When the **** hits the fan

[Diesel_Bomber]

In the realm of fantasy, though - presuming most people ransacking pharmacies would be going after the "fun" drugs - maybe a few prudent ones looking to cache antibiotics and the like - how many people would be going after the metformin, pioglitazone and such?

.

What's the shelf life on these? Is there any reason you couldn't keep a few year's supply on hand?

 

[Biker Bear]

.

What's the shelf life on these? Is there any reason you couldn't keep a few year's supply on hand?

Looking at the bottles I currently have, the expirations appear to be 2 years from manufacture, fairly standard for tableted pharmaceuticals. Presumably if stored somewhere dry and cool they could be useful longer, as such expiration dates tend to be set conservatively. Drugs in less stable formulations (liquids, injectables, etc.) would go bad more quickly, I imagine. But in the situation postulated, the end result is likely to be similar, whether I manage to cache a lot somewhere appropriate and eke out another (say) 5 years or not. I simply don't have any illusions about the fact that I'm not a "roughing it" kind of person; I simply don't have the skills to survive long in that sort of situation to begin with.

For what it's worth, I DO try to keep a good stock of my essential pharmaceuticals on hand in case we have an earthquake or other disruptive event here in Southern California - but under the presumption I'd be able to restock within a couple of weeks. Unfortunately, even here trying to explain the need to keep a stock on hand in case of emergency rarely gets one very far with a health insurance company - or with a pharmacy where one is trying to get an extra refill, even if one's willing to pay for it out of pocket. (I can understand them being leery of such a request for meds with "street value" - but for stuff like diabetes, blood pressure, etc.?)

 

[pri0n]

Angelofwar- First real post!

I'll go. Basically I'd say there is two main scenarios, either you are set up somewhere, maybe your old home if it's in the woods where you can hunt, or you are traveling trying to find a stable place to live.

I don't live in such a place, so I'd be traveling, so my load would be a bit lighter than yours.

Things to take:
I'd take my two most useful guns. remington 870(which would prob end up getting sawed off for compactability) for defense and my ruger 10/22 for small game hunting.
Various lights, mainly my modded maglite and itp a2 because it will be easier to find batteries.
ESEE rat 6 and my izula.
cheap gerber machete
all weather clothing and rain poncho.
fire starter kit/ rest of my survival kit(mirror, space blanket, etc..)
Can of kerosene
Water purifier and collection equipment.

To scavenge for:
Larger hunting rifle...
Any seeds I can find.

The goal would be to get to my parents house in the woods where we could hold out and live off the land.

 

[Stress_Test]

Watching a season of the "Survivorman" show impressed on me just how darn difficult it is to "live off the land" so to speak, unless you're already established with a garden/crop/livestock or something.

If anyone's not familiar with the show, it involves a survival expert being left in the wilderness (forest, jungle, desert, etc) under conditions in which someone could plausibly be stranded out in the wild. He carries video equipment and self-documents everything he does.

After a week, he gets "rescued".

I have to say, in most of the cases he looks pretty bad by the end of the week, and he usually admits it too. It doesn't look like he'd make it a month. And he's a survival expert, so I'm under no illusions about my long term odds out in the wilderness. Think I'd stick to the cities in such a scenario as you describe.

Should be stray cats, dogs, squirrels, and so on that are easy pickings for a .22 rifle, once all the normal food supplies are gone and there's nothing left to scavenge. Course, this also depends on how many other humans there are competing for the same resources.

I think for long term survival and defense people would have to band together again just the way it was done in the hunter/gatherer days. A lone guy or two by himself isn't going to last long before something does him in.

There would be mass die-offs of people, and individual survival would probably depend more on luck than anything else (edit: I mean luck being a factor in loooong term situations... preparation is still the biggest factor otherwise!) but enough people would be able to pull it off to keep humanity from going extinct. That is, unless we're also being hunted down by Skynet at the same time. Then we're screwed!! oo:

 

[beerwax]

well lets see.

without glasses im gone.

im only alive today because of pennicillin. if i get skin break and it gets infected i dont do at all well. i can generally win those battles with salt.
tinnea - dont laugh. tinnea can get real bad and then can get infected. the only home remedy i have for tinnea is alcohol.

once the modern pharmaceuticals run out we will be back to home remedies, and i lament that many may have been lost.

i might party harder too as there would be a strong likelyhood that everyday would be your last.

cheers

 

[Monocrom]

Long-term? I'd suggest reading trhe book "Patriots," by James wesley, Rawles.

Although a novel, it contains very realistic situations regarding a collapse of the government and economy. (Something far more realistic than a sudden End of the World scenario.) Towards the end, the book becomes more of a collection of the author's own views of the way the world should be. It's likely to turn off some folks. But the rest of the book is excellent.

Basically, you need a place to Bug Out to. You need to join with certain, trusted (that's a big one), individuals who have a variety of skill sets that are vital for long-term living without modern conveniences and resources. You need to plan far in advance, and you need money and firearms. (Yeah, I know. Still, let's be realistic about what the world would be like in the aftermath of a true national collapse.)

 

[richpalm]

You need to plan far in advance, and you need money and firearms. (Yeah, I know. Still, let's be realistic about what the world would be like in the aftermath of a true national collapse.)

Money!? Ha, got none now, no less after a collapse.

 

[StarHalo]

Gold will be the #1 post SHTF currency, booze will be #2; if you have an emergency money stash, it should include a few bottles..

 

[jtr1962]

Watching a season of the "Survivorman" show impressed on me just how darn difficult it is to "live off the land" so to speak, unless you're already established with a garden/crop/livestock or something.

I enjoy that show also. What you mention are exactly the reasons I have no illusions about being able to survive long once modern civilization is gone. Sure, I've grown vegetables, but definitely not enough to sustain me through the winter. And it's backbreaking work. That's really the biggest problem. Living off the land might be possible given proper training but it's hard work. You really need to be in great physical condition. Even then, your body will wear out by the time you hit your 40s, just as it did in ancient hunter-gatherer times. After that, you're mostly dependent upon the younger, stronger members of your clan. Sure, it can work, but you need to band together with a group of like-minded people you trust. There's just no way an individual or even a family is going to make it long-term in a post-apocalyptic world. In all honestly, I'd put my money on the people we call "primitives" (i.e. those few native tribes still living like they did 2000 years ago). They're already used to doing what needs to be done.

Will humanity itself survive an apocalypse? It all depends upon whether or not the earth can sustain life after the fact. A major meteorite strike might well wipe out everything except single-celled organisms. An even larger strike could literally wipe the surface of the earth clean.

Something man-made, such as a nuclear war or a biological war, you would likely have large numbers of survivors. It might be just a matter of toughing it out a few years until civilization could restart itself. That's probably more realistic than surviving on your own for the remainder of your life. We'll actually be more likely to survive in large numbers if we can control our basic survival instinct of killing off each other while fighting for scraps. Instead of fighting, it would make more sense to band together. And you'll have a more useful spectrum of society surviving as a result. If we resort to guns and knives, what will survive will probably be largely criminal elements used to fighting. That in turn wouldn't bode well for the long-term survival of civilization as we know it. The end result would be more of a Mad Max scenario.

So the basic short-term problem is how does the broader population (who is likely unarmed both by choice and because of local laws) fend off this criminal element? After that, survival is simply a matter of growing enough food to sustain yourselves. I have no good answer to that. Lots of mention in this thread of various weapons some have to prepare for such a scenario. Not mentioned is how do people like myself, who live somewhere where most weapons, and certainly all firearms, are prohibited, make such preparations (and this is similar to the problem mentioned by Biker Bear of acquiring enough meds to ride out a SHTF scenario without attracting the attention of law enforcement)? Remember that some in NYC have tried to do exactly that, build up a stash of weapons just for their own survival, only to have said stash seized by police. Anyone have a realistic answer to this that doesn't involve breaking the law or moving? The closest I've come is to have a friend who you trust, and who lives somewhere firearms are allowed, hold your stash. Whether such trust would survive a post-apocalyptic scenario is another question.

 

[Monocrom]

Money!? Ha, got none now, no less after a collapse.

I believe you might have misunderstood that part. The money and firearms are what you need now. Both will be scarce if the $#!% does indeed hit the fan. Obviously, if you have plenty of money, you can do certain things now to prepare. This includes buying land that is at least somewhat isolated, buying a $#!%load of supplies and gear, buying building materials, putting up a secure structure to bug out to, buying older vehicles that a shadetree mechanic can work on, etc.

All about using your money now. Clearly though, those are things you can do if you're very financially secure right now.

 

[Monocrom]

Gold will be the #1 post SHTF currency, booze will be #2; if you have an emergency money stash, it should include a few bottles..

Don't forget silver. Especially U.S. quarters from just before the mid 1960's. In the face of a true economic collapse, real money along with needed goods will be invaluable. Not sure about booze. I think ammunition will be #2 in certain parts of America.

 

[jtr1962]

Most valuable currency in a true SHTF scenario in my opinion is knowledge. Imagine coming across a group of people with no electricity, getting by eating pidgeons or squirrels. Suppose you have the knowledge to help them build the means to generate power from what is available, and to produce more reliable food supplies? You could end up running the place, with all your needs catered to. Barring knowledge, food and water would probably be highly valued, along with what might then be luxury items like soap or antibiotics. Depending upon location and what is going on there, ammo/weapons might be a good bartering tool also. I'm dubious if the value of any precious commodities in a real survival scenario. You can't eat gold or silver. Both have no value helping one survive. Still, I might trade surplus food or knowledge for large amounts of both with the idea that if civilization restarts in a few years, I'll be wealthy.

 

[Monocrom]

I think it's a safe bet that precious metals, just like in ancient times, will be accepted as a form of univeral currency.

 

[Diesel_Bomber]

I don't understand the "just give up" mentality. I don't understand thinking we couldn't possibly survive. Humans have lived at a subsistence level before, some still do. I see no reason it can't be done again, and I won't give up before I even give it a shot, especially given time to prepare and educate myself ahead of time.

Yeah, it'll be a lot of work. Yeah, the odds I'll survive will be slim. Do I give myself better odds by preparing now? You bet I do. Even if I don't make it all the way through whatever calamity causes the breakdown, if I just live a while longer, that's OK with me, and gives me more of a chance to survive clear through.

I'm not seeing the disadvantage. Most of the preparations for a bigger end of the world type disaster are good sense for smaller, local ones which are much more common, as well.

 

[pri0n]

I highly doubt any form of currency would be worth anything, unless it could be melted down to make bullets haha. Even the earliest forms of precious metal currency didn't become valued until after the hunter gatherer society was gone. That kind of money has no value unless there is some sort of backing to it. And on another point I doubt even stashing it would be worth much when society came back because there will be so few people and so much of it lying around, we would probably come up with a new form of currency altogether.

btw this is who I want with me.... and les stroud

Food for five years, a thousand gallons of gas, air filtration, water filtration, Geiger counter. Bomb shelter! Underground... God damn monsters.

 

[Monocrom]

I doubt things would get to such a primative state when the $#!% hits the fan that precious metals would be rejected. If things never improved for many generations far down the road, then perhaps . . .

No one in the near future will turn down precious metals. Silver and Gold are valuable in and of themselves. They need no backing. It's doubtful that a gigantic deposit of either one will be discovered in the near or distant future. In some areas food, ammunition, and skill-sets could be bartered or traded. Yet, no one will turn up their nose at an offer of precious metals.

At one time, long ago, in the Middle East; salt was traded nearly ounce for ounce for gold. I doubt that will happen again. Certainly not in the near future.

 

[pri0n]

well it all depends on the level of mayhem. If people are hunting for food and scavenging to stay alive, who the hell would accept useless heavy metal in exchange for precious food? But then again, you may be right because human greed knows no bounds. Personally I won't be the one shooting for that, you guys can keep your gold. I predict seeing a bunch of corpses sitting around piles of treasure while the smart ones would be looking for seeds and bullets...

 

[pri0n]

But to clarify I think some people are talking about economic collapse or something, in which case yea it wouldn't be that bad. i'm more talking end of the world/ nuclear holocaust.

 

[Marmaduke]

But to clarify I think some people are talking about economic collapse or something, in which case yea it wouldn't be that bad. i'm more talking end of the world/ nuclear holocaust.

In an imaginary massive all-out end of world holocaust scenario where presumably every last ICBM and nuclear device of every configuration that every country around the world has all get launched within hours, I can only hope I am as close to a ground zero as possible.

 

[angelofwar]

Sorry Mono, I'm with PrI0n on this one...I'd trade my spare hammer/odd tool/whatever, for 50 rounds of 5.56mm or a pound of jerky before I'd trade it for an ounce of gold...