Human species as pathogens

There is a disturbing theory about the human species that
has begun to take on an alarming level of reality. It seems
that the behavior of the human race is displaying uncanny
parallels to the behavior of pathogenic, or disease-causing,
organisms.
When viewed at the next quantum level of perspective, from
which the Earth is seen as an organism and humans are seen as
microorganisms, the human species looks like a menace to the plan-
et. In fact, the human race is looking a lot like a disease — comprised
of organisms excessively multiplying, mindlessly consuming, and
generating waste with little regard for the health and well-being of its
host — planet Earth.
Pathogenic organisms are a nasty quirk of nature, although
they do have their constructive purposes, namely killing off the weak
and infirm and ensuring the survival only of the fittest. They do this
by overwhelming their host, by sucking the vitality out of it and leav-
ing poison in their wake. Pathogens don't give a damn about their
own source of life — their host — and they often kill it outright.
This may seem like a silly way for a species to maintain its
own existence; afterall, if you kill the host upon which your life
depends, then you must also die. But pathogens have developed a spe-
cial survival tactic that allows them to carry on their existence even after their host has died. They simply travel to a new host, sending
out envoys to seek out and infect another organism even as their own
population dies en masse along with the original host.
A man dying of tuberculosis coughs on his deathbed, an act
instigated by the infecting pathogen, ensuring that the disease has a
chance to spread to others. A child defecates on the dirt outside her
home, unwittingly satisfying the needs of the parasites inhabiting her
intestines, which require time in the soil as part of their life cycle. A
person stricken with cholera defecates in an outhouse which leaches
tainted water into the ground, contaminating the village well-water
and allowing the disease to spread to other unsuspecting villagers.
In the case of pathogenic organisms that kill their host, the
behavior is predictable: multiply without regard for any limits to
growth, consume senselessly and excrete levels of waste that grievous-
ly harm the host. When this is translated into human terms, it rings
with a disquieting familiarity, especially when we equate human suc-
cess with growth, consumption and material wealth.
Suppose we humans are, as; a species, exhibiting disease
behavior: we're multiplying with no regard for limits, consuming nat-
ural resources as if there will be no future generations, and produc-
ing waste products that are distressing the planet upon which our
very survival depends. There are two factors which we, as a species,
are not taking into consideration. First is the survival tactic of
pathogens, which requires additional hosts to infect. We do not have
the luxury of that option, at least not yet. If we are successful at con-
tinuing our dangerous behavior, then we will also succeed in march-
ing straight toward our own demise. In the process, we can also drag
many other species down with us, a dreadful syndrome that is already
underway. This is evident by the threat of extinction that hangs, like
the sword of Damocles, over an alarming number of the Earth's
species.
There is a second consideration: infected host organisms fight
back. As humans become an increasing menace, can the Earth try to
defend itself? When a disease organism infects a human, the human
body elevates its own temperature in order to defend itself. This rise
in temperature not only inhibits the growth of the infecting pathogen,
but also greatly enhances the disease fighting capability within the
body. Global warming may be the Earth's way of inducing a global
"fever" as a reaction to human pollution of the atmosphere and
human over-consumption of fossil fuels.
When the internal human body temperature rises, the microspecies, 25% of all mammals, and 50% of all primates are threatened
with extinction.5
Of 242,000 plant species surveyed by the World
Conservation Union in 1997, one out of every eight (33,000 species)
was threatened with extinction.6
What would drive humanity to damage its life support system
in this way? Why would we disregard our host organism, the Earth,
as if we were nothing more than a disease intent upon its destruction?
One answer, as we have seen, is consumption. We embrace the idea
that more is better, measuring success with the yardstick of material
wealth. Some startling statistics bear this out: the 225 richest people
in the world (0.000003% of the world's population) have as much
acquired wealth as the poorest half of the entire human race. The
wealth of the world's three richest people is equivalent to the total
output of the poorest 48 countries. We in the United States certainly
can raise our hands and be counted when it comes to consumption —
our intake of energy, grain and materials is the highest on the planet.
Americans can admit to using three tons of materials per month, each
of us, and that's not counting food and fuel. Despite the fact that we
are only l/20th of the globe's population, we use 1/3 of its resources.
We would require no less than three planet Earths to sustain the
entire world at this level of consumption.