And now I desire that this inequality
should be no more in this land,
especially among this my people;
but I desire that this land be a land
of liberty, and every man may enjoy
his rights and privileges alike,
so long as the Lord sees fit
that we may live and inherit the land,
yea, even as long as any of our
posterity remains upon the face
of the land.
Mosiah 29:32
In the midst of an international hysteria about the novel coronavirus COVID-19, it is interesting to review the current statistics for seasonal flu in the United States. Here is the summary.
Hmm. No one is buying toilet paper or water worrying about the flu. No one is quarantining millions of people over the flu. No one is shutting down museums, parks, and other destinations over the flu. No one is telling the elderly to stay inside and to avoid crowds because of the flu. Hardly anyone is buying or wearing a facemask because of the flu. I had the flu, the real flu, about three years ago and no one interviewed me for the news or avoided me and told me to go home. The stock market did not collapse over the flu. No politician made comments about the flu except in passing.
What is the difference?
I really don't have an answer to that question.
My grandson got home from South Korea and apparently, my daughter and her husband have worked out the two-week quarantine. We have decided to carry on our activities as usual unless and until someone in authority tells us otherwise.
There is a reason for writing about the virus simply because it is causing such a huge reaction. I am guessing that the U.S. number of cases is vastly under-reported.
Cooper Hewitt, Smithsonian Design Museum, Public Domain, Walter Clark, American, 1848–1917
As a genealogist, I have been interested in the impact that wars, disasters, pandemics, and other natural phenomena have had on history and particularly the history of my extensive family. As a result of my interest, I have read extensively about events such as the 1918/19 Flu Epidemic. You can watch a video about some of my thoughts from this video on the Brigham Young University Family History Library YouTube Channel.
I never really believed that I would be caught up experiencing a global pandemic. We always have a tendency to think that this type of catastrophe occurred in the past as a result of a lack of knowledge about medicine and hygiene. As I began a renewed interest due to the beginnings of what is now being called the novel coronavirus epidemic, I discovered that I have already lived through a number of pandemics. See Wikipedia: List of epidemics. One of these, the ongoing HIV/AIDS pandemic from 1960 to the present, has killed over 32,000,000 people. Two other pandemics during my lifetime, the Asian flu of 1957/58 and the Hong Kong flu of 1968/69 killed about 2 million and 1 million respectively.
As of the date of this post, the Coronavirus COVID-19 (the official name of the disease) has claimed the lives of 3,555 worldwide putting it into the low category for diseases. So what is the big deal? From all that I have read so far, this Coronavirus has two or three things that make it more disconcerting; it spreads while people show no symptoms, it is relatively more contagious and lethal, and it got a huge head start in China before coming to the United States (where I live).
So why did I start to write today (March 7, 2020)? Today, the Coronavirus made our lives even more complicated than they have been recently. No, I am not sick. No, no one in my family is sick. A least not yet. However, the complications came from the disease. One event this week did give me a preview of what was coming. I greeted a patron in the Brigham Young University Family History Library, where my wife and I volunteer, and she shook my hand and then dashed to the hand sanitizer dispenser to disinfect her hand. Not a usual reaction to me or my handshake. That got me thinking.
One of my grandsons was serving as a missionary for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in South Korea. As the Coronavirus began spreading to countries other than China, the Church began to close down its temples and transfer missionaries out of the impacted countries. My grandson was, at first, isolated and then sent home where he will have to spend two weeks in isolation before being transferred to a different mission here in the United States. See "LDS missionaries removed from South Korea due to virus." Suddenly, the virus was affecting my immediate family.
The CDC guidance comes as two top infectious disease experts with ties to the federal government have advised people over 60 and those with underlying health problems to strongly consider avoiding activities that involve large crowds, such as traveling by airplane, going to movie theaters or concerts, attending family events, shopping at crowded malls, and going to religious services.
Dr. William Schaffner, a Vanderbilt University professor and longtime adviser to the CDC, said these two groups should strongly consider avoiding activities that involve large crowds, such as traveling by airplane, going to movie theaters, attending family events, shopping at crowded malls, and going to religious services.
Now, it looks like we might be impacted even further, especially since the first known case of COVID-19 in Utah has been confirmed. My reaction to almost everything is to write, hence, this post and the ones to follow.
Stay tuned for updates as various events occur. I don't think I will write every day but only as events drive my writing.
Crystal skull at the Musée du quai Branly, Paris. Eugène Boban, a controversal antique dealer, sold this piece to Alphonse Pinart, a young explorer. Pinart donated it to the Museum of Ethnography at Trocadéro, Paris.
An outbreak is a term that refers to the initial, sudden appearance of a particular disease. The disease does not have to be new or unusual. The term is usually applied to the first detection of the disease in a limited population. If the disease spreads to a larger population in a short period of time, the terminology changes to refer to the disease outbreak as an epidemic.
The word "epidemic" is defined as a widespread occurrence of an infectious disease in a community at a particular time. An epidemic usually involves a relatively short period of time and a large number of people in a defined population. Once the occurrences of the disease increase across larger populations, at some point, the terminology shifts to refer to the disease as a pandemic. The World Health Organization (WHO) has the following list of Pandemic, epidemic diseases on its website as of the date of this blog post. See https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/en/
Chikungunya
Cholera
Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever
Ebola virus disease
Hendra virus infection
Influenza (pandemic, seasonal, zoonotic)
Lassa fever
Marburg virus disease
Meningitis
MERS-CoV
Monkeypox
Nipah virus infection
Novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)
Plague
Rift Valley fever
SARS
Smallpox
Tularaemia
Yellow fever
Zika virus disease
Because of my interest in history and particularly in genealogy, I have been interested in historic pandemics. These occurrences usually result in blank spaces on a pedigree chart with few records that help to fill the gaps. The most recent historical pandemic occurred in 1918 and 1919 and resulted in the death of an estimated 1/3 of the world's population. See the following:
Taubenberger, Jeffery K., and David M. Morens. “1918 Influenza: The Mother of All Pandemics - Volume 12, Number 1—January 2006 - Emerging Infectious Diseases Journal - CDC.” Accessed March 4, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1201.050979.
Here is a quote from the above article about the 1918 pandemic:
An estimated one third of the world's population (or ≈500 million persons) were infected and had clinically apparent illnesses (1,2) during the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic. The disease was exceptionally severe. Case-fatality rates were >2.5%, compared to <0 .1="" 100="" and="" arguably="" as="" at="" blockquote="" deaths="" estimated="" high="" in="" influenza="" million="" other="" pandemics="" total="" were=""> If you were to review a list of what are considered to be the worst pandemics in history, you might be surprised to realize that you lived through some of them without buying a surgical mask and/or rushing to the stores to buy toilet paper. Here is a link to one such list: https://www.mphonline.org/worst-pandemics-in-history/
While doing genealogical research, it is not unusual to find multiple deaths in the same family at the same time. These deaths can sometimes be connected to a local epidemic or a larger pandemic. If you look at the list above, you will see some diseases that are still prevalent in the world today and one or two that have disappeared from most of the countries of the world.
When we think of a major pandemic in history, we often think about the "Black Death" or Bubonic Plague of the Middle Ages from 1347 to 1351 that killed from 75 to 200 million people. See "Black Death." You might also be surprised to find out that the Plague is still endemic in the Southwestern United States. See the following:
Eisen, Rebecca J., Russell E. Enscore, Brad J. Biggerstaff, Pamela J. Reynolds, Paul Ettestad, Ted Brown, John Pape, et al. “Human Plague in the Southwestern United States, 1957–2004: Spatial Models of Elevated Risk of Human Exposure to Yersinia Pestis.” Journal of Medical Entomology 44, no. 3 (May 1, 2007): 530–37. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmedent/44.3.530.
There are several diseases on the list that are still lurking out there waiting for the right conditions to reappear in the general population. For example, smallpox has been eradicated in most of the world but currently few people have has the vaccination and a smallpox epidemic today would affect a large population before it was controlled.
It is certain that epidemics and even pandemics will continue to occur. The Novel coronavirus is only one of a number of possible pandemic diseases.
Lately, I have been involved with an ongoing issue with one of the major social networking websites. One of my blogs, Rejoice, and be exceeding glad, has been entirely banned. In fact, this post would not be able to be posted if I included a link to the title of my banned blog. In addition, to add insult to injury, someone has hijacked by personal social network account and is out there promoting a scam by sending out invitations to add my existing "friends" to a "new" account using my name. Of course, the "new" account does not show up when I search on the website. You may notice that I am not using the name of the social networking website but you can likely guess which one I am referring to. Rather than abandon the social networking website, I decided to implement two-stage login so if someone has gotten my password they will not be able to log on to my account.
I have supplied the social networking website with several reasons why they should tell me how and why I was banned but nothing I send is either acknowledged or responded to.
Now, that brings me to the subject of this post. Because I have been fussing with this social networking website, I have been looking at the posts more than usual. Frankly, I am more than appalled at the lack of common sense and logic displayed by those who most commonly post online. I cannot imagine what I wrote on my blog that could have come close to the depths of ignorance and bad taste displayed daily. I thought about giving a few examples but that would require me to re-post some of the blatantly inaccurate memes and comments. By the way, I am not referring to political opinions but merely those comments that assert facts that are entirely indefensible and untrue.
There has been a lot of discussions online about the subject of "fake news." From what I see online, there are few people who could tell a fake news story from anything more factual. With some of the more obvious fake assertions, I can verify the actual information in a matter of seconds. In those rare occasions that I respond, the reactions of the posting party or parties are usually disbelief of my "facts" and a continued defense of the fake news.
Now I could just abandon social networking altogether and also quit writing blog posts. That would certainly free up a lot of my time for other pursuits but would not really solve anything. You could stop reading the social networking posts and then it wouldn't matter if I was writing or not. We could also start thinking about the reality of what we read and see on social networking websites and not re-post blatantly false and misleading information but perhaps that is expecting too much. Maybe I could just confine my writing to something totally uncontroversial such as genealogy. Oh! Wait a minute. That was the blog that got banned.
In a recent visit to my ophthalmologist for an annual checkup, he confirmed that I am going blind. Throughout our lives, we are constantly confronted with "what if" situations. What if I die? What if I don't get a job? What ifs in endless profusion. One of those I have often contemplated is what if I go blind. What would I do? How would I keep writing? What about driving a car? Watching a movie? Endless consequences from what-if situations.
The reality of the diagnosis is cataracts. What if I had cataracts and I was living back in the mid-1800s? Without surgery, I would and will now, most assuredly go blind at some point assuming I lived long enough for that to happen. Because of the internet, when I was first told that I had cataracts in both eyes, I could quickly find out almost everything about the subject. Over the past year or so, I could also document the symptoms. Only recently, before the current examination, did I make a decision about traveling at night based partially on the fact that my vision was impaired.
Fortunately, the rest of my vision is just fine and more importantly, the success rate for cataract surgery is now in the 90% to 95% range. Our ancestors did not have such positive results. See "The Evolution of Cataract Surgery" in the journal Missouri Medicine, The Journal of the Missouri State Medical Association. Here is the citation.
Davis, Geetha. “The Evolution of Cataract Surgery.” Missouri Medicine 113, no. 1 (2016): 58–62.
Facing cataract surgery is only one of several physical conditions I am facing as a result of moving into "old age." If you want to know what most of the world thinks about old age, here is a quote from Wikipedia: Old age.
The United Nations has agreed that 65+ years may be usually denoted as old age and this is the first attempt at an international definition of old age. However, for its study of old age in Africa, the World Health Organization (WHO) set 55 as the beginning of old age.
So actually, I have been progressing into old age for quite a while although I must say that I did not consider myself to be old when I was 55. At that age, I was still climbing high mountains (over 12,000 feet) and that continued until I was 70. So when did old age begin for me? It hasn't yet really but the accumulation of physical challenges is starting to take effect. Here is another quote about old age from the AARP.
A new study by U.S. Trust has found that perceptions of the onset of old age vary widely among different generations. Millennials, for example, say that you are old once you turn 59. Gen Xers, on the other hand, hold a slightly more generous view, saying that old age begins at 65. When it comes to boomers and the silent generation, both agree that you’re not really old until you hit age 73.
I happen to live in a neighborhood where there are a lot of older people. Many of my friends here are in their 90s. It is clear that people age at different rates. Some of those in their 90s are still out shoveling snow and frequently hiking up the nearby canyon. Some are bedridden and feeble in their 80s. From time to time someone in the neighborhood dies and the age range of the dead is considerable. By the way, I am right on the border between being a "boomer" and being a member of the silent generation although I have never considered myself as silent.
The doctor left the decision about when to have cataract surgery entirely up to me. He said whenever I wanted it but let me know that I was definitely in that category.
So what do you do or think when you are faced with such a decision? In my case, life goes on. It is just another thing to think about and considering my age and the number of times I have been involved in life-threatening situations, another one is not much of a challenge. No tears. No depression. I am too busy thinking about other things right now and I have too much to do to even slow down long enough for it to be a problem. But I do have to live, for the time being, with the reality that driving at night is not such a good idea.
One of the challenges of living in Utah Valley is the nearly constant disregard for traffic control devices including red lights. For those of you out there who may not be familiar with Utah Valley, it is located in the north part of the State of Utah, just south of the Salt Lake Valley and along a mountain range called the Wasatch Front. It contains the following communities: Provo, Orem, and their suburbs, including Alpine, American Fork, Cedar Hills, Elberta, Elk Ridge, Genola, Goshen, Highland, Lehi, Lindon, Mapleton, Payson, Pleasant Grove, Salem, Santaquin, Saratoga Springs, Spanish Fork, Springville, Vineyard, and Woodland Hills. The main north/south access in the Valley is confined to the Interstate 15 Freeway. The rest of the Valley is a hodgepodge of all of the small communities with their own street systems. North/south traffic is also impeded by a great portion of the Valley being filled with Utah Lake. Other than the Freeway, there are no direct routes. The only other route that could be considered to be available for north/south traffic is State Highway 68 on the west side of Utah Lake.
Utah Valley is also one of the fastest-growing areas in the entire United States. The present population of Utah Valley is estimated to be over 575,000. From 2010 to 2019, Utah Valley grew by 26.1% and added 134,845 people. See "Utah saw huge population growth this decade, led by Utah County." Also, Utah as a whole is estimated to have 870 vehicles per 1,000 people. But you also have to know that in Utah Valley 33.4% of the population is under the age of 18 years and nearly 10% are under the age of 5 years. See "United States Census Bureau, Quick Facts, Utah County, Utah." This means that the actual number of motor vehicles per driver in Utah Valley is much higher than the average for Utah.
Of course, my personal experience is anecdotal but while driving in Utah Valley, especially in Provo, I see dozens of red light violations a month and I have seen as many as five cars going through one red light at the same time. Starting up quickly from a stop at a red light when your light turns green is extremely dangerous. Most drivers in Utah Valley expect red-light runners and wait for a second or two to make sure the cross-traffic is stopped before attempting to enter the intersection. Most of the problem is due to drivers who simply view a yellow light as a notice to speed up to avoid stopping. If you stop for yellow lights, you are liable to be rear-ended by the car behind you speeding up to "make the light."
It is an "infraction" in the state of Utah to run a red light and there is a fine for a conviction of about $120 and demerit points on your driving record. Multiple infractions also generally affect your insurance rates. It is not unusual to have run a few red lights in a lifetime of driving but there is something more going on in Utah and particularly Utah Valley.
For over 200 years, Americans have supported and observed the Rule of Law defined as the restriction of the arbitrary exercise of power by subordinating it to well-defined and established laws. Running red lights is an obvious symptom of ignoring the Rule of Law. The rule about running red lights is well-defined and established. Every citizen of the state of Utah who obtains a drivers' license has to learn about the motor vehicle law in Utah and pass a test on those laws. Here is a comment about the Rule of Law from Wikipedia: Rule of Law:
The rule of law implies that every person is subject to the law, including people who are lawmakers, law enforcement officials, and judges. In this sense, it stands in contrast to a monarchy or oligarchy where the rulers are held above the law. Lack of the rule of law can be found in both democracies and monarchies, for example, because of neglect or ignorance of the law, and the rule of law is more apt to decay if a government has insufficient corrective mechanisms for restoring it.
People who intentionally run red lights are not just acting from expediency, they are consciously ignoring the Rule of Law in the United States. Justice Sonia Sotomayor is quoted as saying, "I firmly believe in the rule of law as the foundation for all of our basic rights." See "Full Text: Judge Sonia Sotomayor's Speech."
Here is a short video that talks directly about the relationship between the rule of law and the disregard of red lights in Utah Valley.
Here in Utah Valley, you can not drive the streets without fearing for your life at each intersection of the streets and roads. Despite their patina of law-abiding citizens, there is a huge number of people in Utah Valley that believe that traffic control devices do not apply to them personally. Here is where the problems we see on a national level begin.
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution states:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
In the recent (2019) news reports there have been complaints made, primarily by people in the Executive Branch of the Federal Government, that the Impeachment process at the time of the writing of this post is violative of the right to due process of the President of the United States. These claims raise some interesting legal issues including, but not limited to, the extent to which the Constitutional mandate regarding due process is applicable to an impeachment process.
The power to bring and prosecute an impeachment is contained in the United States Constitution:
There are several provisions in the United States Constitution relating to impeachment:
Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 provides:
The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
Article I, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7 provides:
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present.
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
Article II, Section 2 provides:
[The President] ... shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.
Article II, Section 4 provides:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Quoting the Bill of Rights Institute website article on impeachment:
The process of impeachment was outlined in the Constitution when it was drafted in 1787. To date, 19 officials, including judges, cabinet members, senators, and presidents, have been impeached and stood trial. The crimes these individuals have been charged with range from perjury to conspiracy to intoxication on the bench. It is important to note that impeachment is not the actual removal from office, but merely the process to remove an official. Currently, members of the House of Representatives are investigating President Trump to determine if he should be impeached.
Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution also granted due process rights along with citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States. Here is Section 1:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Clearly, this provision of the 14th Amendment pertains to actions taken by the several states and not the Federal Government.
The sections of the Constitution that mention impeachment do not contain any reference to due process. It would appear to me that the mention of due process in the Fifth Amendment is strictly limited to the causes of action and proceedings thereon that are enumerated and an impeachment proceeding does not fall within the definition of any of the items mentioned. For this reason alone, I would have to take the position that those accused of "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors" have no claim to due process. However, it would be helpful to see whether or not a claim of due process was made in any of the other 19 impeachment cases.
Fortunately, I can search all of the Federal Court cases online as well as the Supreme Court cases. There turn out to be hundreds of thousands of references to due process in all in the District Courts around the country. However, given that there are only a handful of Federal impeachment actions involving officials, it is possible to determine if the Supreme Court (or any other Federal Court) has weighed in on the issue of application of due process.
In many ways, the House of Representatives functions likes a grand jury in a criminal case, and an impeachment often has been likened to an indictment. As with the grand jury, the House decides whether there should be a trial. But the usual requirements of due process never have been found to apply at the grand jury stage precisely because there is no deprivation at that point. In fact, grand jury proceedings in many ways are the antithesis of due process: only the prosecution is present; the defendant is not allowed to call witnesses or present evidence; everything is done in secret.
If this analysis is correct and I do agree with the analogy and the conclusion, then talking about "due process" in the context of an impeachment action by the U.S. House of Representatives is what is commonly called in the law, a "red herring" or issue that has nothing at all to do with the action.
Over the next few days, I will spend some time looking at Supreme Court cases. Unfortunately, there is a much more common legal issue that is called "impeachment of evidence." This is an action by one party to a lawsuit to discredit the reliability of the evidence presented in a trial and has nothing at all to do with the removal of a government official. Sorting the evidence cases out from among rulings in actual impeachment cases is a challenge.
