Wouldn’t that be only if there’s no heirs?
Certainly less so. If you want to make it a spectrum, then they would be on the civilization spectrum, but they’d be at the very far end of it.
The USDA was formed in 1862, the FDA in 1906. Prior to that, the food supply was not really all that safe, drugs and vaccines even less so.
But, yes, overall, the ability to pick up a piece of food at the market and consume it with very little concern that it will make you sick or dead is a hallmark of civilization.
Huh. Who knew civilization only arose in the late 1800s…
Regulations regarding food and drink, storage, and adultery thereof date all the way back to beer regulations in Ancient Sumeria.
True, but they didnt know the science to make those regulations more effective.
Well, actually 1991.
Notwithstanding the fact that one of the purposes of govts throughout history was to ensure systems of weights, measure, laws and regulations (including food quality), I would also say that yes, as a civilization we are substantially different and improved than we were in the 1800s, and compared to what we have now, what we had then is not “civilized.”
Note I was responding to the claim
There are two issues. One, our civilization does very much depend on those. To say that not everyone will die because of a lacking is not a good argument that they are not necessary. Two, even without civilization, people need food, or they die. Civilization means that everyone doesn’t have to produce their own food, which means that someone needs to be in charge of ensuring that the food is not compromised.
This is one of those things, like vaccines, that is in the background, and is never thought of. The only time anyone thinks about food inspection is when they are inconvenient or when they make a mistake. They never think about them every single time that they pick up a piece of food from a public market and intent to consume it themselves.
How much science do you need to say “beer has to be beer made with X, Y, and Z and not substituting piss for water” or “if you store grain you need to keep rats and ratshit out of it”?
Cholera, Dysentary, etc
For all the very valid talk of car accidents, I haven’t yet noticed a reference to time of day. If it’s simultaneous across the world, there will be a lot more vehicles crashing where it’s daytime. So some parts of the world will be heavier hit that others.
While cars could be cleared, I think it’d take several days. I don’t think cities descend into starvation with weeks of no food deliveries or become disease-ridden wastelands or anything. Major arteries get cleared first. May have to limit mobility of civilian population and keep people people off the roads as much as possible for a few days. To prevent new accidents occurring. Alas, many people do not keep emergency food supplies on hand and will need to shop within a few days. We should keep a couple weeks emergency supplies, but not all of us do.
The most difficult thing is people and how they react. It won’t be uniform across the world or even a single state. Calling up emergency services is difficult because no one knows who is still present and who is disappeared. If people don’t believe their currency will hold (their paychecks will do them any good), they may not show up, especially in the long-term. In the immediate aftermath, everyone’s going to be trying to find out what happened to their loved ones and may be afraid to leave them. If we have no idea what happened or why, people are going to be scared it’s going to happen again. Do they overcome that panic, react by staying home, lash out at whoever they think is responsible (especially dangerous if powerful militaries do so), or just try to take advantage (at either a personal or national level), etc.?
While door-to-door searches should be done, the manpower is unlikely to be there to get it done in time to save all those who can not care for themselves or seek help (severely ill adults or young children). Still need a door to door later for bodies, because of the health risk.
A huge amount depends on how much stability can be kept, and that’s going to vary place to place.
It would also be a good time to disappear yourself. Whether it is the mob or the law that is after you, they won’t know if you are even still around. If you keep a low enough profile, they may just assume that you are one of the victims of the event.
And a very good time to commit a murder (and get away with it)!
Umm, was adulterating food really a huge problem before the anonymity of mass manufacturing? Like if you were in a small settlement in the 1750s, was the food you could trade for deliberately watered down with inferior ingredients? Or preserved on purpose with poisonous preservatives because the company’s lawyers did an assessment and calculated it would be cheaper to pay the settlements than to make better food?
I’m wondering how much of the problems with contaminated food supplies were a result of the large companies of the early 20th century de facto having limitless power to get away it.
Mass manufacturing goes back to the first time you had a mill to produce flour from wheat. And yes, there were regulations on such things to prevent the miller from substituting sawdust, rockdust, or any other adulterants, as well as regulations on weights and measures.
Yes, actually it was.
A lot of poisonous substances used to be used in food because no one realized they were poisonous (see Ancient Romans and lead). And “settlements” were pretty unusual because it was more likely to be a problem with an individual butcher or brewer rather than "corporations’ or anyone likely to involve a lawyer.
Upton Sinclair’s book The Jungle was rather infamous for describing unsafe food production in Chicago in 1906 and led to the formation of the Food and Drug Administration.
More like it’s cheaper to cut corners than anything else - the problem of food adulteration goes way back, basically to the first written languages.
Well, disposing of a body is more difficult than you think…