Sventipluk OP t1_j14mtzl wrote
Reply to comment by third-time-charmed in Anarchism at the End of the World: A defence of the instinct that won’t go away by Sventipluk
> To the extent where he rejects the germ theory of disease?
I missed that. Where?
third-time-charmed t1_j14pir7 wrote
"and medical professionals have nothing to do when the causes of sickness and madness are removed."
Also the bigger idea that public health is public. People's right to not vaccinate does not matter more to me than the preservation of herd immunity from disease, for eg.
Sventipluk OP t1_j14r1nw wrote
Nothing on germ theory there. Just common sense. Make society healthy and we don’t need professional interventions to keep us operational.
third-time-charmed t1_j15hs12 wrote
While that might be true for some things, such as situational depressions or disabilities that fit the social model better- the flu isn't societal. Cancer isn't societal (there are prehistoric skeletal remains with bone cancer). Norovirus, strep throat, measles, mumps. None of those are societal. Claiming otherwise is a rejection of the germ theory of disease, implicitly.
Sventipluk OP t1_j15kcbu wrote
> Cancer isn't societal (there are prehistoric skeletal remains with bone cancer).
The rarity of cancer in antiquity remains undisputed..
> Claiming otherwise is a rejection of the germ theory of disease, implicitly.
The author isn’t claiming otherwise.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments