I previously posted this in the wrong thread:
I think that by 2000-01 most of the surviving population would be relatively fit, albiet malnourished in some instances. I think the combination of the strikes, disease, and the collapse of infrastructure would have killed off most of those who were not fit. Diabetics and other sufferers of chronic illness would be dead. Because of the lack of antibiotics, many traumatic injuries would result in death, even with otherwise good medical care. Cancer is a long-term problem, but not immediately debilitating depending on the type.
Another think to consider is the baby boom you'd get when people run out of contraceptives and TV goes off the air... I think that although there may be a very high rate of birth defects, you'd still see a radical spike in the number of births per 1000 also as a result of the strikes, among the survivors. This won't play into the immediately available manpower, but does immediately address the need to find teachers (trained or otherwise), and the available manpower situation might be very different by 2010-15.
|