SARS

Of course; for Christ's sake, does it need to be said? Look, the whole point of U.S. government policy has always been to ensure a proper standard of living for its citizens (those that choose to participate, that is). Try John Nichols - he may have a one-track mind but he lays it bare. Fresh bananas at the supermarket every day of the week? You better believe it baby. Thank you, CIA! Thank you Kissinger!

anyways we're way off topic ...

I would have liked to see more compassion for SARS victims on this thread.

I did not know this. Remember my post further up there about my conspiracy-theorist-self that thought about stuff like this? HE IS NOW IN CONTROL.

And I think Mary does have a point, we're really not showing much compassion for the afflicted in here; I don't think it's much a lack of compassion in our hearts though, more like our general mentalist deconstructionizing-everything usual ways. But yes, certainly my heart goes out to those afflicted by this mysterious illness, as well as to all those living in fear due to their proximity to these cases.

And I'll have none of this maligning of stoned backpackers! :D

China, by virtue of having had y'know, a revolution and stuff (and to some extent Vietnam) I actually would agree is better off to a certain degree, in terms of social services etc. But things really went downhill from 1980 on. In 1984 or so the petitioners campaign put a stop to some of the more out of control market measures, and Tiananmen put another brake in the plans, but still. In all the coastal SEZs the "iron ricebowl" of guaranteed employment, basic necessities, etc. has been broken to provide armies of cheap labor. China really came the closest to overcoming the urban/rural divide but, again, the changes of the past 20 years really transformed its landscape. The NY Times has actually been running a real nice series of articles on conditions there.

Also I'm actually annoyed by my comments up there, because they make it sound like everyone in the non-western world is starving. Obviously this isn't true, a great number of people in any given place are doing quite well. I'm just always mystified that it's so controversial to talk about the fact that developing countries are, like, developing. They have modern stuff, some of which is great (better hospitals) and some of which maybe isn't (industrial pollution). And they have non-modern stuff, some of which can be great (traditional culture) and some of which isn't (poor health). The weird thing about this thread is that it's just a discussion of which of these things we should emphasize in the particular case of China: it looks to me like Mary and Spencer both got the sense, based on previous posts, that people imagined China as this stricken backwater packed with filth and livestock -- and as such want to correct that misimpression by stressing its middle-class modernity.

The problem with a discussion like that is that everything winds up based on your impression of someone else's impression of the place in question, which is just a complicated thing to deal with. The conversation becomes:

"Obviously I know it's a modern nation as well, but that doesn't change the fact that there's still poverty."

"Obviously I know there's poverty, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a modern nation."

I mean, what Mary's arguing isn't "China's all modern," it's "China is more modern than you people appear to think."

The fact is that I was reacting to very specific statements that did not require impressions of impressions.

but Sterling:

things really went downhill from 1980 on

b-but, what about five year plans, great leaps forward, cultural revolutions etc? Millions of dead from starvation and persecution might argue with you there. It's true that there might be increasing disparity, but not necessarily increasing despair. The poverty is more visible, but it's always been there, even through the glorious revolution. The supposed safety net is weaker, but life is certainly better according to relatives and friends.

The first five year plan was fairly rational -- it was the second which was utterly insane coz it was the great leap forward and yeah led to mass starvation etc. and the cultural revolution okay sure yeah massively disruptive & terrible etc. But through it all certain safety nets and norms of distributions were maintained, for the most part. You would never have what you have today -- vast roving armies of migrant homeless labor. From a purely public-health standpont this is a terrible thing.

Situation in Hong Kong SAR
The Department of Health in Hong Kong SAR reported 26 new cases today, compared with 23 yesterday. These figures represent a significant decline from the 155 cases reported on Tuesday and 60 reported on Monday. This trend suggests that the extraordinary control measures undertaken by the government are working. The Department of Health further announced that 89 SARS patients have been discharged from hospitals.

Update on cases and countries
As of today, a cumulative total of 2270 SARS cases and 79 deaths have been reported from 16 countries. This represents an increase of 47 cases and 1 death (in Hong Kong) compared with yesterday.

With the addition of the first probable case in Brazil, SARS is now being reported on four continents.

New cases were reported in Canada (4), Hong Kong (26), Taiwan, China (1), France (2), Singapore (3), the United States of America (13), and Viet Nam (1). Brazil reported their first probable case. Two of Romania’s three reported cases, one of the two cases in the Republic of Ireland, and the single case in Spain were removed from the list when determined to have other causes.

[who.int]

http://www.who.int/csr/sarscountry/2003_04_04/en/

i think the scale of movement of EVERYONE worldwide went up a notch probbly in the 80s — primary vector cheap-ish airflights — and this includes the chinese population mass, who are more mobile themselves now (as you yrself argued, re migrant labour) internally, plus the number of types of external contact has increased right down the class ladder

(pop exchange in the top levels of society is still a far lower level of contact-exchange, surely)

"A deadly virus has spread to another densely populated part of Hong Kong, and a top health official warned on Tuesday that cockroaches might be carrying the respiratory disease from apartment to apartment. Deputy Director of Health Leung Pak-yin told a radio program that cockroaches might have carried infected waste from sewerage pipes into apartments in another huge housing complex, Amoy Gardens, where more than a quarter of the city's 883 cases have occurred."

[/vent]

Go Ulaan Bator, Irkusk, Almaty. Although I've always wanted to see Kashgar, I've no idea whats there but it holds a sort of mythical place in my immagination, as most of central asia does. Have you read the Peter Hopkirk books?

Yes, everything is normal here.

Though between SARS and me eating a street sausage people thought I was a nut.

I'm trying not to get too upset on the subway...people have always come onto the subway while they're sick and coughing up a lung, that's just the joy of living in an urban centre where people rely on transit to get to work or the doctor. Unfortunately now everyone is a bit more wound up than usual and people are afraid to cough. When I eat sugar or drink beer I get a bit congested in the lungs and have to cough, even though I don't get SICK, but now I'm worried that if I go on a sugar bender people will think I'm some sort of vector. But hey, if that clears a circle around me then maybe that's not so bad.