inRich.com   


Keyword Search Site Web    Yahoo!

Barticles Blog
 

Barticles Home Page

RSS 2.0



Bloodsuckers
Bart Hinkle
October 10, 2008 8:48 AM

Also from IPN, this piece raises a point too few have considered:

The UN and its cheerleaders should ask why so many African countries have failed over decades to control preventable diseases that other nations have successfully defeated.

Today, 90% of malaria infections occur in sub-Saharan Africa—but the disease was rife in Europe, America and Russia until the middle of the last century. Historical figures as diverse as Saint Augustine and George Washington suffered from malaria, while the largest pandemic to date occurred in the northern Soviet Union in the 1920s. Yet all these regions overcame the disease. Why then is Africa struggling, in spite of billions of dollars in aid?

The answer: endemic corruption and economic repression. Malaria is just a symptom of a much wider sickness.

Read the whole thing.


Reader Comments:

I am sure that you know Scott but the one person who is doing really great work in Africa dealing with malaria is Jimmy Carter. He has done more in a concrete way to help control the disease than all the agencies put together.
He runs his operation like a business and it has paid off big time.

Posted by on 10/13 at 05:27 PM

“The notion that if it were not banned
things would be different is far fetched.“

Swaziland and Madagascar each had maleria epidemics after suspending DDT spraying, the latter’s outbreak killed more than 100,000 people from 1986 to 1988 both epidemics stopped when spraying was resumed.

Would you like to explain the bald eagle theory again to those folk? Or to the millions who contract dengue and hemmoragic dengue and yellow fever every year?

When the diseases don’t kill they create generations of chronically ill. The banning of DDT was an emotional rush to judgement in the wake of Silent Spring.
The alternatives are more expensive. Also more toxic and less effective. And Africa does not have to pay for any of it. WHO and all the other world organizations do.

The fact that the mosquitos have become
resistant to the substance does not matter because it proves such an irritant that the insects will not enter a building that has been sprayed.

The original question was “why is Africa still struggling in spite of billions of dollars in aid?“

Posted by on 10/13 at 05:18 PM

http://blogs.nature.com/nm/spoonful/malaria/

Posted by on 10/13 at 02:17 PM

Greta,

Your analogy is far more contreversial than you make it out to be.

DDT is very contreversial. The notion that if it were not banned things would be different is far-fetched.

They can’t prove it causes cancer. They can’t prove it does not cause cancer either. They do believe it is persistant (does not break down easily) and played a major role in the decline of the bald eagle.

DDT is still in use in a few places. It might help in Africa if not for just what the article said, corruption and repression. Plus, misquito resistance is contreversial as well. That might impact its current and future effectiveness.

There are other insecticides but more expensive and Africa can not afford it.

Posted by Maverick Biscuit on 10/13 at 10:09 AM

50 out of 52 countries suffer from “rampant” corruption.
Why? I don’t know. I will leave that to the sociologists.
On another post recently the discussion turned to global warming and I tried to draw a line between the rush to judgement in that case and the banning of DDT in the wake of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring.
Since that time millions have died of a preventable disease.
The DDT has never been found to cause any cancer in humans.
Mosquitos do develop resistance but the avoidance factor more than makes up for that.
It works better than any other deterrent available today.
They are just beginning to use it again in the African countries.
Why is Africa always in flames?
Their culture is tribal and communal and socialistic.
Someone forgot to send that memo to Idi Amin and Mugabe etc…..

Posted by on 10/10 at 03:19 PM

article: “There will be no sustainable change until their governments lift their economic oppression: instead of setting arbitrary targets at the UN, delegates and donors should demand real freedom for Africans.“ Hmmm. Just who should they demand it from? Bush?

Exactly who is surpressing them? The europeans left decades ago. Apartheid is over. Rhodesia is now the starving Zimbabwe. Who is responsible? Who do they ask for freedom? Who can “give” them an economy? Who can stop malaria based on this information? Who? Hmmm.

Posted by on 10/10 at 11:13 AM

Page 1 of 1 pages

Post Your Comments:

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

--- advertising ---

 
 
 
 
 
 

News | Sports | Entertainment | Living | Shopping/Classifieds | Weather | Opinion | Obituaries | Services/Contact Us
© 2008, Media General Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms & Conditions | Site Map
-- Part of the GatewayVa Network --
webmaster@inrich.com