The Collapse, [Altered States] Consequences of the VITAS Pandemic Options

[kzt]

There wasn't any such military in the mainline SR timeline, I'm not sure what you are using as the POD. I never discussed them.

Assuming you use it with troops as deployed in October 2010:

Having 75% of the population sick for a period that is likely to be about 7 weeks means that nothing gets done. Litterally everyone who is still functional is going to be taking care of the sick. You can see this in reports of the 1918 Influenza epidemic, where they shut down every thing on the base and dragooned everyone not sick into doing things to help out. That might be unloading vehicles, or building new addtions to the hospitals, cooking, nursing, digging graves or scrubbing floors. Not to mention trying to maintain security. Everyone not sick is going to be very busy.

I've heard that the larger bases have huge stocks of fuel and food, so the total shutdown of transport can be survived. I have my doubts about whether the smaller bases have things like 6-8 weeks of fuel, and whether you could effectively organize resupply or even evacuations. Moving large numbers of very sick people is hard and Iraq and Afghanistan are cold in December and January.

Platoon or company sized outposts (which is where much of the line troops are deployed) that run out of fuel and food are going to be in a lot of trouble. When you have 50 guys trying to take care of 150, plus maintain security and you have no fire support and eventually no radio batteries, things are likely to get pretty bad pretty fast.

[apieros]

Litterally everyone who is still functional is going to be taking care of the sick. You can see this in reports of the 1918 Influenza epidemic

You've cited that example several times. In an earlier post, I tried to explain why it isn't as applicable as it would appear. However, I think we crossposted (we both submitted within minutes of each other), so you never saw my post.

Just so we're both on the same page, here's the post you might have missed. Also, from the next post I'm working on, here's a more in-depth explanation.

--excerpt--

VITAS is a peculiar disease, utterly unlike any other in human history. Its only effect on the body is to cause new allergies, and the only symptoms of VITAS are anaphylactic reactions to those allergies, and then only when someone is exposed to a specific allergen.

One can have VITAS and not know it, even when the virus is active. One can be infectious and symptomatic, and not know it.

Patients infected with most lethal diseases require frequent or constant care, often hospitalization. Their symptoms (fever, nausea, and so forth) need to be managed, because they’ll kill the patient.

VITAS is very different. For the first 3-6 days after exposure, there are no symptoms. The first symptoms that appear vary widely (as with all occurrences of anaphylaxis), but are invariably mild and thus easy to overlook and hard to confirm as VITAS symptoms. In fact, due to the variety of symptoms anaphylaxis can cause, VITAS can easily be mistaken for over a dozen different diseases, most of which aren’t lethal.

During the next 12-24 hours, the 55% who will die suffer steadily worsening symptoms, if—and only if—they’re exposed to their allergens. After that time, any exposure to an allergen prompts a lethal anaphylactic reaction and the person dies.

Those who will survive the sickness remain infectious for 5-6 weeks, but other than the occasional mild to moderate anaphylactic reaction require no care. Unless exposed to an allergen, they can function normally in whatever position they usually occupy. They have no fever, no nausea, no headaches, no diarrhea, no bleeding, nothing to indicate they are sick at all.

VITAS is a stealth killer. Its symptoms are hard to discern, it remains infective for a long time, and those who will die do so quickly and dramatically (usually within a week of exposure). In fact, the sudden deaths were usually the first sign that a given population had been exposed. VITAS spread fast, killed fast, and carriers remained infectious for over a month after exposure.

> That’s why the international quarantine didn’t make a difference, and just about everyone who could catch the disease did. VITAS was over the wall and across the country before we knew it was anywhere. The time difference between LA’s Health Department reporting “deaths, likely due to the New Delhi Flu” and when a dept in rural Georgia did was measured in days. In effect, VITAS hit everywhere, all at once.

There was little time to flee, little time to panic because by the time people knew there was something to panic over, those who would die had already died. Within a couple of weeks, 40% of the population just vanished.
- Asclepian

--end excerpt--

With alt-VITAS, people don't have to spend time caring for the "sick", because they don't appear ill until they encounter something they're allergic to (i.e. an allergen). It's a very peculiar disease, in that way.

I'm not sure what you are using as the POD

Up until the outbreak of VITAS, in Aug of 2010, my timeline tracks exactly with the real world. (With a couple of exceptions: fictitious individuals such as Howling Coyote and the ancient, magical past.)

So, VITAS is the first "Shadowrun" event to happen. The Awakening (Dec 2011) is the second.

Assuming you use it with troops as deployed in October 2010:

I am, though the exact details of alt-VITAS are different enough that your explanation—which would well fit a typhus, TB, or influenza outbreak—doesn't fit an outbreak of alt-VITAS. Hopefully the above explanation and the other post will clarify why.

Sorry we got our wires crossed.

[kzt]

VITAS is a stealth killer. Its symptoms are hard to discern, it remains infective for a long time, and those who will die do so quickly and dramatically (usually within a week of exposure). In fact, the sudden deaths were usually the first sign that a given population had been exposed. VITAS spread fast, killed fast, and carriers remained infectious for over a month after exposure.

Actually, that makes it worse. It means that people think they are not yet exposed, so packing up and fleeing for the hills is perfectly logical.

It also means that nobody knows when the pandemic is over, because people NEVER get better and people keep dropping dead.

[kzt]

By way of curiosity, what lethality do you think is socially survivable? What lethality do you think would lead to a weakly united, almost Articles of Confederation US?

You'd have to kill off >90% to do that. Essentially kill enough people that technological society can't be maintained. Or produce some effect that prevents people from being able to associate. A mysterious plague that kills without prior symptoms in horrible ways for years might go a long way towards accomplishing that, but I doubt you want "strangers will be shot" as the most common street sign. If you can maintain modern technological society you will. Particularly as never really recovering from a total state of emergency will mean that you won't get a goverment breakdown.

Given carte blanche, and knowing what social and campaign world effects I'm aiming for (AoC US, limited secondary effects from famine, etc.), what values would you give for:

1.) Infectiousness (% pop. exposed who become ill)?
2.) Lethality (% ill people who die)?
3.) Latency (avg. time period after infection but before before first symptoms appear)?
4.) Time to severe symptoms (avg. time period after symptoms, until lethal symptoms first appear)?
5.) Length of infection (avg. time ill, from exposure to becoming well)?

Just curious what you think.

The Black Death killed a huge percentage of the population, believed to be around 50% in England. It was commonly believed during the pandemic that everyone was going to die. In England the first wave hit in autumn 1348 and ended in December 1349. In 1361-62 20% of the population died in the second wave, with subsequent waves normally killing less and often being more localized. The government remained in power, the structure of society was somewhat changed as the survivors had the ability to demand more pay and there was deflation in land etc due to the large number of people who had no survivors. It largely ended the tradtion of the peasents being tied to the land, but not the kind of result you are looking for. The government was able to crush a couple of rebellions shortly after the plague ended. In general I can't think of a European country where the scale of the change you are looking for happened.

So I'm not sure you can reasonable expect the result you desire without killing a crazy large percentage of the population, enough that you can't maintain a high tech society. Even so, nobody in their right mind is going to decide to organize the clan of the bearkiller as a replacement government, and nobody will join up the obviously insane people who try. They will shoot them instead, or go to the sheriff and he'll shoot them.

[apieros]

It also means that nobody knows when the pandemic is over, because...people keep dropping dead.

People don't keep dropping dead because the majority of those who would die, actually did die during a 2-week period. (Those who will die, die 4-7 days from exposure.) After that, the deaths just stopped.

And people knew it was over (at least those who paid attention to reports coming out of India and other places) because the deaths just stopped.

"No one dying" = "plague over." That's a logical conclusion. And one many people reached on their own.

Actually, that makes it worse.

I know you'll argue with me, but I disagree. This disease allows people to function in their jobs, even while sick, enabling economic recovery and unit cohesion. (Also important as they keep their allergies for life.) It also provides a clear sign as to when the epidemic reached your town, and when it burned out.

"Bodies dropping" = "danger". "Nobody dying" = "safe". And people quickly learned that.

people NEVER get better

Not quite true.

Those who survived the Red Days were either uninfected, immune, or were only mildly or moderately symptomatic. And while the latter never got any better, they also never got any worse. So far as most were concerned, they were immune. (An incorrect, but logical assumption.)

It means that people think they are not yet exposed, so packing up and fleeing for the hills is perfectly logical.

No more or less than in (for example) an influenze epidemic. "Not sick" = "flee" is the same judgment call whether you're actually not sick, or just think you're not sick.

Survival of Civil Society

The reason civil society survived is, first volunteerism (people in high cohesion areas risking their lives for their neighbors), which gave rise to "local sovereignties". The second is the replacement troops from overseas.

They'd suffered through the plague, several weeks before it became a problem in the US. Having survived, they could return and operate without having to worry about further casualties. And they did a lot of good.

How?

The epidemic burned out quickly, in the US (speed of travel = speed of transmission). And by the time the burnout happened, the US government had seen the progression in other countries, and had many first-hand reports from US personnel in those countries. They knew how the disease progressed.

When the troops abroad were recalled, they began reclaiming critical facilities. They also began liaising with "local sovereignties", part of which included educating people on the epidemic and why the worst had passed. (Call it "propaganda" if it makes you feel better.) They also offered people food and fuel for employment.

Sure, running for the hills makes sense (to many or most) when you have food and other supplies. But when you and your kids are going hungry (not starving to death, just very very hungry), working for food is a great deal. And if the government is saying things are safe...

Many people took them up on it. And when others saw that things actually were safe (for the most part), more agreed to the bargain.

Not everyone, everywhere. And (generally) not those in hostile sovereignties or "no-go" zones. But enough agreed that it eased the effects of the Collapse somewhat. Which gave the country enough breathing room to widen efforts. Bit by bit Reclamation restored infrastructure, got a modicum of an economy going (accidentally, as regards ration coupons), and integrated local sovereignties into the larger nation.

What emerged was a country governed at the local level. In most places state governments had little power, and the Federal government had almost no power, save that exercised by the weakened army. The situation has changed in the intervening 21 years, but that's where things stood during the winter and spring of 2011.

(Then the NAN guerrilla war kicked into high gear. The NAN were the only sovereignties to successfully resist Reclamation.)

[kzt]

When the troops abroad were recalled, they began reclaiming critical facilities. They also began liaising with "local sovereignties", part of which included educating people on the epidemic and why the worst had passed. (Call it "propaganda" if it makes you feel better.) They also offered people food and fuel for employment.

The deployed manpower in Iraq was 49,700 in august 2010. There are ~98,000 in Afghanistan. In either case getting them back to the US is not going to be quick or easy. Assuming nobody gets killed by the locals or freezes to death, that has ~66,000 troops arriving some time over the spring. Give that the entire US military is 1.4 million, plus 850K in the reserves I just don't see this 66K force accomplishing anything even close to what you expect, particularly as they are almost certainly going to abandon most heavy equipment, burn a significant amount of the jet fuel available to the US, and arrive piecemeal.

[apieros]

The deployed manpower in Iraq was 49,700 in august 2010. There are ~98,000 in Afghanistan.

Best data I can find is a Pentagon document dated Sept 30, 2010. The numbers given in that document are 96,000 for Iraq, 105,000 for Afghanistan, 17,000 for those operations but in other countries, and 297,000 for the rest of the globe. Altogether, 515,000. (Source here.)

(Not all of those units are Army, that includes all the branches. But it also excludes National Guard and Reserve Units in the same areas.)

40% casualties gives out-of-country strength of 309,000. That's a significant force, equivalent to 24 divisions, 8 corps, or 6 armies. (Again, after casualties.) That's equivalent to the armed forces of France and 1/3rd larger than the entire British army.

One infantry company can reinforce and hold a critical installation, like a power plant or refinery. That size force has 2090 companies.

Yes, that size a force can have a tremendous impact on Reclamation. In fact, it makes Reclamation possible.

In either case getting them back to the US is not going to be quick or easy.

Nothing is easy, especially when it comes to managing troop movement and logistics. But "difficult, grueling, and painful" doesn't equal "impossible". I point to... hell, just about any desperate situation people have faced and overcome.

In this case, emergency airlift of military personnel, there's an entire organization already dedicated to the task. I introduce the Civil Reserve Air Fleet, consisting of 1,364 civilian aircraft dedicated to the purpose of moving soldiers and materiel in emergencies. And they're just a supplement to the C-5's and C-130's of the US Air Force.

Suppose each airplane could only carry a single company. (More likely is up to 2 companies, 300 passengers. A 747, for example, can carry up to 600.) 2 trips each by just 75% of those aircraft, and the entire force is moved. (Send them to an AFB, army post, supply depot to pick up M-16's and gear and they're ready to begin... whatever.)

Now, there are going to be difficulties and problems with running that many jets. And it will take longer than a couple of days. It would be a logistical nightmare. But it is possible.

2000 companies can make a serious dent in national problems, enough to get critical facilities up and running, and enough to make sure local sovereignties remain up and running.

Not easy, not quick, but possible.

[apieros]

By way of curiosity, what lethality do you think is socially survivable? What lethality do you think would lead to a weakly united, almost Articles of Confederation US?

You'd have to kill off >90% to do that. Essentially kill enough people that technological society can't be maintained. Or produce some effect that prevents people from being able to associate.

I'm a little confused. You first said that 40% death rate, on its own, was enough to cause the total atomization of society as people fled from each other, in fact even the family structure would break down. No military, no government, no corporations. Essentially Mad Max.

So how can it require 90% death rate to achieve a far less drastic dispersal of authority? Less casualties should equal more cohesion.

Let me clarify my terms, in case that's the source of confusion. During the Collapse, authority broke down to the local level (excepting Utah, for peculiar reasons, and a couple of other places). The military Reclamation effort recreated a nation, but one with a fairly weak central government. (Equivalent to the pre-Civil War US or the States under the Articles of Confederation.)

Due to the Long Depression, the Federal government just doesn't have the money to implement and maintain the regulatory agencies, social programs, and defense spending of the post-WWII years. Thus, no FDA, no EPA, no Social Security, and on and on. Federal regulations, even if technically "on the books" have become unenforceable.

The central government is still there, it just doesn't have much to do with the daily lives of most people. (As was the case in, for example, the 1870's.) It maintains a small standing army, primarily for border control, the Post Office, and conducts foreign affairs. All other matters are left to state jurisdiction.

90% deaths from a disease wouldn't cause such a system, it would cause a post-apocalyptic Book of Eli, Earth Abides, or Mad Max situation. But a near-total collapse of society, saved by the slimmest of threads, and restored as much as possible would cause this situation. IMHO.

The Black Death killed a huge percentage of the population, believed to be around 50% in England...The government remained in power, the structure of society was somewhat changed

And we're back to the same conundrum. Again, you said that 40% death rate would cause total social breakdown as people fled for the hills. Yet England's society survived 50% death rate?

Those two seem to be in direct contradiction of each other. Perhaps the difference is due to one being a pre-industrial, traditional, agrarian society, and the other a modern industrial nation-state. In that case, the Black Death example wouldn't be definitive, as the two types of societies differ greatly.

In Altered States, 40% casualties causes a great deal of wreck and ruin. Society fell apart in many areas, but clung on in others. And Reclamation brought it back from the brink.

Plus, the situation isn't due to just VITAS. The NAN war, the Awakening, and the Long Depression all played a part.

without killing a crazy large percentage of the population, enough that you can't maintain a high tech society.

High tech societies can be maintained with a surprisingly small population. Singapore, Israel, and Hong Kong, for example. (Though all depend on international trade.)

In terms of absolute population, the pop of the US in 1945 was 140,000,000. 2010, pre-VITAS, it was 309,000,000. After VITAS, and including an estimated 20 mil secondary effects casualties, it would be 165,400,000. Even if we assumed an additional 20 million deaths on top of that, it would still be higher than in 1945.

Even so, nobody in their right mind is going to decide to organize the clan of the bearkiller as a replacement government, and nobody will join up the obviously insane people who try. They will shoot them instead, or go to the sheriff and he'll shoot them.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Though, in all fairness to that sheriff, guns no longer worked in his world. Swords, bows, and pikes worked just fine, however.

[kzt]

You are confusing effect during the actual pandemic and effects after the pandemic.

Things would go completely to hell during the pandemic. Just as they did during the black plague. Given the dependency on a sophisticated transportation network, "just in time" logistics and the limited ability of highly complex infrastructure systems to operate without supervision things are likely to get very, very ugly.

Once the pandemic passes then people will try to reestablish their lives. This means fixing crap that broke and reestablishing order if needed. One obvious thing they will do is reestablish communication to the government. As the number of survivors is akin to 1960 there certainly isn't any reason why they can't reestablish a governmental structure similar to what existed. in the 1930 to 60s.

If you want a decentralized goverment the last thing you want is a central goverment that can deploy a military and "save us". You want "Hitler in the Bunker", where what the powerless guys far away makes no sense and people stop caring about the minutia of OSHA and EPA rules seems to be the only thing that the nuts in DC seems to be focused on. And they have no ability to send armed bodies of troops to enforce their will.

[Sengir]

I think a major source of disagreement lies in this:

Yes. 25% of human beings (or meta-human beings, for that matter) are intrinsically immune to the disease. Inject it into their veins, they will never become sick.

If an infection affects 75% of the population that does not mean that 75% get hit immediately while the remaining 25% are immune. It means that when looking at a sufficiently large and diverse group of persons for a certain amount of time, three out of four will suffer an infection. It's basically a stochastic process, every second has a certain chance of contact with the pathogen, and a certain chance that the natural defenses will not just sweep it out.

This has a couple of consequences. Most importantly, the disease will not just die off once everybody infected on day one is dead. New infections occur every day, until for some reason all sources of infection are removed without creating new ones in the process.
Secondly, being put on rationing for months (btw, I was not the one who brought up the claim of days (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) ) suppresses the immune system. This counteracts the tendency of epidemics to burn out, as vulnerable victims are newly created every day -- and they become more vulnerable with each day. The fact that everything is supposed to happen in winter makes it even worse.
Lastly, soldiers (and everybody else trying to help) who were not infected in the initial outbreak are not immune. Once they get to work, the dying starts again. And if the troops move cross country, or are in contact with people who do because the army runs layover points, they help spreading the disease even further. Maybe VITAS burned out in your small, isolated nest. But once a relief convoy arrives, the whole shit start again.

[apieros]

If an infection affects 75% of the population that does not mean that 75% get hit immediately while the remaining 25% are immune.

I know. And I'll back that up with some examples.

Suppose a guy was off hiking in a state park (Yellowstone, say) when VITAS was first tearing through. He never gets exposed. If he later leaves and encounters someone infected, there's a 75% chance he'll get ill, and a 55% chance he'll die within 4-7 days. Believe me, I understand that isolation prevents disease transmission.

VITAS didn't infect every single person on the face of the planet. But it was so infectious (R0 north of measles, in industrialized countries) that the uninfected were a statistical outlier (.06 percent of the population). In the US, pop 309,000,000, there were probably 100,000 - 200,000 people unexposed by the time the disease began killing.

VITAS transfered through bodily fluids, sneezing, or coughing. Touch your mouth, shake hands... you just spread the virus. Drink a soda at a restaurant, the busboy touches the glass... another person exposed. Stand on a subway and breathe hard, tiny droplets of fluid are expelled, and... you just got someone sick.

More, the virus was a tough little bastard. It could survive on surfaces for up to a day. Use the restroom, touch the sink, handdryer, and door handle... people exposed.

VITAS didn't need to infect literally everybody to infect pretty much everybody. And all this happened before the first suspected cases started appearing.

This has a couple of consequences. Most importantly, the disease will not just die off once everybody infected on day one is dead.

Let's break this down a little more. People began being infected in several large cities, like LA, NY, Chicago, Seattle. Hubs of travel, in other words.

Their clock started ticking from the moment they were exposed. 3-6 days later they became symptomatic and 12-24 hours after that they began to die. People who didn't catch it until a day or two or three later, died later. But the disease was still spreading in the meantime.

Rural Georgia first reported suspected deaths a week after LA. By that time, the disease had hit a huge percentage of the places it was going to (99.94%).

The deaths in LA kicked off two weeks of mass deaths across the country. After that spike the deaths faded away because, except for 40% of the 100,000-200,000 uninfected, everybody who was going to die had already died.

When it hit, it hit hard. But when the mass deaths were past, it had burned out. Sure, it was going to suck for the 40,000-80,000 who hadn't been exposed, and would die if they were, but by that time other factors (covered in the first post in this topic) were killing millions. 40,000 more, give or take, wasn't going to make a big difference.

There were continuing deaths, in other words, but from factors other than the disease. (And an impaired immune system from low food stores would make a difference in many of those cases.)

[Note: there's a couple of problems, not touched on in the thread thus far, that pose severe difficulties for the timeline. I'm going to have to think those over, and it looks like I'll have to futz with the numbers a bit. One big problem: 40% of the population just didn't vanish, they died. Where do you put them? And what happens in the meantime? Nothing good, especially for cities. Food for thought.]

(btw, I was not the one who brought up the claim of days)

True, and I didn't mean to imply you did. My apologies.

[kzt]

[Note: there's a couple of problems, not touched on in the thread thus far, that pose severe difficulties for the timeline. I'm going to have to think those over, and it looks like I'll have to futz with the numbers a bit. One big problem: 40% of the population just didn't vanish, they died. Where do you put them? And what happens in the meantime? Nothing good, especially for cities. Food for thought.]

Once the reality of what is going on, they lie in the street or in the houses where they died until people decide it is safe to come out. It will NOT be very nice.

The virus is described as behaving very differently than any real agent, so the obvious assumption will be that it is a deliberate bio agent that got out of control. Think about the impact of that decision.

[apieros]

Once the reality of what is going on, they lie in the street or in the houses where they died until people decide it is safe to come out. It will NOT be very nice.

I agree. The problems I was thinking of were...

Suppose you live in an urban area with 10 million people. 4 million suddenly drop dead, pretty much evenly distributed across every single family, neighborhood, and SES group. If those do, as you say, just lie there (for the most part. Some places will get cleanup crews around), they're going to begin to rot. And attract flies. And that's fertile soil for a whole 'nother epidemic. Flies that feed off the dead, and the dead bodies themselves, are fertile breeding grounds for disease.

The virus is described as behaving very differently than any real agent, so the obvious assumption will be that it is a deliberate bio agent that got out of control.

That's crossed my mind. But I was thinking, however, that it would be more interesting if it were a para-species. That is, the first magical species to appear. It would explain a lot about the disease.

Not sure what consequences that would imply. But it's very Shadowrun-esque.

(And, as in mainline SR, the prayers and rituals performed by people during VITAS are the first appearances of magic.)

Given the dependency on a sophisticated transportation network, "just in time" logistics and the limited ability of highly complex infrastructure systems to operate without supervision things are likely to get very, very ugly.

I agree, hence the original post. I've tried to touch on all of those.

As the number of survivors is akin to 1960 there certainly isn't any reason why they can't reestablish a governmental structure similar to what existed. in the 1930 to 60s.

There's a big one: money. It takes a lot of money to run the government. And the economy is screwed to hell and back.

The currency hit triple digit annual inflation, and is essentially worthless. The stock market cratered, banks are MIA, there's a critical labor shortage and something like 70% unemployment. (People with real skills will find employment. "Performance Art" majors will have to either retrain or join the bread lines.) Trillions of dollars of wealth just disappeared in the Collapse.

International trade is MIA and will be for years. No cheap Chinese goods for WalMart. No Chinese engines for John Deere. No Chinese factories to produce iPads and iPhones. (Even if all those companies had survived, which they didn't.)

America went from being a rich, rich, rich country to being... well, worse off than in 1920. Before WWII, 50% of the population lived below the poverty line. As in "no electricity, wood stove, crap in an outhouse" poverty line. Survivable, but not wealthy.

After the Collapse, it's gone back to that situation. (As in mainline Shadowrun. Ever wonder where all the people in the Barrens come from? Now you know.)

"Screwed to hell and back" just isn't vitriolic enough.

The economy will get moving again, but very, very slowly. People can find work, but in the beginning they're working for ration coupons. The Argentine Model will put a bunch of defunct businesses back into production, but again very slowly.

Plus, the US will have to rebuild an industrial base that's been withering since 1960's. We'll have to start producing steel again, and start making parts here. We'll have to become largely self-sufficient.

All of this adds up to... The Long Depression. (Which I've mentioned before.) A very weak economy, anemic economic growth (at least, when compared to the population growth), and a couple of decades of widespread poverty and deprivation.

It isn't that there's no federal government. Or that people are rebelling and creating their own countries. (Other than, you know, the NAN.) It's that there just isn't the taxation base to support an expansive defense establishment and domestic agenda.

Government programs require money. And the money just isn't there.

[Sengir]

Suppose a guy was off hiking in a state park (Yellowstone, say) when VITAS was first tearing through. He never gets exposed. If he later leaves and encounters someone infected, there's a 75% chance he'll get ill, and a 55% chance he'll die within 4-7 days.

Nope, there would be a chance of let's say 30% that he gets infected. The next time he has contact with VITAS, it's another 30% chance and so on and so forth.

Basically a series of Bernoulli trials, with the number of trials being how often the average person will be in a situation where he could get infected...

[Jeremiah Kraye]

Just want to point out: Losing 50% of the population in england back then, does not in any way come close to losing 20% of the population in 2011... Even then, 20% of the population is a drop in the bucket compared to the total population of the globe. 40% of the population STILL probably leaves more people in the world than the population of the world during the age of the black plague.

Just thought that was a relevant thought to the ideas of a massive pandemic. Unless you get to zombie flick (5% left) you aren't going to end society, period, and even then that 5% is gonna seek to keep some semblence of society and attempt to rebuild, even if it takes them back 3 decades of tech, they will move on.

Second the fact that a flat percentage of people have immunity (diseases don't have this) combined with the fact that even if infected it requires two secondary issues (the allergen and not recieving treatment for the problem quickly) makes me think even less of the idea that this disease would end society. In truth the pain is probably that after a week of people dropping dead... LIFE MOVED ON, probably by finding out why they all dropped dead.

[kzt]

There's a big one: money. It takes a lot of money to run the government. And the economy is screwed to hell and back.

The currency hit triple digit annual inflation, and is essentially worthless. The stock market cratered, banks are MIA, there's a critical labor shortage and something like 70% unemployment. (People with real skills will find employment. "Performance Art" majors will have to either retrain or join the bread lines.) Trillions of dollars of wealth just disappeared in the Collapse.

Have you looked at the stats for the US circa 1933? There was a roughly comparable situation there, called the great depression. Given that the effects of the Black Death was to greatly increase both wages and employment options due to the huge numbers of dead people who suddenly were not working, accompanied by enormous deflation due to the large amount of assets that dead people held and needed to be sold to support survivors, that doesn't really hold up.

I'd suggest that you get disintegration due to the federal Government becoming an obstacle for recovery due to idiocy like the Feds insisting on formal EPA studies and Federal court approval before you burn the bodies of the dead, OSHA insisting on some sort of absurd and totally crippling legality and similar insane bureaucratic nonsense attempted to be enforced by rulebook fanatics.

[apieros]

Have you looked at the stats for the US circa 1933? There was a roughly comparable situation there, called the great depression.

The Great Depression began with the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which raised import fees. It prompted a trade war with Europe, cutting off a great deal of international trade. At its height, the country had a 25% unemployment rate, which had dipped down to 18% by the start of WWII.

The situation, at the end of the Collapse, was much worse.

the effects of the Black Death was to greatly increase both wages and employment options due to the huge numbers of dead people who suddenly were not working, accompanied by enormous deflation due to the large amount of assets that dead people held and needed to be sold to support survivors, that doesn't really hold up.

The recovery from the Black Death took a long time, up to a century after the plague itself happened. Yes, wages increased and the economy recovered, but in the immediate aftermath there was an economic contraction. Economic growth (seen, for example, in wages) didn't really emerge until the 1450's. And, though scanty labor played a part, so did other factors.

(Example: Monarchs and nobles meddled extensively in trade. With their power weakened in Western Europe, trade became more easily accomplished, and thus the economy grew.)

Wealth, in those days, was primarily tangible: gold, land, etc. Money nowadays is intangible, often existing as credit balances in bank accounts. (Banking, as such, didn't exist until long after the Black Death, and indeed seems to have been a consequence of it.)

But when those banks go belly-up, and the money itself is worthless, that makes it hard to get the economy moving. How can you buy an idle factory, when there's no money to buy it with, and the owner no longer exists (assuming it's a corporation)? (The answer, at the bottom of the first post, is "The Argentinean Model".)

To have trade, you need a person with money and a person with something to sell. There was no money (the dollar was worthless, so everyone had suddenly become very poor), and the companies that used to produce things had vanished.

In the post-collapse economy, the only liquid form of wealth readily available is fuel, food, and other supplies necessary for survival. Economic recovery begins with what is a fiat currency: assignable ration coupons. (Or, if you prefer, you can view it as money backed by commodities instead of gold or "full faith and credit".)

Each coupon is good for, say, a certain amount of food. If you have a surplus, due to saving or planting your own garden, you can assign the coupon to someone else for a chair they made. In this manner, people can begin to buy and sell things, and the economy can start to grow. But not at a rapid pace.

As for labor, modern jobs necessary for an industrial society require a lot of training. Not just anyone can, for example, operate a nuclear power plant or drive a semi or whatever. Retraining is possible, but it also takes time.

International trade was a big factor in economic recovery in the 1400's, but there is little to no international trade for years after the Collapse. The majority of economic growth depends on internal trade in the US.

The economy will recover, but not quickly (I assume it happens over a 20 year period). Indeed, my assumption is that 2032 (year the campaign starts) is the beginning of an economic upswing, were the hard work of recovery finally begins paying off.

And until the economy does recover, the government (at all levels) will find it hard to support a vast bureaucracy, even should they wish to do so.

due to the federal Government becoming an obstacle for recovery due to idiocy like the Feds insisting on formal EPA studies and Federal court approval before you burn the bodies of the dead, OSHA insisting on some sort of absurd and totally crippling legality and similar insane bureaucratic nonsense attempted to be enforced by rulebook fanatics.

Three point response:

1.) That's a good suggestion that I've considered. It's even plausible. (That is, depending on who is in charge, it could definitely happen. Government intervention in the economy may have deepened and lengthened the Great Depression, at least according to some historians.)

2.) It tracks with some of the source material I'm using for inspiration.

3.) But it's too political. Here's why:

I see Altered States as a technothriller campaign. (Techno-magicalthriller, technically.) Essentially, it's Tom Clancy, if he wrote novels set it the Sixth World.

The campaign will revolve around national conflicts, meta-human racial conflicts (Elf nation, a would-be Orc homeland), bleeding edge magical and technological innovations, secret agents, spies, terrorism, dealing with magical threats (e.g. insect spirits) and so forth. The PC's are a group of agents drawn from across North America, and instead of criminals who raid a Renraku gene lab, they're elite operatives who raid a Tir Tairngire airbase.

Technothrillers are seen as a right-wing form of literature. And adding in "the government caused everything" moves it even further to the right.

I don't like it when people jam politics into entertainment, and I don't want to do that with Altered States.

Again, your suggestion isn't a bad idea. I'm just wary of putting real-world politics in the campaign. "Tir vs. Aztlan vs. USA" is alright. "Government regulation caused the Long Depression" is too far.

[kzt]

You misunderstand my proposal. I'm not saying that the Federal Government policies caused the ensuing economic collapse. Instead the obvious crony capitalism and absurd bureaucratic reactions caused the collapse of the Federal Government. Essentially, everyone decided that they needed to do things and stopped listening to what the manics in DC were saying and DC had no ability to make people follow their directives. Once the usual attitude of the people towards the government becomes ridicule the goverment is doomed. Once people stop listening, stop paying taxes and the vast majority of (probably unpaid) honest federal employees decided to work with the people who were actually trying to fix the world instead of trying to pretend that it was still the same world the entire vast government falls apart. When a few armed EPA agent show up to enforce their absurd rules about wetlands in a wet spot in a farmers field the Sheriff has a body of armed deputies show up and convinces them to go away and stop bothering people in his county.

Without that you essentially have "and then the magic happens" between a massively powerful federal government running the country by decree under martial law and your desired endpoint of a federal goverment on the order of the articles of confederation. The government doesn't run out of money because it is the issuer of the money and has the legal power to make people accept it. What is the federal deficit this year? $2 trillion?

Given the timeline you are proposing and the general prevention of power grid collapse the internet would still work. Modern systems don't require constant attention to keep running and critical hardware has a MTBF of many years. And the vast majority of system admin can be done from home. That means people will have a vastly better idea of what is going on than in any previous crisis, even if they are hiding out in their houses for a moth or whatever. And if it is really stupid that will spread.

[apieros]

Second the fact that a flat percentage of people have immunity (diseases don't have this)

According to the information I've gathered (which may not be complete or perfect), there are indeed genetic resistances to specific diseases. Encyclopedia Brittanica: "Every animal species possesses some natural resistance to disease...Presumably, most causes of absolute resistance are genetically determined; it is possible [to have] two strains of rabbits, one highly susceptible to tuberculosis, the other highly resistant."

In the case of VITAS, an estimated 25% of the populace was highly resistant to the disease, to the extent they never caught it. I suppose its possible some actually contracted the disease, and it just failed to provoke the development of an allergy. It also makes sense that there is a percentage of the population that's highly susceptible, these would probably be chief among those who developed severe anaphylactic symptoms (and hence died).

I may be misunderstanding your point, though, please feel free to expand.

Unless you get to zombie flick (5% left) you aren't going to end society, period,

I guess it's a good thing that's not what I'm doing. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

The struggle during the Collapse is between devolving into scattered local sovereignties or warring tribes (as happened in Africa, Pakistan, and Afghanistan), or being able to hold the country together. China, for example, broke apart into several new countries, as did the US (i.e. the four NAN nations).

So, I'm not saying "society will inevitably dissolve". That's be a post-apocalyptic Shadowrun, not a technothriller Shadowrun. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

(Which could be cool, just not what I'm doing right now.)

combined with the fact that even if infected it requires two secondary issues (the allergen and not recieving treatment for the problem quickly)

An epi-pen (or other medicines) will help those in anaphylactic shock. The problem is that they have multiple severe allergies, sometimes twenty or more, and encountering any of them will cause a myocardial infarction (blood supply to the heart cut off, part of it dies) or other lethal reaction. This could happen a dozen times a day or more, each time they encounter any one of their twenty or more allergens.

Yes, it might technically be possible to save someone with that many lethal allergies. But it would take enclosing them in a hypo-allergenic room for the rest of their life. That's expensive, and very hard to arrange for in the midst of the Collapse.

It would also require people to know what was going on. Which they didn't.

The exact mechanism of the disease didn't become clear for a year or two after the plague burned out. The name "VITAS" wasn't coined until 2 years after the pandemic began. During The Collapse, it was known as "the New Delhi Flu" or "the New Delhi Plague."

During the Collapse, no one knew what was happening. Or, at least, if some doctor or researcher did realize it, the information didn't get distributed very widely. Like AIDS in 1980, VITAS was a mystery.

In truth the pain is probably that after a week of people dropping dead... LIFE MOVED ON

That's what I assume. Specifically, moved on to Reclamation, trying to restore the economy and central government.

[Jeremiah Kraye]

Resistant is not immunity...

I'm mostly on your side, not sure what kzt doesn't like about the numbers.

As for the allergies from what I read the allergens were varied and ranged from common to uncommon. IF you were allergic to plastic products good luck, but many people are allergic to latex and rarely run into the stuff.

Either way its ugly, but with a % not suffering, a % suffering only lightly and a % outright getting owned, I think your numbers are about correct, with 40% not making it (which I believe is cannon).

[apieros]

Resistant is not immunity...

You're right. I overstated the case.

"Resistance" means that, if a normal person has a 50% chance of catching the virus (numbers totally made up) each time they encounter it, a susceptible person has a 99% chance of catching it, and a resistant person has a 1% chance of catching it. Not "it never happens", but "it's pretty damn rare".

(Plus, the susceptible person usually develops severe allergies, and the resistant person usually develops mild allergies.)

So, I agree with you on that. In my mind, the 25% number was, from the POV of 2032, an estimate (hard figures were difficult to arrange for) of how many people didn't come down with the virus. Subject to a lot of waffling either direction, errors in methodology, difficulties gathering data and what not.

As for the allergies from what I read the allergens were varied and ranged from common to uncommon. IF you were allergic to plastic products good luck, but many people are allergic to latex and rarely run into the stuff.

That tracks with the information I've gathered. VITAS induces allergies, so uncommon allergies often become far more common.

I think your numbers are about correct, with 40% not making it (which I believe is cannon).

The canon death toll is about 25%, but with no information about "secondary killers". Nor, so far as I've read, and acknowledgment that they would be a big factor.

I've prepared a spreadsheet with new numbers, using information from the 2010 US Census. In that, I assume a 20% kill rate for VITAS itself, and varying percentages of deaths from secondary effects based on how urbanized the area is. (Secondary effects including famine, dehydration, hypothermia, secondary epidemics, civil strife, and so forth.)

In the end, and by design, the total kill rate (for the US) is about 40%. It amounts to the same thing, but with more consideration for how difficult it was to survive the aftermath of the epidemic.

I'm mostly on your side

None of your posts have seemed hostile or condescending. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.

I appreciate all the feedback in this thread, it's helped me to make the material more complete and more plausible. (And provoked me into doing a lot more research on a lot more topics.)

[Jeremiah Kraye]

I would look into or write about what immunity vs resistance is.

I thought from what I read there were people who were completely uneffected by vitas, those who survived vitas but continue to be afflicted by the mild allergies it caused (I assume those with resistance either to it's effects or those who have relatively strong immunity to allergens), and those who suffered the full brunt (worst allergy effects).

[apieros]

Essentially, everyone decided that they needed to do things and stopped listening to what the manics in DC were saying and DC had no ability to make people follow their directives.

I like what you're saying, and I think there's a good way to make it work. (And, it doesn't have to be black and white. Multiple elements can come into play.

--start file--

After the Red Days, the military returns to begin Reclamation. They get some areas stabilized, to ensure logistic support (food and fuel for the military) and begin protecting critical infrastructure. They even start the ration program, to buy and sell commodities with. This restarts a tiny part of the economy. The military begins to distribute food to stabilized areas.

Per the original Reclamation OpPlan, the military begins to hand administration duties over to local government or (where still operative) state governments. Governors and local cities are working together to feed the refugees from the large cities and re-establish order. The National Guard is helping move food and fuel around, garrisoning critical installations, and so forth. There are food reserves, waiting for refugees to be located and brought into one of the camps that have been established.

Things in a few places are looking up, especially in the protected bunkers/military bases in which reside the Cabinet, president, and other bureaucrats. The DHS and FEMA, under the aegis of the NIPP (the National Infrastructure Protection Plan) begin trying to take control of Reclamation from the military and local or state governments. Instead of "buying" supplies with ration coupons, they try and seize supplies. In many cases, even seizing property still occupied by its owners. FEMA begins issuing orders to locals, in the interests of "managing" the situation.

Their goal is to restore the national government (ensure that it is fed and fueled), so as better to be able govern the nation. People need the Federal bureaucracy, the argument goes. The counter-argument (coming from state and local governments) being:

"We don't need to give all our tiny surplus to reopen Federal buildings across the country, so the government can enforce OSHA regulations, fine people for violating FDA regulations by burning 'greenbelts' to cook food with and avoid freezing this winter, or whatever other damn thing you feel needs to be done. We're trying to prevent 100,000,000 people from starving or freezing to death this winter."

Both sides are sincere in their arguments, and think they're right. The conflict between the two causes no end of grief for everybody else involved (the military being especially pissed because it's their logistics chain being futzed with) and complaints flow towards Washington.

There's a meeting of the National Security Council. The SecDef and the JCS make the argument that DHS has no authority. The Reclamation rationing program is run by the military, under lawful auspices, and no civilian agency can simply take it over. The argument is heated, and at one point the president is rumored to have said “I’m not about to fuck up the one good thing we have going for us.” The decision goes against the DHS: goods bought, sold, or produced as part of the Emergency Military Supply Acquisition Program cannot be seized or commandeered by civilian agencies.

State and local officials are administering the EMSAP, on behalf of the military. From that point on, governors become very liberal with the definition of what, exactly, constitute such goods. Attempts by FEMA or DHS to seize pretty much anything are generally met with “I’m sorry, this land (vehicle, building, case of cola, pile of rubble) is part of the Emergency Military Supply Acquisition Program.” The military universally backs up such declarations.

--end of file--

This implements the essence of your idea, if not the exact details. And it makes sense, in context, and fits with the rest of the material.

running the country by decree under martial law

That's not quite what happened during Reclamation. Even under martial law, the government didn't have control of most places in the country. There are five identified levels of control:

Unorganized Territory: No set governing authority. Possibly no stable population, or several groups vying for control. High chance of internecine violence. No aid, travel authorized only in heavily armed convoys. No authorization to establish control, unless mission-critical resources are present and authorization is granted by the officer in command. No rules of engagement.

Hostile Sovereignty: Extant governing authority of varying levels of hostility to NMC. Emergency aid permissible in crisis situations. No travel. No authorization to rationalize sovereignty or establish control, unless mission-critical resources are present and authorization is granted by NMC. RoE: armed response for self-defense only, or as needed to effect current mission.

Benign Sovereignty: Extant governing authority with history of cooperation with NMC. Aid permissible in severe emergencies only. No authorization to rationalize sovereignty, unless gross violations of applicable law is confirmed by unit commander and authorization is granted by NMC. RoE: armed response in self-defense only, or as needed to effect current mission, and then in such a manner as to minimize civilian casualties.

Reclamation Zone: Governing authority rationalized: Constitutional civilian authority functioning under applicable laws. Protection and aid on as-available, as-needed basis.

Secured Area: Temporary or permanent DoD base, or effective equivalent. Protection and logistic support on an as-needed basis.

So parts of the country are controlled, other parts under civilian authority, yet others by friendly, if questionable people, others by hostiles, and yet others are free-fire zones. Martial law might have been declared, but the military lacked the manpower and resources to garrison and govern the entire country.

The government doesn't run out of money because it is the issuer of the money and has the legal power to make people accept it.

In the long term, they can certainly get back into the business of printing money. (And, I'm assuming, do.) In the first couple of years post-Collapse, a lot prevents that.

And even after, those in power recognize that hyper-inflation (from printing massive amounts of currency) takes you into Weimar Republic Marks or Confederate Dollars territory. It'd be suicidal.

As for deficit spending, the banking system was destroyed, and is only slowly growing back (post NAN War, let's assume). There isn't anyone to buy government debt. And having the government buy its own debt, takes it back into Weimar territory. In 2016, there isn't a lot of room to maneuver, in terms of trying to support a bureaucracy without commensurate tax receipts.

[kzt]

I can buy all of that. Though given the short period of time that the pandemic was raging I'm unclear how you would lose control of any significant populated areas beyond the ability of state and local goverment to have general control. It's a lot easier to explain given a many months long pandemic, where people refused to enter the areas where it raged.

The counterpoint to the goverment falling apart is that the periods where the federal goverment has gained the most power have been these sorts of existential (or seemingly existential) crisis. The Civil War, the Great Depression, etc. However I think you are right, the combination of the effective bankruptcy of the US and many of the larger states would make it really hard for the Feds to do anything similar to FDR's mismash of programs. The US started the Great Depression with the total Federal Debt at about 20% of GDP. We ended the Great Depression at ~50% of GDP (1940). In late 2010 the Federal deficit was at ~95% of GDP. So post pandemic mid 2011 would seem like it might not be the greatest time to sell USG bonds. Hence government expenses need to be severely cut to get costs somehow related to income. Or so you would think. The other option is that doesn't happen and the economy melts down from the Feds trying to prop up AFSCME, Goldman Sachs and rest of the "too big to fail" crony capitalists.

[apieros]

I would look into or write about what immunity vs resistance is.

When I do the second draft, I'll make sure to clarify that (among several other things).

I thought from what I read there were people who were completely uneffected by vitas, those who survived vitas but continue to be afflicted by the mild allergies it caused (I assume those with resistance either to it's effects or those who have relatively strong immunity to allergens), and those who suffered the full brunt (worst allergy effects).

That's the way I first set it up. 25% unaffected (didn't catch the disease or isolated), 40% who developed allergies with lethal reactions, 35% who developed allergies with mild or moderate reactions. (Though I'm changing that for the second draft.)

Though given the short period of time that the pandemic was raging I'm unclear how you would lose control of any significant populated areas

It's a good point. What you're talking about is, effectively, the length of time deaths are occurring (the "Red Days"), which is the time during which people are sequestering themselves to avoid catching the disease. By quarantining themselves, they contribute to the breakdown in industries and infrastructure but they save their lives and the lives of their families (they hope).

I agree that two weeks seems a bit short to cause a breakdown in civil order by itself. For the second draft, it may be a good idea to lengthen the time, perhaps to a month or so.

On the other hand, VITAS was just the first wave of sickness. Cholera, season flu, and other sicknesses followed it, effectively putting more pressure on society. And these are more traditional sicknesses, with people sidelined or needing care. Two weeks of VITAS, followed by sporadic and various epidemics, sporadic breakdown in infrastructure, economic collapse, and the breakdown in emergency and medical services could well be enough to cause the kind of chaos I'm looking at.

So post pandemic mid 2011 would seem like it might not be the greatest time to sell USG bonds.

And if they decide to, who's buying? The international monetary system has collapsed, the Chinese are locked in a civil war, the stock market has cratered (making the rich much poorer), the banking system has collapsed (wiping out the savings of the middle class), inflation has destroyed the dollar (wiping out the savings of the middle class and making the rich much poorer), and they've just repudiated 13 trillion dollars of debt (crashing retirement accounts and savings bonds of people across the country, and destroying the nation's credit rating). Just to get the economy moving, they'll need a revalued currency (as Japan did with the nuyen).

Selling bonds depends on having a bond market to absorb them at rates you can pay. By 2011, the US government has a junk bond rating, and has to offer ridiculous rates to tempt anyone.

Hence government expenses need to be severely cut to get costs somehow related to income.

Yeah, deficit spending would seem to be off-limits for a long time.