Discussion of a line from a TOM story "The Rock"

[Reasonable Rascal]

I sincerely believe that we will see a much greater than 20% survival rate. Yes, we will see diabetics, those with wonky heart rhytms currently controlled by medications, HIV + individuals, those with really borderline blood pressures, those a few pills away from a stroke and those who are truly immune-compromised pass away fairly quickly, but to plan on a mass die-off after a harsh (but not catastrophic, just because you can't plan on it) winter is unrealistic.

Contrary to popular believe, for instance, is that people on home oxygen will quickly die off.  In reality most cases use oxygen for comfort rather than true necessity. To qualify under Medicare guidelines, for instance, you need to have an oxygen saturation of 88% or lower on room air with minor exertion. Many people manage quite well at that. But supplemental oxygen makes them feel better though it does not prolong life. Perhaps 20% will die off shortly after their continuous supply is cut off, but the other 80% will carry on though their ability to perform anything the least strenuous will be impaired.

Famine, lack of utilities, deaths due to crime and other traumas make take their tolls, but the final result will be far, far less than 80% mortality even after a couple of years.

RR

[230gr]

I think the rate of attrition will be more selective with the inner city residents with little idea of drinking purified water (or how to do it) or preparing raw food w/o electricity (or obtaining it in the wild) being much higher.   

[pqtb]

The population decline will vary by area and what infrastructure survives and for how long.  Failure of power and fuel supplies will make large population centers have higher death toll then rural america where folks have more resources available per person.   The time of year and weather will affect survival rates also.  My travels around the world that some areas have far population then the local resources can support without modern transportation of goods.  There are some areas that failure of the modern transportation system and power grid will have very little impact unless you consider loss of cell phone.

[Jerry D Young]

I sincerely believe that we will see a much greater than 20% survival rate. Yes, we will see diabetics, those with wonky heart rhytms currently controlled by medications, HIV + individuals, those with really borderline blood pressures, those a few pills away from a stroke and those who are truly immune-compromised pass away fairly quickly, but to plan on a mass die-off after a harsh (but not catastrophic, just because you can't plan on it)winter is unrealistic.

Contrary to popular believe, for instance, is that people on home oxygen will quickly die off.  In reality most cases use oxygen for comfort rather than true necessity. To qualify under Medicare guidelines, for instance, you need to have an oxygen saturation of 88% or lower on room air with minor exertion. Many people manage quite well at that. But supplemental oxygen makes them feel better though it does not prolong life. Perhaps 20% will die off shortly after their continuous supply is cut off, but the other 80% will carry on though their ability to perform anything the least strenuous will be impaired.

Famine, lack of utilities, deaths due to crime and other traumas make take their tolls, but the final result will be far, far less than 80% mortality even after a couple of years.

RR

RR, I agree with your statement highlighted in red above. However, that situation/those situations are not what I refer to when I state that I expect a 90% human die-off. It is the worldwide catastrophic, apocalyptic, TEOCAWKI situations that I think will result in 90% of the population dying off within twelve to thirty-six months after the loss of electricity that will trigger cascading losses of other infrastructures, which will, in turn, prevent the repair of, and bringing back into service widespread electrical service.

With the rate that the world population is growing, it will take something huge to bring that to a stop, and then increase the death rate over the birth rate to a significant degree. However, looking at population distribution, it must be noted that a huge portion of the world's population is in mega-urban, urban, and suburban concentrations, with much of the rest in partially concentrated rural areas. Only is a portion of the people living on earth living in areas where they can support themselves without the necessity of importing any significant portion of their food or importing or treating their water.

While I happen to think that the population has outstripped the population's ability to grow enough food and treat enough water to sustain the entire population all that much longer, I am as certain as I can be that without the complex and multi-dependent food production, water treatment, food transportation, and water distribution infrastructures, that the overwhelming portion of the population that does not live where it can sustain itself, will die off for lack of safe water first, violence over resources second, and then complications from malnutrition and environmental exposure.

Just my opinion.