Raw Water anybody?

[walpurgis]

This is quite humorous. Just show how daft some people are.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2018/jan/03/raw-water-the-unsterilised-health-craze-that-could-give-you-diarrhoea

[struth]

Nowt like a bit of beaver fever [emoji855]

[Puffin]

No Shit Sherlock..........unless you drink the water:lol:

[Minstrel SE]

Yeah but as a species we have drunk water from natural souces before the modern water system came along. We must have developed some tolerance and immunity from the microbes found in steams and rain water.

A would have thought a nice glass of spring water is pretty healthy with lots of natural minerals and algae. Obviously we wouldnt want to scoop water from the muddy bog where the cows have been but people had to drink before United Utilities came along.

[struth]

Water would have been cleaner in hills and dirtier in towns. Most folk drank weak beer

[prestonchipfryer]

Cholera, typhoid, dysentery. Take your pick. :)

[Pigmy Pony]

Yeah but as a species we have drunk water from natural souces before the modern water system came along. We must have developed some tolerance and immunity from the microbes found in steams and rain water.

A would have thought a nice glass of spring water is pretty healthy with lots of natural minerals and algae. Obviously we wouldnt want to scoop water from the muddy bog where the cows have been but people had to drink before United Utilities came along.

Zafu still does, poor girl, and she has to walk for miles with an old bucket to collect it. We're so lucky aren't we

[Macca]

Zafu still does, poor girl, and she has to walk for miles with an old bucket to collect it. We're so lucky aren't we

I always wonder why they don't just move closer to the well.

[struth]

Or why the folk filming don't lend a hand

[prestonchipfryer]

Or if all the money sent is used for such projects.

[Macca]

I suppose some of it goes to make the commercial in the first place.

[walpurgis]

Or why the folk filming don't lend a hand

And what were they drinking?

[prestonchipfryer]

And what were they drinking?

Beer in all probability.

[montesquieu]

I remember filling some empty water bottles from a stream most of the way up a mountain in Wales, then drinking from them later. The kids (about 8 and 10 at the time) were horrified and wouldn't touch it. Water not from the tap and stuffed with smelly chemicals = unhealthy.

[Macca]

Beer in all probability.

If there were any female crew they would more likely to be having a fruit-based beverage. Otherwise, agree.

[Pigmy Pony]

I always wonder why they don't just move closer to the well.

Can't afford the council tax

[walpurgis]

I remember filling some empty water bottles from a stream most of the way up a mountain in Wales

I'd only do that if I was desperate. How do you know there wasn't a rotting goat carcass or something equally dodgy in the water further upstream?

[Macca]

I'd only do that if I was desperate. How do you know there wasn't a rotting goat carcass or something equally dodgy in the water further upstream?

That's what sanitabs are for. Best to boil it up and make tea. Drinking it raw is a bit risky, goat carcass or not.

[Pigmy Pony]

Goat's Head Soup! As kids we would often drink from streams, and after a day making a dam, go home for tea, never washed our hands, and somehow survived. I could be wrong but I do think a bit of muck is probably healthier than having everything sanitised as it seems to be for kids these days

[walpurgis]

There are lethal amoeba in untreated fresh water.

[Macca]

Goat's Head Soup! As kids we would often drink from streams, and after a day making a dam, go home for tea, never washed our hands, and somehow survived. I could be wrong but I do think a bit of muck is probably healthier than having everything sanitised as it seems to be for kids these days

I sort of agree but basic fieldcraft is you don't do it as if it does make you sick you are screwed if you are far from help. Or supposed to be helping to man the machine gun ;) Even if you are not, getting tapeworms is worth avoiding.

[walpurgis]

http://survivaltopics.com/that-water-is-unsafe-to-drink/

[Pigmy Pony]

I stand corrected! After reading that, now I feel sick-not as ill as that donkey though, he must have been drinking gallons to get like that

[Macca]

I stand corrected! After reading that, now I feel sick-not as ill as that donkey though, he must have been drinking gallons to get like that

Spaniards probably did for him.

[Sherwood]

I have to express a little concern with the flippancy of some of the postings on this thread. OK, the original post was intended as a light-hearted mockery of new age "health fads". However, I think one needs to take seriously the global problem of water borne diseases and the devastating effects on poor vulnerable populations. Great progress has been made worldwide over the last decade in reducing diarrhoeal mortality rates, but globally 1.4 million people still die from diarrhoea each each, mostly children and infants. Although, effective treatments are available to treat diarrhoea and to rehydrate those affected, these are often beyond the means of households in the developing world, the majority of which survive on close to $1 dollar per day or less. Poor health infrastructure means that mothers may have to walk many hours carrying their very sick children to the nearest functioning health clinic by which time little can be done to save the child. It is still shocking to me to visit a rural health facility where an infant has just died from a water borne illness and to witness the devastation of the families affected and indeed the facility staff. Unfortunately, I have witnessed this too many times.

With global warning and increased environmental pollution and degradation, there is a very real chance that recent progress in reducing global diarrhoeal morbidity and mortality may be reversed, and that more parts of the world experience severe water shortages. There is very little that individual households can do to escape the burden of water born diseases. Their mobility is limited, and they often survive on marginal holdings in remote rural areas. Water collection is typically delegated to children, often girls, who spend hours walking to the nearest (often polluted) water source. Households that migrate to urban areas in search of work often find themselves living in slums with poor sewage and sanitation, and exposed to an array of water borne diseases not least cholera, typhoid and dysentery. One of the best investments in development is support for safe and sustainable water supplies such as boreholes and hand pumps. Communities are more than willing to commit resources to such initiatives such as labour and building materials, and once built are committed to ensuring the pumps are well maintained.

I understand that it is difficult for those living in Europe and the developed world to appreciate how lives are shaped by the need to spend so much time and effort collecting water and fuel for cooking, and the catastrophic efforts of a major health event on household incomes. It is not unusual for a single health episode to account for 40% of a poor households monthly income and to force the sale of assets such as livestock or drive people to predatory money lenders. These problems are very real though and should be taken seriously.

Geoff

[walpurgis]

I think that may have killed the thread.

[Landloper]

'One of the best investments in development is support for safe and sustainable water supplies such as boreholes and hand pumps. Communities are more than willing to commit resources to such initiatives such as labour and building materials, and once built are committed to ensuring the pumps are well maintained.'

Setting aside whether or not we in this country should spend money on providing basic infrastructures for sovereign states that have their own revenues, I'm somewhat puzzled because the solutions seem to be relatively cheap. How can it be that despite decades of aid amounting to billions of pounds from this country alone, these states still unable to end the problems you mention? Is it that no matter how much aid is sent nothing much changes because the money is usurped by the rich of the recipient states and never reaches the people it is intended to help? Or is it because aid comes with so many strings attached that any good it may do is swiftly undone? Or perhaps a combination of both?

At the moment it is reckoned that £5,000 [1] is the cost of ensuring that an African community [presumably they mean by 'community' a village] can have clean water to drink, cook, and wash with. E.G. £5 million will cover a thousand villages. During 2004/2005 the UK donated £883 [2] million through the DFID, by 2006/7 that figure had risen to £1,265 million [3]. Yet as each year passes we are told that things are worsening and that more of our money needs to sent abroad.

Zimbabwe, for example, had a relatively well developed urban water system on independence, with things being rather more mixed in the countryside. The nation made good progress in addressing the challenge and significant improvements were made. This progress was reversed partly because of Mugabe's political Land Reform policies, partly because the ruling Zanu PF have asset stripped so much of their country's resources for personal gain, partly because of population growth . Now Zimbabwe is experiencing a deterioration in water quality and sanitation provision despite all the monies disbursed to her in aid, and despite the country's own efforts to improve matters.

In 2008 Zimbabwe was estimated to be losing some $5 million in corruption [I]each day. That's around 3.7 million pounds a day - that's a lot of wells, pumps, sanitation equipment, and public health education lost to the crooks that run that country.



[1 Source: Water Aid UK]
[2 Source: Dept for International Development (DFID)]
[3 Source: DFID]

[walpurgis]

Ah. I see. Not sure what I'm supposed to do with this information.

[Sherwood]

It was not my intention to kill the thread, only to stress the huge burden of, largely preventable, disease attributable to poor water and sanitation globally.

In response to John's points:

a) Yes there is widespread corruption in Africa and other parts of the developing world, and yes, money given for health and development is siphoned off at many levels, from the top down to the bottom. In the past, donors were not particularly effective in preventing or minimising "leakages" but DFID and other donors are increasingly working on improving governance, accountability and transparency and have actually withdrawn or suspended development funding where corruption has been detected or conditionalities were not met.

b) Is development funding effective? Yes it can be, and since 2000, global deaths from diarrhoea have more than halved. However, the global costs of meeting even basic health needs in the developing world are high, and beyond the revenue generating potential of most poor countries. Recent estimates produced for the UN Sustainable Development Goals suggest a basic health package would cost around $100 per capita per annum to provide: a figure way beyond the means of many countries. The figures you quote for water supply works are misleading and omit important indirect and overhead costs. Costs also vary according to remoteness and local geology and how deep a borehole is required to tap water. Dry boreholes also need to be factored into costs. The bottom line is that globally, improved water and sanitation requires a sustained global investment of many billions of dollars per annum over many years.

c) Should we be paying for development? Well, disregarding any arguments about the degree to which the developed world has exploited the developing world and contributed to its current problems, the question of self interest is relevant. Poverty is a breeding ground for unrest, and increasingly problems in remote parts of the world have the potential to affect the developing world. Terrorism, ebola, mass uncontrolled mass migrations are factors that affect us all wherever we happen to live. Quite aside from any moral or humanitarian considerations, unless we address the causes of poverty and underdevelopment, and begin to improve the lives of the world's poorest, these global hazards will become all the more acute.

I should add that I speak from a relatively informed perspective rather than as some naive dreamer. I've worked in around 30 countries, including long term postings in some of the poorest and most fragile states. I have served as an adviser to health ministries and also worked as team leader on some major health projects funded by bilateral and multilateral agencies. Yes, it drives me crazy when I see resources wasted or misused but for me the challenge is to do development smarter rather than give up because it's difficult. Oh, and don't get me started on Mugabe and other monsters like him....

Geoff

[Haselsh1]

I once bought some powdered water but couldn't find anything to dilute it with.

;)

[Macca]

It isn't really that simple, not when you factor in that states like India and Pakistan spend millions on fighter aircraft and space programs whilst people are dying of dysentery in the streets. I have to say I object to people implying that we in this country have some responsibility for this based on some (largely conflated) colonial exploitation that ceased over 100 years ago.

Just because we are not responsible doesn't mean that we should not help out of course, but I would be more inclined to help out if the indigenous governments of these countries were in the slightest but interested in fixing the problems, or at least were to prioritise them and maybe get round to the space program and the nuclear submarines once they have taken care of their more fundamental responsibilities.

[walpurgis]

Good reply Martin.

[Sherwood]

It isn't really that simple, not when you factor in that states like India and Pakistan spend millions on fighter aircraft and space programs whilst people are dying of dysentery in the streets. I have to say I object to people implying that we in this country have some responsibility for this based on some (largely conflated) colonial exploitation that ceased over 100 years ago.

Just because we are not responsible doesn't mean that we should not help out of course, but I would be more inclined to help out if the indigenous governments of these countries were in the slightest but interested in fixing the problems, or at least were to prioritise them and maybe get round to the space program and the nuclear submarines once they have taken care of their more fundamental responsibilities.

Don't you think that the UK should be prioritising spending on health and social care rather than on its nuclear submarines and a pathetic attempt to play the global superpower.

As to supporting countries like India I think you will find that the UK has been phasing out grant support for several years now and focusing on techical assistance and governance. Also, are you suggesting that India should not be developing its industrial and techical capacity. Surely this is way out of poverty and dependence on external support.

Finally, I am puzzled by your suggestion that developing countries are not committed to developing their social sectors.This is not true. Indeed, it was not that long ago that they were resisting pressure from the World Bank and IMF to slash social spending under the Structural Adjustment Program.

Geoff

[walpurgis]

:sofa:

[Macca]

Don't you think that the UK should be prioritising spending on health and social care rather than on its nuclear submarines and a pathetic attempt to play the global superpower.

As to supporting countries like India I think you will find that the UK has been phasing out grant support for several years now and focusing on techical assistance and governance. Also, are you suggesting that India should not be developing its industrial and techical capacity. Surely this is way out of poverty and dependence on external support.

Finally, I am puzzled by your suggestion that developing countries are not committed to developing their social sectors.This is not true. Indeed, it was not that long ago that they were resisting pressure from the World Bank and IMF to slash social spending under the Structural Adjustment Program.

Geoff

I don't see the UK as making 'a pathetic attempt to play global superpower'. I think that is a biased perspective. From an objective perspective maintaining a fleet of ballistic missile submarines makes perfect sense. Which is why they do it. We already spend an extraordinary amount of money on social care, several hundred billion pounds a year. The problem there is that due to incompetence and complacency we get poor value for money. A different issue.

I don't think we should be giving any money to India, as a nation at least, whether we give privately is our own personal decision, and the Indians seem to think the same way. I do not see that India is dependant on external financial support, perhaps you have other information? Technical support is another matter.

I am sure there are some developing countries that are committed to developing their social sectors, whatever 'committed' might mean outside of politician-speak. It does seem to me that the majority are too corrupt and too incompetent to resolve these issues. Which is why, as someone pointed out above, we continue to give large sums in donations, both private and public and yet the situation does not seem to improve.

I am quite sure that there is nothing so difficult in those situations that an intervention with, say, a brigade of Gurkhas would not overcome. But that would be seen as 'neo-colonialism' of course, and so is off the cards. That would have been my personal solution to, for example, the Southern Rhodesia situation in '79. Sadly 'modern morality' prevailed leading to the deaths of many hundreds of thousands of people there over the last thirty years.

But that's okay because it means wealthy, middle class, bleeding heart British people can sleep easy in the knowledge that they are 'better than that', and are doing the right thing in leaving these countries to slowly collapse under the weight of incompetence, corruption and ancient tribal conflicts. That is really the important thing for our 'decision makers'. An hypocrisy that is staggering in its sheer fatuousness.

However, I suspect we are quite far apart on these matters.

[sq225917]

There's deserts in America, they just choose not to live in them. If you don't live near water, move, and don't waste your time breeding. That's the solution to the third worlds water crisis, stop fucking breeding.

[walpurgis]

You forgot to mention the 'genetic bullet', which everybody strenuously insists as an abandoned and obsolete idea.

(as if............you can bet your life the americans, russians, israeli's, chinese and others have been beavering away behind the scenes working on that one)

[alphaGT]

Some riveting conversation gentlemen, but so far off topic. Yes I will agree that 3rd world people drinking from unsafe sources is a real problem, but that has nothing to do with drinking from a mountain Spring! Is a fresh mountain spring any different from well water? Of course if you extract your water from the creek some miles from the spring, who knows what may be living in it, fish are having sex in that water for heaven sakes! But I drink from well water, most everyone in my county does, directly from the water table, unfiltered and no chemicals added. My father used to own a parcel of land in the foothills of the Mountains of Virginia, and a spring shot forth from a crack in a large rock, a stream about the size of your finger. My brother in law who deals in property values tested the water coming from that spring and it tested the cleanest drinking water he had ever tested anywhere. The whole matter of safe drinking water is to know your source. All of Rome existed on spring water brought in on aqueducts from the mountain tops to the city, for literally hundreds of years. They did not drink from the river that ran through the city, where they dumped their waste.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[struth]

You forgot to mention the 'genetic bullet', which everybody strenuously insists as an abandoned and obsolete idea.

(as if............you can bet your life the americans, russians, israeli's, chinese and others have been beavering away behind the scenes working on that one)

Its a bit like football. The manager gets a vote of confidence so you know he is getting sacked.. denying there is any way to do something like that means there IS A WAY

[Haselsh1]

The sheer number of begging ads on commercial TV is alarming to me. If the young child is having to walk miles for clean water where the hell is the mother or father..? And whilst we are constantly shown images of dying children, how come the parents look absolutely fine and in good health...? I seriously suspect that most of what we see is led by the media as was that huge hole in the ozone layer that was going to fry us all with cosmic radiation and now...? Strangely, not a mention. Why...? Because the media have now moved on to global warming. Oh no, sorry, they've changed that as well. Is it not now climate change...?

[walpurgis]

Its a bit like football. The manager gets a vote of confidence so you know he is getting sacked.. denying there is any way to do something like that means there IS A WAY

You can bet on that. It may well have been achieved. But whoever has success will be keeping quiet. The main problem would be delivering such an agent and in what form. It's the ultimate genocide weapon or population control. Bloodless, painless, and as selective as required. Probably untraceable and untrackable.

[Pigmy Pony]

Serious health Issues in the developing world, we all throw money at it, nothing seems to change, and some intelligent opinions as to where the blame lies, differ greatly.

But at least we can have laugh eh?

One of the things I love most about AoS is the slightly skewed, often childish and sometimes irreverent humour of the contributors. It doesn't mean we don't care.

[Sherwood]

I can see I am wasting my time here. I have corrected inaccuracies in postings but others continue to promote false assertions.


Aid works: global deaths from diarrhoea have halved since 2000.

It is just over 50 years since the UK withdrew from most of its African colonies, and just over 70 years since it left India, not over 100 years since the end of the colonial era.

India is not a primary beneficiary of UK development assistance. Despite being the second most populous country it did not even make the top 20 in terms of DFID country spending in 2016. Current support is largely in the form of technical advice and support to improve governance and strengthen civil society.



As to the comments about genetic bullets, I am frankly speechless. Any discussion linking genocide to the problems of global poverty is one that I do not wish to participate in. I am all for a health and vigorous debate on these issues, but not one that ignores evidence and promotes zenophobic policies and ideas. I a sorry that some posters do not feel greater compassion for those in vulnerable and fragile states, nor even appreciate that it is in the developed world's interest to address these problems.

Goodbye!

[struth]

up to you geoff, but people have a right to their opinions as much as you do.

[Macca]

I can see I am wasting my time here. I have corrected inaccuracies in postings but others continue to promote false assertions.


Aid works: global deaths from diarrhoea have halved since 2000.

It is just over 50 years since the UK withdrew from most of its African colonies, and just over 70 years since it left India, not over 100 years since the end of the colonial era.

India is not a primary beneficiary of UK development assistance. Despite being the second most populous country it did not even make the top 20 in terms of DFID country spending in 2016. Current support is largely in the form of technical advice and support to improve governance and strengthen civil society.



As to the comments about genetic bullets, I am frankly speechless. Any discussion linking genocide to the problems of global poverty is one that I do not wish to participate in. I am all for a health and vigorous debate on these issues, but not one that ignores evidence and promotes zenophobic policies and ideas. I a sorry that some posters do not feel greater compassion for those in vulnerable and fragile states, nor even appreciate that it is in the developed world's interest to address these problems.

Goodbye!

I think your misunderstanding of the points that others are making is almost total.

Added to that I suspect that most of us feel slightly insulted by your insinuation that we do not feel compassion. Really that assertion is absurd but given that it seems to a standard part of the 'liberal intelligentsia playbook' these days you can perhaps be forgiven for not realising the stupidity of that assertion.

It does amuse me that all types of forums seem to have people cruising them looking for ways to be offended or for ways in which they can demonstrate their inherent moral superiority. This tends to blind them to the true nature of the sentiments being expressed.

For example the comments on the girl with the bucket that first attracted you to this thread were actually an oblique, albeit humorous, criticism of the nature of such appeals, as opposed to a demonstration of hard-heartedness towards the child herself. Everyone who was contributing got that; you didn't. I suggest you ask yourself why that was.

[walpurgis]

Somebody seems to not understand context.

[walpurgis]

I think your misunderstanding of the points that others are making is almost total.

Exactly. Just because a subject is mentioned, does not mean it is being advocated.

[prestonchipfryer]

I can see I am wasting my time here. I have corrected inaccuracies in postings but others continue to promote false assertions.


Aid works: global deaths from diarrhoea have halved since 2000.

It is just over 50 years since the UK withdrew from most of its African colonies, and just over 70 years since it left India, not over 100 years since the end of the colonial era.

India is not a primary beneficiary of UK development assistance. Despite being the second most populous country it did not even make the top 20 in terms of DFID country spending in 2016. Current support is largely in the form of technical advice and support to improve governance and strengthen civil society.



As to the comments about genetic bullets, I am frankly speechless. Any discussion linking genocide to the problems of global poverty is one that I do not wish to participate in. I am all for a health and vigorous debate on these issues, but not one that ignores evidence and promotes zenophobic policies and ideas. I a sorry that some posters do not feel greater compassion for those in vulnerable and fragile states, nor even appreciate that it is in the developed world's interest to address these problems.

Goodbye!


Healthy and vigorous debate includes those who do not take things so seriously. You will be amazed that all the time you are being offended the people on here really do care about what goes on in this bad world which we all live in and have to put up with. If you cannot see that then you need to ask yourself why you are so easily upset by a few light-hearted words. Sticks and stones.

[Minstrel SE]

I can understand where Geoff is coming from because its a deep and heavy subject that started off on a health fad slant but will naturally come to safe drinking water as a basic necessity all over the world.

I dont get offended (or try not to) now on forums because I know that the replies will go in any direction and with respect to the forum it probably isnt the place for a full debate about corruption, foreign aid and priorities in life.

I do understand that when you have written a page from the heart, a following comment may seem flippant, casual or too much of another tack for a flowing debate.

However the comments about the girl with the bucket and even genocide are valid in the context that its an open forum and points we shouldnt shy away from. I dont trust people in power to care about people in need and I sometimes wonder about charity appeals and if the money reaches people in need. Its a steep one to move to genocide and I can see why thats hard to handle.

I tend to avoid the heavier subjects on forums now because I dont know where to go with them. I can end up sounding flippant as I dont know what to do with the information and how to process it.

If I was debating in parliament I would probably get stuck in but that lot just seem to spout a load of hot air. I dont know if they really try to sort any of the worlds problems without vested interests getting in the way.

[walpurgis]

It doesn't help when folk jump on their soapbox and start propounding their gospel, then expect others to respond with approving respect. Or worse, ignore them. So you can't win really.