In order to lower the worlds population growth, what would be the ideal way to do this?

Destroy the ozone layer

Kill all the brainlets.
Start with yourself.

>Alaska
>As big as Mexico

Poison water supplies.

Fleas or rats, dropped by plane, like unit 731 experimented. They also infected the water supplies and it was successful too

Alternatively you could try positive/negative eugenics : offer let's say $10k to people from big population countries if they accept being castrated and you can also offer $10k to families from low fertility rate countries for each baby they have if you want to compensate

But the fleas and rats should be infected first; how would one create/acquire such bacteria or virus's such as the Variola major/minor or Yersinia pestis?

>But the fleas and rats should be infected first
Yes yes sorry, I was mentioning fleas and rats as a medium. The japs infected them with bubonic plague to kill the chinese
Not sure where you can acquire the pathogen though.
As a civilian you would probably need to be working at a facility where they have access to potentially deadly viruses/bacteria

>In order to lower the worlds population growth

stopped reading right there. If you fell for le overpopulation meme you confirmed that you are a brainlet and should start lowering the population growth by killing yourself.

>In order to lower the worlds population growth, what would be the ideal way to do this?
Simplest, and least invasive way, is simply to enforce modern western culture on everyone. Make it so you need two people to maintain a household income, and make all the women go out for careers.

Worked everywhere in the west, and in Japan, and is working nearly elsewhere else such an un-family friendly situation has arisen.

Does create the problem that your most advanced regions are also your slowest growing, and since that same economic model makes a shrinking population a path to perpetual recession... Well...

Biological methods are much more widely available than you suggest (frighteningly so), but they are also, currently, rather random.

The problem is less overpopulation and more density and distribution though. I suppose you could mitigate that by encouraging telecommuting and zoning your population and production centers into more rural areas, but decentralizing infrastructure brings with it its own problems.

(Looking at this infographic has me wondering when it was made though... $2.50 for a meal? I can't remember the last time I paid less than $7 for even a homemade meal.)

It is unnecessary. The global population is self regulating. Dumbass.

Curious how you're gonna enforce the western way of life in shitholes where they literally defecate in the streets and their GDP is X times lower than US's GDP

It is to a degree, but often in the nastiest way.

Granted, OP musing about biological attacks isn't any better.

What ya need is a socially acceptable way that you can successfully engineer and propagate, that also encourages your best and brightest to breed faster than the worst of your underclass.

Sadly, the current socio-economic trends kinda have that ass backwards.

Bring back human eugenics. Sterilize the weak, retarded, jews, and cuckholds.

Takes time. The place you are alluding to is certainly more westernized than it ever was.

Question is, if you can cause that shift before the western nations are critically smaller than those in transition. Sheer population increases your world economic punching power, something both the economy of the place in question and nations like China depend upon. You could end up in a situation where the developing nations are simply so much larger that their cultural influence outweighs that of the naturally population reducing modern western culture.

What an insipid strategy. What if the disease spreads to your own country?

We already know that the world population will peak at 15 billion in a few decades and then start lowering.
Anyway, the best and most harmless way to reduce population growth is to develop the underdeveloped places. The third world is the one who causes the world population to grow. As people get better oportunities to study and work, they realize that having children is stupid whereas they can get rich and pursue their own interests.

Rage war, which is used a lot for that purpose

Ok dipshit. take a hint and fuck off back to /pol/

You're thinking too much like a /pol/ ack. Just stop them from breeding.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunocontraception

It is trivial to modify salmonella or E. coli to express proprieties that are needed for fertilization. There are also methods that would target sperm.

It's actually harder to denature the bacteria and do vaccines than it is to just use a modified live pathogen.

In fact students have done this with live bacteria, baiting cat food it was effective.

actioncat.com/research.html

Both adding this to a bacteria and growing large quantities of bacteria in a bio reactor are trivial.

E. coli is so common in municiple water supplies its considered safe if its found in less than 5% of samples.

You could modify your bacteria, grow it in a bio reactor, freeze dry the bacteria, press the freeze dried bacteria into pucks and place them in rivers and streams, infecting millions. If you make it a benign form people wont noticeably get sick so no efforts to counter it would be raised.You would even have a reasonable chance of it being passed through most water filtering to a decent level.

Just how easy this would be really wrinkles my think sack. This is somersetting one person could do alone in a few months, reducing the population by millions.

War ain't got nuttin on disease (or even general social trends).

>go to Brazil
>contract Zika, it's basically a bad cold to your immune system
>immediately fly to India
>cough on shit and shake hands with people
>make several flights to the more densely populated southeast asian countries
>repeat
>suddenly next year 9/10 babies being born in these areas are brainlets which get flushed

Literally the natural human genophage virus

Peary dogs are a well known vector and should be easy to acquire. But the plague is a poor pathogen, it is easily stopped with penicillin.

I wonder how you could possibly make it antibiotic resistant. Sounds hard right? Actually its so easy a gradeschooler can do it.

theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/09/stunning-videos-of-evolution-in-action/499136/

Think twice

Well, yes, you could nuke all the population centers, but then all you have left is the riff-raff in the unimportant nations and the sticks, which is probably the opposite of your end intent.

Developing the economy has proven to be a successful rate to lower the population growth.

Also the "Earth can't sustain X population" doomsaying has been proven exaggerated again and again.

No nukes, thinked wise, again...

Now this is interesting
I'm a pleb in all things Veeky Forums, how would you modify a casual E. coli extracted from poop to do this?

youtube.com/watch?v=TWthRz-0T18

the-odin.com/diy-bacterial-gene-engineering-crispr-kit/

And it comes with the E. coli already.

Have fun.

Nice, thanks mate!

>some random guy in Veeky Forumscauses the end of humanity by ading a wannabe mad scientist
It was expected, somehow

Don't let the kid know, this will probably cause mass animal extinction as well. I wanna see it happen. Making the bacteria target most mammals is far easier than making it target just humans. The imperium of man has no need of all these environmentalists kvetching about rare ass shrews and shit.

Kek
The thread that /thread'd the world

Wont be laughing though when the news start coming

Please, someone put me in the screencap
Dont post it, until a 20% of the humanity has been erradicated

Well, now that we've used every other key word the NSA could possibly be digging for, I'm bailing on this thread.

Still say a social engineering solution is better than germ warfare. Also lasts longer - with germ warfare you'll just end up having to repeat the process every few generations.

E. coli is endemic, if you make it the dominant strain it will re inoculate everyone over and over till no one is left.

What about a combination of social engineering and reduction of populace

But couldn't it be controlled? If it was released in one river it wouldn't spread around the world, or would it?
Or use a countervaccine?

Too bad it infected Brazil first. If it had appeared in Africa, we would've gotten at least a couple more years before a vaccine.

It would likely have animal vectors carrying it elsewhere. And why would you use it in only one river?

India is near its peak carrying capacity and has leveled off anyhow. Africa is the place where population is really booming. But I suspect most /pol/ acks would want to spread it everywhere other than north america and europe, and even then they would target places like flint michigan.

Just do nothing, the reproduction rates are below 2.1 in most places

Or should you say
>too bad (((((they))))) infected Brazil first

I was thinking along the lines of Brahmaputra, Niger, Kongo etc.
But it's true, the birds would probably spread the bacteria a bit too efficiently. The mutation would have to be either only for mammals which would be difficult with E. coli, or then there would have to be ready a vaccine against the mutation in case the spread gets out of hand

>Zika 2, Electric Boogaloo

Construct a society where it's too expensive/inconvenient for a lot of the population to have children then watch as they think it was their choice and they happily go along with it

aka the developed world

Virtually all immunocontraceptives that have been developed target only mammals.

If one wanted to procreate after being inoculated they would simply need to go on immunosuppressants, most immunocontraceptives only target eggs pre fertilization binding to sperm receptor cites, you would only need the immunosuppressants during contraception. It's nothing that would eradicate the first world even if we all got inoculated. It would be like birth control only reverse, take this pill if you want to have kids.

nice b8

#mgtow

This is just sounding better and better
But what about the other mammals? Cows and so on? Will we all become just vegetarians?

Wild mammals be fucked. Livestock would need the same treatment as humans if infected. It is possible to grow cattle and pigs without specific strains of E. coli.

That doesn't sound very good at
On the cat article they discuss how the salmonella has been altered so that it wont spread from cats since it wont produce a disease, could a water plant, from which water is directly led to peoples apartments, be infected with similar E. coli and thus only affect the urban human population?

They used salmonella which is not nearly as easy to spread in water. You want to use an infectious strain of something otherwise it wont spread. E. coli is a rather ideal bacteria, most forms are harmless.

We must advocate for lower reproduction rates rates in Europe and America.
Africa, India and China have a disproportionate amount of people so they should be moved in lower population areas like Canada, United States, Australia, France, Norway etc to ease uneven pressure.

youtube.com/watch?v=8xEDEJ0DHFA

hnnnng

Wow, that's a cruel idea and rather counterproductive.
Imagine what a catastrophy it would be of someone was to implement this in real life, can you imagine?

>It is trivial to modify salmonella or E. coli to express proprieties that are needed for fertilization
How does this happen?

that was satire, right?
it's sad that I have to ask, but we've really been invaded by reddit lately