Posted on 03/17/2003 7:36:36 AM PST by cogitator
And: cleaning up water might do more to reduce fatal disease overall than dumping millions of dollars on the AIDS crisis in Africa. Not that AIDS doesn't need money, but cholera and dysentery kill, too: and they kill more children.
probably, eh?
I wonder how much human feces it tales to amount to that of all the creatures in the ocean.
"Health of the coral reefs" indeed.
What's stopping the other 2.4 billion from picking up a shovel and digging a latrine?
The main thing connecting them is the economic level of the areas that lack sanitation. Another characteristic of these areas (particularly in China) is that humans and domestic animals (chickens, pigs, goats, etc.) share the domicile. This close proximity of humans and animals has been pointed out as one of the main reasons that new flu strains tend to originate in Asia. So while the lack of sewage treatment is a health problem, it's probably not the cause of new diseases, but the conditions that foster new diseases are endemic and related to the overall "health" situation.
Might be lack of a suitable site, in some cases. I.e., the people are so cheek-by-jowl that there's no place to dig except your neighbor's 20x20 space. (Ever seen a picture of Mexico City's high-density neighborhoods?)
Yes. Good point!
It's not the "whole" ocean. What's happening in many of these countries (particularly island nations) is that concentrated sewage outflow is getting dumped directly on the reefs that lie right offshore the coasts. This is a lot more waste (and nutrients) than are produced by the aquatic inhabitants of the reef themselves. Corals need very clear, low-nutrient water to survive, and the input of untreated sewage right on top of them is obviously not good.
Probably, because bubonic plague is spread by rats.
In an interesting side note, the first "epidemiologic" study was of cholera; a doctor mapped cholera incidence and fingered a contaminated well in London.
Yes.
That sort of squalor is hard for me to understand so I'll admit ignorance when it comes to third world sanitation.
One would think that living with cholera, dysentery and hepatitis ridden sewage would motivate these poor wretches to reach a consensus for a remedial solution to the problem.
Tear down selected areas of shacks for communal latrines. Burn the waste with diesel or kerosene. Bury it, pour lime on it, compost it, generate methane with it, anything but live with it flowing down the street or stream.
It doesn't sound like an insurmountable problem that requires first-world monies to solve.
I'd make a fortune if I could convince these poor slobs that living on a pile of feces is bad for their health.
How is something that has been taking place since the beginning of human existance(pooping in the woods/fields) a 'crisis'?
Nonsense. When you gotta go, you gotta go, and when you gotta go badly enough, you'll find a place, whether it's sanitary or not. The problem's not that two and a half billion have no place to sh*t, it's that they have no good place to sh*t.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.