So what is it with newfound diseases or new names of diseases and the like? For some, they are rightly acted upon whilst others have become a means to an end, for unscrupulous individuals who...
abuses veto power.
I'm talking about blatant fumigation and let's look at the good, the bad and the ugly.
 |
| Image: Mosquito fumigation |
We act upon Zika because it is new, a trend so to speak. Somebody in Singapore got the virus. Whoa! So we must act on it to put a stop to any sort of outbreak. We must go to suspect neighborhoods and fumigate at will. Then we'll be safe… from accusations! We've done our job. We'll still have a job, year in and year out as long as we do our job.
Brazil being the source, is now under fire, and maybe even the olympic games may be affected. What's happened to malaria? Is it less of a threat now? Highly unlikely. In fact the fatality from malaria has not shown lessening as expected. Then why is there no noise on it? Old news? In fact, in 2015, there were roughly 214 million malaria cases and an estimated 438,000 malaria deaths. To put it in another perspective, every 30 seconds, a child dies from malaria.
On the good side, fumigation is supposed to rid an affected area of pests or more specifically in this case, mosquitoes, only as long as the sprayed chemical is airborne. Its' effectiveness wears off the moment the mist dissipates. That's the bad.
Instead, what it leaves behind in its' wake far outweighs its' original intentions. First, other insects not causing harm to us is harmed eventually. A recent exercise in fumigation resulted in a destruction of a whole colony of honey-making bees, and these included those pitiful souls who were from private scale apiaries to begin with. Loss costs involved amassed thousands. And we wonder why honey bees are dwindling around farms for much needed cross pollination, let alone producing honey. In fact, dwindling would actually be an understatement.
Other counts of insects which exists symbiotically in a garden disappears leaving the plants to fend for themselves and thus increasing usage of other chemicals. Birds and smaller animals won't be around for long. We might not care much for them but what about our pets in the house? Our kittens, puppies, budgerigars, our old folks, even our babies? Then there's the amount of cleaning that needs done on contacted surfaces, not to mention eating utensils. Everything would need a complete spring cleaning, lest we'll end up having aches in some parts of our body due to toxicity, and when we do the cleaning makeover, we'll end up having aches anyway. Exposing ourselves to the fumigated chemicals would find us having sore throat whilst slime and phlegm starts to build up in our mouth. This is just from one bout of spray. And all because the initial action was man-made without empathy.
WHO claims that dengue mosquito fumigation is harmless to human and that it's odorless. Really? Carbon monoxide is also odorless and yet highly poisonous! You tell me whether fumigation is harmful, or not, with the basis of the following excerpts from Wikipedia:
"Methyl bromide was among the most widely used fumigants until its production and use was restricted by the Montreal Protocol due to its role in ozone depletion.
Widely used fumigants include:
1,3-dichloropropene
dazomet
chloropicrin
DBCP, prior to 1985
formaldehyde
hydrogen cyanide
iodoform
methyl isocyanate
phosphine
sulfuryl fluoride
Fumigation is a hazardous operation. Generally it is a legal requirement that the operator who carries out the fumigation operation holds official certification to perform the fumigation as the chemicals used are toxic to most forms of life, including humans.
Post operation ventilation of the area is a critical safety aspect of fumigation. It is important to distinguish between the pack or source of the fumigant gas and the environment which has been fumigated. While the fumigant pack may be safe and spent, the space will still hold the fumigant gas until it has been ventilated."
Long story short, once the area is ventilated and free from fumigants, it is no longer effective.
So why adopt these same age-old practice despite various extensive negative reports? Perhaps some age-old unscrupulous quarters are comfortably making money without appropriate qualifications? It seems apparent that change is never good for these quarters in their comfort zones. That's the ugly.
Having said that, there are alternative methods to airborne fumigation. Methods which are far more effective and longer lasting. More of a prevention rather than cure. For instance, spraying onto areas where water may inadvertently be stagnant. This treatment lasts approximately two weeks or longer and mosquitoes can't rest on these treated waters let alone breed babies in them. The thing about this kind of spraying is that it is still a chemical that'll be let loose into an environment, and it may have its' set of side-effects too.
There could still be better methods yet, which we should insist and instill in all, without harm to others nor to ourselves.
Environmental prevention; ensuring stagnant water containers are covered to prevent breeding. This should be the forefront of the battle against mosquitoes. Checking surrounding areas for unintentional stagnant water and if present, turn containers over or remove them if unused. We don't need authorities to make us do this. Actually we don't do it because methods to make us do it have been too orthodox. I'll cover this a little later.
Personal prevention, always have mosquito repellents around us for ease of use, if and when we are exposed to mosquito-prone times and zones. These could include insect repellent patches which some neighboring countries are distributing freely to infested areas. As far as patches are concerned, they'd last a good 8 hours when activated. Others that would last as long would be insect repellents that we could roll on or spray on to our skin, God-forbid barring any known skin allergies. Major components in most of these repellents would consist of citronella, which is au natural. Compare that with toxic fumigation, you'd get arguably half an hour effectiveness whilst fumigants get ventilated.
Sounds simple doesn't it? But difficult to do. Why? The slackening existence of consistent educational campaigns and programs.
The powers at will should consider changes. Stop only punishing or reprimanding people when things are amiss. Rather than just summoning wrong doers to court or fines just because at certain occasions their homes were not kempt, we are better off rewarding those who upkeep their homes and surroundings in an exemplary manner through competitive campaigns and the like. Rewards could be in a form of recognition and announcement in local municipal publication, challenge trophies that would be rotated on a periodic basis, as this would deter extra costs for each winner, and others which I'm certain could be formulated with a bit of brainstorming.
Whatever it is, change is necessary. It won't be easy but it is possible, for what seems simple is never easy.
No comments:
Post a Comment