. Their methods of interdimensional travel and communications are used throughout the universe. They are also called upon to create geometrical sound and color forms to alter or transmit to developing worlds.  Arcturians are often the master minds behind the crop circle signatures. They create amazing ships of light that can traverse many dimensions and are sought after.

Basic Needs: Appreciation and being needed. Arcturians know they are good at what they do, and like to be admired for it. They enjoy using their abilities for constructive purposes.

Focus: Designing and implementing their brilliant ideas to be of service in the universe. Involvement with Earth: The Arcturians are our neighbors and at one point a group inhabited Earth, long before humans became sentient and before Lemuria and Atlantis.  It was decided by galactic councils that there would be other experiments to help local species develop on Earth, so they left.  But they still retain an interest in Earth’s progress and today they make contact attempting to open humanity to new thought, especially via their use of sacred geometry.  They design crop circle forms to input new evolutionary frequencies into Earth and her inhabitants.

Guide for Humanity: El Ectarus (6D  Ambassador to Earth)

Star seeds: There are many million Arcturian souls born on Earth and a good portion are among the younger generation.  It is felt that these starseeds can play an important role as ambassadors to the neighboring 4D Arcturians and also elevate humanities capabilities in their areas of expertise.  These starseeds will be the planners and builders of a new society through their innovations.  They not only see beyond the present structures and systems, they can also add an understanding of the frequencies inherent in form.  They can be cutting edge mathematicians, physicists, geometry artists, architects, community planners, system designers, technology wizards, musicians that have a talent for precise use of tones for affect, and energy healers that use geometry and sound to heal specific organs and mental states.  These souls like nothing more than to experiment and see their ideas in action.

* Amariah assembled this information from her telepathic contacts with Arcturians, including guides for individual starseeds.

[wastesensemelbourne]

How Waste Management Services Reduce Environmental Impact?

Waste management is critical to reducing waste production's environmental impact. Managing waste efficiently is crucial for sustaining the environment in cities like Melbourne, where population density and consumption rates are high. The best waste management Melbourne services help ensure that waste is handled responsibly, emphasising reducing, reusing, and recycling materials. 

This not only helps in minimising pollution but also contributes significantly to conserving natural resources. Explore how these services contribute to a greener, more sustainable future.

1. Reducing Landfill Dependency

Landfills are a significant source of environmental harm. They consume large areas of land, generate greenhouse gases like methane, and can pollute surrounding ecosystems. Waste management services play a crucial role in diverting waste from landfills. 

These services reduce the volume of waste in landfills by employing recycling, composting, and waste-to-energy technologies.

Through efficient waste segregation and processing, organic waste, plastics, and metals are either recycled or converted into energy, significantly reducing landfill usage. This minimises the environmental footprint of waste disposal and curbs methane emissions, which are harmful to the atmosphere.

2. Enhancing Recycling and Reuse

Recycling is a cornerstone of modern waste management, and waste management in Melbourne services are focused on ensuring that as much waste as possible is recycled. From paper and plastics to metals and textiles, these services sort and process recyclable materials to prevent them from being discarded in landfills.

Recycling reduces the need for raw material extraction, conserves natural resources, and reduces energy consumption. Moreover, promoting product reuse—such as repairing electronics or donating furniture—further lessens the strain on waste disposal systems. 

By focusing on recycling and reuse, waste management services reduce the demand for new materials and the energy required to process them.

3. Responsible Management of Hazardous Waste

Certain types of waste, such as chemicals, batteries, and electronic waste, pose significant environmental risks if improperly disposed of. The best waste management Melbourne services specialises in the safe and responsible handling of hazardous waste, ensuring that it is processed according to environmental regulations.

Improper disposal of hazardous waste can lead to soil and water contamination, affecting wildlife and human health. By adhering to strict guidelines for hazardous waste management, these services reduce the risk of environmental pollution, safeguarding natural resources for future generations.

4. Public Education and Sustainable Practices

Raising awareness about waste management is essential for encouraging responsible consumption and disposal practices. Waste management services play an active role in educating the public on reducing waste, properly sorting recyclables, and avoiding contamination in the recycling stream.

Through educational campaigns and community engagement, residents and businesses are informed about best practices for waste disposal. 

Waste management services help reduce the overall environmental impact of waste generation by empowering individuals with the knowledge and tools to make environmentally conscious decisions.

5. Supporting the Circular Economy

The concept of a circular economy is gaining momentum as a sustainable alternative to the traditional linear economy, which follows a "take, make, dispose" model. In a circular economy, products and materials are reused, refurbished, and recycled to extend their lifecycle. Waste management services are integral to this model, as they facilitate the recycling and repurposing materials to reduce waste and conserve resources.

These services support the circular economy by reducing the need for new raw materials and minimising the environmental impact of production processes. This approach contributes to more sustainable manufacturing, waste reduction, and energy savings.

6. Reducing Carbon Footprint through Efficient Operations

Waste management services also reduce the carbon footprint of waste collection and disposal. They have made significant strides in improving the efficiency of their operations. By optimising waste collection routes, using fuel-efficient vehicles, and implementing green technologies, they minimise the environmental impact of their operations.

In addition to reducing emissions from waste management vehicles, these services also focus on implementing energy-saving practices across their facilities. This reduction in operational carbon emissions contributes to the broader goal of combating climate change.

Conclusion: A Key Player in Environmental Sustainability

Effective waste management is essential for minimising environmental impact and conserving natural resources. The best waste management services help achieve these goals by reducing landfill use, promoting recycling and reuse, managing hazardous waste responsibly, educating the public, and supporting the circular economy. 

These efforts are vital for building a more sustainable and environmentally conscious society. By working with waste management services, we can all contribute to reducing our ecological footprint and preserving the environment for future generations.

Source From : How Waste Management Services Reduce Environmental Impact?

[viact1]

Enhancing Pedestrian Safety with AI: The Role of Computer Vision in Industrial Worksites

For instance, in modern settings of industries, the safety of all personnel is guaranteed, whether pedestrians or not. The number of construction sites and complexity in the operations of industries has never been higher, and the same goes for risks concerning the safety of pedestrians. Computer vision for pedestrian safety has become a priority solution that serves to alleviate risks and enhance safety measures at work sites as these industries use more advanced technologies. In this article, you will come to know the role of computer vision in the industrial worksite. Do read the article completely to understand and enhance your knowledge.

Understanding Computer Vision Technology

Computer vision refers to the ability of machines to interpret and put into context visual information about the world, similar to the way humans would. Leveraging complex algorithms, along with artificial intelligence, the computer vision system can analyze video feeds in real-time for objects, movement, and potential hazards. Technology demand has been great from sectors like construction and industrial applications, especially where worker and pedestrian safety are a concern.

The Importance of Pedestrian Safety in Industrial Worksites

Industrial worksites are normally busy, involving heavy machinery, moving vehicles, and plenty of personnel. According to the World Health Organization, the construction industry leads many others in the number of employees who die on the job, mainly because of vehicle and equipment accidents. This is an indication that some solid safety conditions ought to be implemented for both the workers and pedestrians.

The stakes are higher for pedestrians, majorly those who may not be directly involved in the work being carried out but are also present in the vicinity. Whether other workers, visitors, or delivery personnel, run the risk of accidents caused by machinery, falling objects, or unexpected movements by vehicles. Computer vision can reduce these workplace-related risks to a great degree.

How Computer Vision Enhances Pedestrian Safety?

Real-Time Monitoring and Alerts

Among the topmost advantages of computer vision technologies are their real-time monitoring capability of worksite conditions. Fully automated video analytics systems can be programmed to continuously scan the site for unsafe acts or conditions pedestrians entering dangerous zones, or vehicles operating near pedestrian pathways. Should such situations arise, the system can immediately alert operators through warnings to take immediate action against imminent accidents.

PPE Compliance Monitoring

PPE helps industrial job sites to observe workplace safety. The computer vision system may monitor the compliance of working staff with PPE regulations, including the wearing of all required protective gear by all personnel. This is very important in the issue of pedestrian safety, as the consequences of compliance are not good in case of accidents.

With automatic PPE violation detection, the organization will be in a better position to implement its compliance policies and make the workers understand why safety gear is so essential for their benefit. A better level of compliance protects individuals and inculcates a safety culture in the workplace.

Danger Zone Management

For pedestrians, the establishment of danger zones and taking control over them is very important in minimizing risk within industrial settings. The computer vision can build a map to indicate danger zones that a worker or a pedestrian is about to enter. This feature is useful in dynamic environments where construction or other activities cause a change in the setting after short periods.

Data-Driven Decision Making

Computer vision integrated into safety management systems allows organizations to gather key data on pedestrian movement and identification of potential hazards. Analyzing data for patterns and trends then allows organizations to make informed decisions about appropriate safety protocols and training programs.

Training and Awareness Programs

Computer vision for pedestrian safety also finds its application in training programs. Using video feeds taken from monitoring systems, organizations can create training that identifies possible hazards and the need for implementing safety measures. This kind of educative material will go a long way in enhancing awareness among personnel working on site, who more often than not fail to identify risks that surround them.

Conclusion

Computer vision for workplace safety opens up a whole new dimension in handling industrial risks. It will help organizations take care of the safety of all personnel, reduce the occurrence of accidents, and facilitate a culture of compliance and awareness through AI-enabled monitoring systems. With leading names like viAct, the future does look bright for workplace safety, making way for a much safer and more efficient industrial world. Embracing such innovations is not a strategy but an inherent commitment toward the protection of human life and enhancing efficiency in operations that are getting increasingly complex.

Visit Our Social Media Details :-

Facebook :- viactai

Linkedin :- viactai

Twitter :-aiviact

Youtube :-@viactai

Instagram :-viactai/

Blog URl :-

Next-Gen EHS: Computer Vision for Hazard Detection

Confined Space Safety: A Modern Approach for Remote Monitoring

[cnacertificationprogram]

Comprehending the CNA Definition of Nursing: Key Insights for Aspiring Healthcare Professionals

Understanding the CNA Definition of Nursing: Key Insights for Aspiring Healthcare Professionals

Understanding the CNA Definition of Nursing: Key Insights for Aspiring Healthcare Professionals

As aspiring healthcare professionals, grasping⁣ the essential definitions and frameworks‌ that underpin your vocation⁤ is crucial.⁣ The Canadian⁣ Nurses Association (CNA)⁣ provides a forward-thinking approach to the definition of nursing that encompasses the evolving roles within the healthcare landscape. In this article, we will delve into the‌ CNA’s definition of nursing, explore⁤ its implications, and⁢ inspire you with insights as you embark on your healthcare journey.

The CNA Definition of Nursing

The CNA⁤ defines nursing as “the​ protection, promotion, and optimization of health and ⁣abilities; ​prevention of⁤ illness and injury; alleviation of suffering through the diagnosis and treatment of ‍human response; and advocacy in the care of individuals, families, communities, and populations.” This definition clearly‍ illustrates ⁤the multifaceted‍ nature of nursing practice, emphasizing both the scientific and holistic aspects of​ patient care.

Key ⁣Components of the CNA Definition

Protection and Promotion: Nurses play a critical‍ role in safeguarding and promoting health. This includes educating patients ⁢about healthy living⁢ and implementing public health initiatives.

Prevention: ⁤Nurses are proactive in preventing illness and injury through health assessments, education,⁣ and community programs.

Alleviation of Suffering: Addressing pain, ​both physical and emotional, is a vital component of⁣ nursing ‌care, ‍providing comfort and support to patients.

Advocacy: ‍ Nurses advocate for patient ⁣needs and rights, ensuring their ⁢voices⁣ are heard within the healthcare system.

Holistic Care: The CNA definition recognizes the importance​ of caring for the whole person, including their emotional, social, and spiritual needs.

Benefits of Understanding the CNA⁢ Definition of Nursing

Familiarizing yourself with ‍the CNA’s definition of nursing not only enhances your understanding⁤ of the professional landscape ‍but also supports your personal growth and ability to make a meaningful impact. Here are some benefits:

Enhanced Knowledge: Understanding the complex roles of nurses⁢ helps you navigate⁣ your future career effectively.

Informed Practice: The CNA definition equips you with a framework to approach patient care comprehensively.

Empowerment: Being aware of your role as an ⁢advocate fosters confidence in providing patient-centered care.

Professional Growth: Understanding ⁢definitions and standards allows for continual learning and skill development.

Practical ⁢Tips for Aspiring Nurses

Equipped with the CNA definition of nursing, here are several practical tips to‌ thrive in your nursing career:

1. Embrace Lifelong Learning

Healthcare⁣ is constantly⁢ evolving. Stay updated⁤ with the latest research, trends, and technologies ‌in the nursing field.

2. Develop Communication Skills

Effective communication with patients, families, and multidisciplinary teams is essential for successful nursing practice.

3. Prioritize Compassionate Care

Holistic care is centered around‍ empathy.​ Always strive to‍ understand your ‌patients’ needs and experiences.

4. Build ⁢Strong ⁤Professional Relationships

Collaborate with fellow healthcare professionals ​to enhance patient outcomes and create a supportive work environment.

Case Study: Nurses in Action

To illustrate the​ CNA definition in‍ practice, let’s look at a hypothetical case study of Nurse Emily, who works in a busy urban ⁢hospital.

Patient⁤ Scenario

Nurse Emily is caring for Mrs. Thompson, a 68-year-old patient with chronic heart failure. Mrs. Thompson arrives at the hospital due to worsening symptoms and requires immediate attention.

Application of CNA Definition

Aspect of CNA Definition

Nurse Emily’s⁣ Actions

Protection and Promotion

Initiates heart health education and preventative care measures.

Prevention

Conducts a thorough assessment to prevent complications.

Alleviation of Suffering

Administers pain relief and emotional support.

Advocacy

Communicates patients’ needs‍ to the care team.

Holistic Care

Adds a referral for mental health ‍support.

This case study illustrates how the CNA definition‍ of⁢ nursing translates into real-world applications, reinforcing ⁣the significance of a comprehensive approach to patient care.

First-Hand Experience: Insights ⁣from a Nursing Professional

Let’s hear ​from Sarah, an ‍experienced Registered Nurse (RN), who ​shares her journey and insights:

“When I first entered the nursing⁢ profession, I didn’t understand fully how nursing could ⁢impact ⁣so ‍many lives. The CNA’s definition encapsulates‍ everything ‍I strive for as a nurse – not just treating illness, but truly advocating for my patients. I’ve seen how education and support can change patient outcomes dramatically. It’s energizing to know that our roles can promote health in our communities!”

– Sarah, RN

Conclusion

Understanding the CNA‍ definition of nursing is essential​ for aspiring​ healthcare‍ professionals. ⁣It offers a comprehensive ⁢view of the pivotal roles that nurses play in ⁢health care delivery,​ patient advocacy, and⁢ community health. By embracing this knowledge and applying it to your practice, you have ⁢the potential to make a ⁤significant impact in the lives of your patients ​and the broader community. As you embark on your nursing journey, keep exploring, learning, and advocating for ‌the principles that define your profession. The future of healthcare awaits, and you are a vital ⁢part of it!

https://cnacertificationprogram.net/comprehending-the-cna-definition-of-nursing-key-insights-for-aspiring-healthcare-professionals/

[smith-fang]

Document Scan Solutions: Enhancing Passenger Experience in Airlines

In an age where speed and efficiency are paramount, the aviation industry faces mounting pressure to streamline operations while ensuring compliance with complex regulations. The ability to process vast amounts of travel documents quickly and accurately is no longer a luxury; it’s a necessity. This article delves into the transformative impact of Document Scan Solution for Airlines, highlighting how advanced technology can enhance operational efficiency and elevate the passenger experience.

The Importance of Document Scan Solutions for Airlines

As air travel continues to grow, airlines must manage increasing volumes of travel documents, including passports, visas, and health certifications. The traditional manual processing of these documents is not only time-consuming but also prone to human error. Document scan solutions offer a robust method to automate and accelerate this process, ensuring that airlines can maintain high standards of compliance and efficiency.

Enhanced Speed and Accuracy

Document scan technology allows airlines to digitize travel documents in real-time, significantly reducing the time spent on processing. Automated systems can swiftly read and validate essential information, minimizing the potential for errors that can lead to compliance issues or passenger delays. This speed not only benefits the airline in terms of operational efficiency but also enhances the overall travel experience for passengers, who can move through check-in and boarding processes more swiftly.

Compliance with Evolving Regulations

The aviation industry is subject to a myriad of regulations that can change frequently. Document scan solutions are designed to be adaptable, ensuring that airlines can quickly update their systems in response to new compliance requirements. This agility is crucial in an environment where failure to comply with regulations can result in significant penalties and operational disruptions.

Revolutionizing Passenger Experience

In addition to operational benefits, document scan technology plays a vital role in enhancing the passenger experience. Travelers today expect a seamless and hassle-free journey, and airlines that leverage advanced technology can meet these expectations more effectively.

Streamlined Check-In Processes

With document scan solutions, check-in processes become more efficient. Passengers can quickly scan their travel documents, allowing for faster verification. This streamlined process reduces queues and wait times, contributing to a more pleasant airport experience. Moreover, the ability to integrate these systems with mobile applications can enable self-service check-in, further enhancing convenience.

Improved Security Measures

Document scan technology also contributes to heightened security. Automated systems can instantly detect anomalies or discrepancies in travel documents, providing airlines with an additional layer of protection against fraud and ensuring that only valid documents are accepted. This not only safeguards the airline's interests but also enhances overall passenger safety.

Implementation Challenges and Considerations

While the benefits of Document Scan Solution for Airlines are clear, implementing such technology comes with its own set of challenges.

Integration with Existing Systems

One of the primary hurdles airlines face is integrating new document scanning technology with existing systems. Many airlines operate with legacy systems that may not be compatible with modern scanning solutions. A thoughtful approach to technology integration, involving comprehensive training and support, is essential to ensure a smooth transition.

Investment and Resource Allocation

Implementing document scan solutions requires significant investment in both technology and training. Airlines must carefully consider their budget and resource allocation to ensure that the benefits outweigh the costs. However, with the potential for increased efficiency and improved passenger satisfaction, this investment can yield substantial returns in the long run.

The Future Landscape of Airline Operations

As the aviation industry continues to evolve, the adoption of document scan solutions is likely to accelerate. Airlines that embrace this technology will be well-positioned to thrive in a competitive market, providing enhanced services while meeting regulatory requirements.

A Focus on Innovation

The future of airline operations will be characterized by a focus on innovation. Advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning are expected to further enhance document scanning capabilities, allowing for even greater accuracy and efficiency. As these technologies develop, airlines will need to stay ahead of the curve, continuously adapting their processes to leverage new advancements.

Building Customer Trust

Ultimately, the successful implementation of document scan solutions can significantly enhance customer trust and loyalty. By demonstrating a commitment to efficiency, security, and compliance, airlines can foster a positive relationship with passengers, encouraging repeat business and positive word-of-mouth.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the integration of Document Scan Solution for Airlines represents a pivotal shift in how the aviation industry operates. By embracing advanced technology, airlines can improve their operational efficiency, ensure compliance with regulations, and enhance the passenger experience. As the industry continues to evolve, those who prioritize innovation and adaptability will be best positioned for success in the future of airline operations.

[nitiemily]

Camera Embedded System Enables Real-Time Processing in Robotics Technology

In the evolving landscape of robotics technology, the integration of camera embedded systems has emerged as a pivotal innovation, facilitating real-time processing and enhancing operational capabilities. As industries increasingly rely on automation, the demand for advanced vision systems has soared, driving the need for efficient, responsive, and intelligent robotic solutions.

Understanding Camera Embedded Systems

Camera embedded systems consist of compact camera modules integrated into robotic platforms. These systems utilize sophisticated algorithms to process visual data on-the-fly, allowing robots to interpret their surroundings and make instantaneous decisions. The advent of this technology marks a significant shift from traditional methods, enabling robotics to operate in dynamic environments with greater accuracy.

The Role of Real-Time Processing

Real-time processing is essential for robotics, particularly in applications such as autonomous vehicles, drones, and manufacturing robots. By analyzing visual data as it is captured, these systems can adapt to changes in the environment almost instantaneously. This capability is crucial for tasks that require immediate feedback, such as obstacle avoidance, object recognition, and navigation.

Obstacle Detection and Avoidance In robotics, the ability to detect and avoid obstacles in real time is vital. Camera embedded systems equipped with advanced image processing algorithms can identify objects in the robot's path, allowing for swift maneuvers to avoid collisions. This capability is especially important in applications where safety is paramount, such as in industrial settings or public spaces.

Object Recognition Object recognition is another critical function enabled by camera embedded systems. By employing machine learning and computer vision techniques, robots can identify and classify objects, facilitating tasks such as sorting, inventory management, and quality control. This not only enhances operational efficiency but also reduces human intervention, leading to increased productivity.

Navigation and Mapping Camera systems play a crucial role in navigation and mapping, particularly in autonomous vehicles and drones. By processing visual data in real time, these systems can create detailed maps of their surroundings, allowing for accurate path planning and navigation. This is essential for applications in logistics, agriculture, and urban planning, where precise location data is necessary.

Applications Across Industries

The integration of camera embedded systems in robotics technology spans various industries, each benefiting from enhanced functionality and efficiency.

Manufacturing: In manufacturing environments, robots equipped with camera systems can perform quality inspections, monitor production lines, and even adapt to changes in the workflow. This leads to a reduction in waste and an improvement in overall product quality.

Healthcare: In healthcare, robotic systems with camera embedded technologies assist in surgical procedures, provide telemedicine solutions, and aid in patient monitoring. The ability to process visual data in real time enhances the precision and effectiveness of medical interventions.

Agriculture: In agriculture, drones equipped with camera systems enable farmers to monitor crop health, assess soil conditions, and optimize resource usage. The real-time processing of visual data facilitates informed decision-making, leading to improved yields and sustainability.

Advantages of Camera Embedded Systems

The implementation of camera embedded systems in robotics offers numerous advantages:

Enhanced Efficiency: Real-time processing significantly reduces latency, allowing robots to operate more efficiently in dynamic environments.

Improved Accuracy: Advanced image processing algorithms enable robots to make precise decisions based on accurate visual data, enhancing overall performance.

Cost-Effectiveness: By automating tasks that previously required human intervention, camera embedded systems contribute to cost savings in labor and resource management.

Scalability: As technology advances, camera embedded systems can be easily upgraded or scaled to meet the growing demands of various applications, ensuring long-term viability.

Challenges and Considerations

Despite the numerous benefits, integrating camera embedded systems into robotics technology is not without challenges. Factors such as lighting conditions, environmental complexity, and the need for robust algorithms can impact performance. Additionally, data privacy concerns arise when cameras are used in public or sensitive areas, necessitating careful consideration of ethical implications.

Future Directions

Looking ahead, the future of camera embedded systems in robotics technology appears promising. Continued advancements in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and image processing are set to enhance the capabilities of these systems further. Innovations such as 3D vision and multi-camera setups will likely enable even more complex tasks, expanding the horizons of what robots can achieve.

As industries increasingly embrace automation, the role of camera embedded systems will only grow, positioning them as indispensable components in the robotics landscape. By enabling real-time processing, these systems empower robots to operate more intelligently and efficiently, ultimately driving progress across various sectors.

Conclusion

Camera embedded systems are revolutionizing the robotics industry by enabling real-time processing capabilities. With applications spanning manufacturing, healthcare, and agriculture, the benefits of integrating such technology are evident. While challenges remain, ongoing advancements promise a future where robotics technology becomes even more capable and integral to our daily lives. The fusion of vision and robotics is not just a trend; it represents the ultimate evolution of intelligent automation, paving the way for a more efficient and productive world.

To Know More About camera embedded systems