Comfortable life kills

Camembert cheese is similar to Brie. Both these kinds of cheese originate from two different regions of France. They are made from the cream of cow milk with the help of rennet (an animal enzyme). After the formation of a loaf of cheese, it is coated with a stuff containing a lot of a special mold (microscopic fungi). Later, this stuff forms an edible crust on the surface of the cheese. And the "waste products" of these fungi penetrate the cheese and change its taste and texture. 

So, somewhere by the end of 2010s, manufacturers of Camembert raised alarm – Camembert is about to be no more. More precisely, the cheese will remain, but its special taste and texture are about to change, and are already changing. 

In making this cheese, a particular kind of mold is used. Like other kinds of mold, these are mscroscopic fungi. Those used for Camembert were given a scientific name: Penicillium camemberti. And these fungi are massively dying out. 

For a long time, scientists tried to identify the cause. Maybe, some disease. Maybe, some virus. Maybe, radiation or something else. But none of these were confirmed. The life conditions of Penicillium camemberti were ideal. Finally, scientists came to a conclusion: the fungi are killed by the very conditions that are ideal.  Or rather, the fungi are dying out, having lost the "purpose of life".

Yes, people began to make this cheese a long time ago. But only in the past 150-200 years, with development of microbiology, they understood that mold is microorganisms and learned to separate them from organisms that are completely different or just slightly different – bred a "pure culture" of these fungi. They created for them ideal conditions – complete sterility, no other microorganisms, always enough food and moisture, always fresh air and comfortable temperature..

Imagine – everything necessary for life is available. No enemies that are trying to exterminate these fungi, no diseases, not competition from similar fungi or even the same fungi (because everything is in abundance), and complete comfort. And the absence of the necessity to struggle for survival, both against other microorganisms and unfavorable conditions, and make efforts for this, broke the will to live and desire to reproduce in these fungi. 

They still reproduce, but ever less frequently. Their population is shrinking. Manufacturers of Camembert are already looking for a replacement. They already have variants. But their replacement will be immediately felt by connoisseurs of this cheese, because it will not be the same as it used to be.

This experiment was carried out in the 1960s, initially with rats. Its results were shocking, and scientist thought that that was because of a small number of individuals. So, they repeated it with mice, Mice are much smaller than rats, so,  scientists, within the area available for the experiment, could involve into the experiment many more individual mice than they could accommodate rats there. Besides, mice live "faster".  But results were the same, only even more dramatical.

The gist of the experiment. In a rather spacious room, "paradise conditions" for animals were created;  places for nests, for physical activity, for entertainment and socializing,  feeding troughs with ever fresh and versatile food in sufficient quantity, and drinking troughs with ever fresh water. Fresh air, enough of sunlight, regular cleaning, ideal sanitary, prevention of infections. Enough "construction materials" for the nests. Of course, no cats or any other potential predators. And, into this paradise, they put several couples of animals – a sufficient number to prevent degeneration of animals due to incest.

Naturally, animals began to reproduce quickly. At that, they communicated with each other a lot, ran and played a lot, and generally enjoyed life. But later, the rate of reproduction slowed down, and then stopped. There was still enough room for new families and their offspring. Still there was enough room for running, playing and communicating, or, on the contrary, to stay in solitude for a while. Of course, there was still enough food and water; the sanitary, comfortable temperature and humidity were maintained – the researchers took care of this.

Animals began to split into groups and communicated predominantly within these groups, showing hostile attitude to representatives of other groups. Outcasts appeared, that were undesirable in any of the group. It became a duty for animals to attack an outcast and scratch or bite it. For this reason, outcasts were always wounded, but they did not unite and did not isolate themselves. Instead, they were reaching out to the "community" that ruthlessly repelled them. Once in a while, some of the outcasts were killed, but this did not scare off the rest of the outcasts.

And a particular group emerged, which scientists called "the beautiful ones". More precisely, this was not a group. These were individuals that avoided communication with other animals, avoided sex, and most of the time devoted to themselves – ate, drank, entertained themselves, had rest and tidied themselves up by combing and licking their fur. Other animals avoided attempts to communicate with the "beautiful ones", because such attempts resulted in aggressive rebuffs.

The stable number of animals did not last long. Soon, the population began to shrink. Animals formed fewer couples, and the couples had fewer or no offspring. Initially, scientists though that animals felt congested, and this was the cause of the reduction of the population. Maybe, it was only the opinion of scientists that there still was enough room for more animals, but animals had a different opinion? Maybe, when the number of animals shrinks, they will start reproducing again, or, at least, the population will stabilize? 

But no. Stabilization of the population did not occur. Its shrinkage continued. After some more time, birth of new animals stopped, and those that were left, ever more isolated themselves, chose tastier, but less healthy food, and noticeably reduced physical activity. Their lifespan began to noticeably shorten. This continued until the last animal died.

Why did this happened? Neither rats, nor mice explained. The most likely assumption is that comfortable life killed them.

Of course, we can think that what happens to single-celled organisms or rodents should not be directly projected onto people. Yes, now we know that animals have social life. Plants and even bacteria have it too. They exchange information through various signals, and bacteria also exchange pieces of genetic codes, and not only within one species, but also between completely different species.

But communication of people is much more complicated. People know much more. And their information exchange is much more advanced, such that enables transfer of knowledge over generations, and spreading of information instantly.

Certainly, the destiny of Penicillium camemberti, rats and mice is not a threat to us, is it?

Well, look closer at the trends in the human society. Wild animals practically stopped threatening people several hundreds of years ago, except rare accidents that scare everyone exactly because they are rare. The human population began to grow quickly as a result of achievements of science, which ensured overcoming of most dangerous diseases; there is enough food (yes, many people still die from starvation, but this starvation has mostly political causes – corrupt dictatorial regimes, which destroy economies of their own countries for their personal enrichment and preservation of power). Development of technologies has made life much more comfortable. Even back in 1990s, scientists forecast (of course, basing on observation), that, by the end of the 21st century, the human population of Earth could exceed 20 billion. But recently something has changed. Yes, the population is still growing, but not everywhere. There are places where it is noticeably shrinking, and in other places, its growth slowed down. According to forecasts made in the early 2020s, the population of Earth will begin to shrink in the second half of the 21st century, and, by the end of this century, it will be noticeably smaller than the current 8 billion.

We reduced physical activity. We are offered justifications for this, and we willingly accept them. We avoid cold, even briefly. Because we value comfort.

We choose entertainments that do not require our own efforts and active participation. In fact, we do not entertain ourselves, we let others entertain us. And when we try to entertain ourselves, sometimes the outcome is such that it would have been better if we had not tried. 

We choose not the food that is healthier, but that that is tastier, more convenient and always available. Of course, for a long time we have been lied to about healthiness of such food, and we have happily believed, though information about what is healthy is available to everyone. But not everyone cares to find it.

Not surprisingly, we have the epidemic of obesity, epidemic of type 2 diabetes, epidemic of cardiovascular diseases, epidemic of cancer, epidemic of dementia. And recently, a tendency of shortening of life span manifested itself in some countries with the most comfortable life. And also the epidemic of suicides with the highest rates in countries with the most comfortable life. And also "child-free". And also "diversity, equity, inclusion" together with the "cancel culture" and furious attacks at those who think somewhat differently. Doesn't this all remind the experiment with rats and mice? 

We cannot change the world. But we can take care about ourselves and our loved ones and periodically come out of the comfort zone. Comfortable life kills.