World Mosquito Day: Raising Global Awareness of the Importance of Mosquito Elimination Program
Accra-Ghana, - In honor of World Mosquito Day, observed annually on August 20, but ignored in most African countries including Ghana, Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa (VPWA) and its partners in Sub Saharan Africa are working to increase awareness of the importance of efficient technology to kill mosquitoes and therefore eliminate mosquito borne diseases including Malaria.
World Mosquito Day originated in 1897 by Dr. Ronald Ross of the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine. After dissecting mosquitoes known to have fed on a patient with malaria, Ross discovered the malaria parasite in the stomach wall of the mosquito. Through further research using malarious birds, Ross was able to ascertain the entire life cycle of the malarial parasite, including its presence in the mosquito's salivary glands. Ross confirmed that malaria is transmitted from infected birds to healthy ones by the bite of a mosquito, a finding that suggested the disease's mode of transmission to humans. For his findings, Ross is credited with the discovery of the transmission of malaria by the mosquito, and was honored with a Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1902.
Presently, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 350-500 million cases of malaria occur worldwide each year, and more than one million people die, most of them young children in sub-Saharan Africa. Mosquitoes cause more human suffering than any other organism, and afflict not only humans, but animals as well.
VPWA is using this year’s Mosquito Day to point out the flaws in current African policies and recommending to committed leaders on the continent to rethink Malaria strategies. Leaders should take the bold initiative of implementing a result oriented initiative that could eradicate Malaria in 3 years, probably within first term of some African leaders.
First, the bed net: Research finds that bed nets are only 25% effective in preventing Malaria. This means that, in the unlikely event of every person within a given geographical area (for example: Ghana) sleeping under bed nets from 5pm-7am, Malaria cases are likely to be drop by 25%. Despite these research findings, we still we have NGOs raising money all around the globe in pursuit of ‘blanketing’ Africa with nets. It should be noted that, mosquitoes do not bite only when you are in bed.
Second, Indoor Residual Spraying (IRS): Indoor Residual Spraying is the dispensing of insecticides on walls made from porous materials such as mud or wood. The idea is that, after the mosquito has taken the blood meal, it will land on the wall and die. In some African countries where DDT is used, this repels the mosquito from even entering the house. Less effective insecticides like permethrin are also used for this purpose. This method has proven to be about as effective as bed nets achieving only around a 25% reduction in transmission rates and is not designed for plaster city dwellings. Studies on biting rates done in Mali, indicate that about 38% of all biting occurs outdoors. As a consequence this is why bed nets, and Indoor Residual Spraying, will never break the malaria transmission cycle.
Third, truck mounted "fogger" units: These units are only capable of reducing mosquito populations by about 30% in the US, where they are in common use. However this is under better circumstances than are available in Sub-Saharan Africa, where there is a general lack of a good road grid pattern, typical of American Suburbs.
It must be understood that a 30% reduction in mosquito population does not translate into a 30% reduction in malaria transmission. The Centre for Disease Control did a study some time ago in Sub-Saharan Africa and managed to get a 90% reduction in mosquito populations, however only a 25% decrease in transmission rates was achieved.
This having been said, one must realize the reduction levels achieved with these experiments were given on the basis of a controlled research protocol. A real world situation would not be controlled. Not everyone would sleep under a bed net, not every house would be treated with Indoor Residual Spraying, and the truck mounted fogger units are a bigger joke than either bed nets or IRS treatment, when it comes to reducing the transmission of the malaria parasite. These considerations are however not applicable in a program involving the treatment of an entire region with an aircraft equipped with insecticide aerosol generators.
In the unlikely circumstance the whole of Ghana is blanketed with nets, meaning, all inhabitants of homes, hotels etc. sleeps under nets, and IRS enabled in every home, and truck mounted fogger units dispensing insecticides in our neighborhoods, Ghana will see a reduction of only 50% in Malaria transmission. However for Ghana to even implement this multi faceted approach and be successful, the nation will spend a huge chunk of its GDP annually to maintain it. Failure to maintain the exercise will also lead to a catastrophic rise in human death due to Malaria.
What are we proposing?
VPWA is proposing Aerial Spraying or what the Americans call “space spraying.” This technology consists of an aircraft equipped with a high pressure aerosol generator, treating the entire environment the mosquito lives in, effectively eliminating the mosquito.
We are proposing this project be funded by the grant money currently being wasted on marginally effective interventions and wish to introduce this method to Ghana as a model for the elimination of malaria in Africa. We estimate that for only about 2% of the total direct and indirect costs presently associated with Malaria in Ghana, the disease could be eradicated within 3 years. Within 30 days the transmission cycle could be broken within a given treatment area.
That having been said, defeating malaria in Sub-Saharan Africa is the challenge of all challenges, and certainly not a task for amateurs. Sadly however in this case, amateurs are in charge of this effort. The irony is it would cost much less to succeed, in this endeavor, than pursue the present failed strategy.
Hayford Siaw
Executive Director
Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa
info@vpwa.org
+233 21 928245, +233 24 3340112
Friday, August 21, 2009
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Controlling the Vector
Mosquitoes are the vectors that transport protozoan parasites of the genus Plasmodium. It is this parasite that induces malaria. In order to control the spread of malaria, the behavior of the vector that causes the disease must be understood.
Although there are 3,500 species of mosquito, only one species (and only females of that species) has the ability to spread malaria: the Anopheles mosquito. Only the females of this species feed on the blood of humans, and are therefore the main focus of concern.
All mosquitoes, no matter the species, require water in order to breed. Mosquitoes lay their eggs wherever there is standing water: a salt marsh, a lake, a puddle, a natural reservoir, or in something as simple as a bucket filled with water. The average female mosquito only lives for around 3 weeks and therefore the lifecycle of the mosquito is very rapid.
Most mosquitoes that transmit malaria pick up the parasite after feeding on an infected human. That is why swift isolation and treatment of an infected individual is important. Walking around as a carrier of the disease is actually potentially contributing to the spread of the problem.
There are several ideas on how to control the malaria epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa. I believe that one of the best ways to get the problem under control would be to focus on the standing water sources of the region. Organic items such as garlic oil act as mosquito repellants. If large amounts of something like garlic oil were added to standing water sources, female mosquitoes would avoid laying their eggs and eventually die after the end of their 2-3 week life cycle. Organic materials such as garlic oil would not pose a threat to contaminating the land with toxicity or, as in the case of pesticides, contaminating humans. Treatments like this would be effective, and because the garlic oil loses potency after 4 weeks, would be a solution affordable enough to maintain until the issue had greatly subsided.
Controlling mosquitoes would not just help with the malaria crisis. Mosquitoes spread other problematic diseases such as West Nile Virus, dengue fever and yellow fever. Controlling these populations could drastically reduce the number of cases reported for many of these diseases each year, as well as help to save millions of lives.
For more information on vector control, you can visit www.cdc.gov
Although there are 3,500 species of mosquito, only one species (and only females of that species) has the ability to spread malaria: the Anopheles mosquito. Only the females of this species feed on the blood of humans, and are therefore the main focus of concern.
All mosquitoes, no matter the species, require water in order to breed. Mosquitoes lay their eggs wherever there is standing water: a salt marsh, a lake, a puddle, a natural reservoir, or in something as simple as a bucket filled with water. The average female mosquito only lives for around 3 weeks and therefore the lifecycle of the mosquito is very rapid.
Most mosquitoes that transmit malaria pick up the parasite after feeding on an infected human. That is why swift isolation and treatment of an infected individual is important. Walking around as a carrier of the disease is actually potentially contributing to the spread of the problem.
There are several ideas on how to control the malaria epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa. I believe that one of the best ways to get the problem under control would be to focus on the standing water sources of the region. Organic items such as garlic oil act as mosquito repellants. If large amounts of something like garlic oil were added to standing water sources, female mosquitoes would avoid laying their eggs and eventually die after the end of their 2-3 week life cycle. Organic materials such as garlic oil would not pose a threat to contaminating the land with toxicity or, as in the case of pesticides, contaminating humans. Treatments like this would be effective, and because the garlic oil loses potency after 4 weeks, would be a solution affordable enough to maintain until the issue had greatly subsided.
Controlling mosquitoes would not just help with the malaria crisis. Mosquitoes spread other problematic diseases such as West Nile Virus, dengue fever and yellow fever. Controlling these populations could drastically reduce the number of cases reported for many of these diseases each year, as well as help to save millions of lives.
For more information on vector control, you can visit www.cdc.gov
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Bringing Back DDT
In February of this year, Microsoft creator Bill Gates opened a jar of mosquitoes during the Technology, Entertainment and Design Conference. He did this to demonstrate how much of a concern malaria is for several regions of the world.
Bill Gates and many others support the idea of reintroducing DDT as an effected tool to fight against malaria. Him and other scientists believe that spending mere cents on spraying houses would be more cost effective than supplying $10 dollar mosquito nets to everyone in an area impacted by malaria. They also believe that killing the insect using DDT is better than just preventing them from biting by using a net.
The stigma around the use of DDT dates back to the 1950’s. Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethan
During WWII, DDT was used to control the spread of Typhus. In the 1945, it began to be used to fight against the spread of malaria. In 1955, the World Health Organization initiated a program to eradicate malaria worldwide, its main weapon being DDT. The attempt was semi-successful. It eradicated malaria in Taiwan, much of the Caribbean, the Balkans, parts of northern Africa, the northern region of Australia, and a large swath of the South Pacific and dramatically reducing mortality in Sri Lanka and India.
Soon after this program started, scientists began to notice certain side-effects of DDT. Birth defects and cancer-related cases began to steadily rise in the regions of the world where the drug was being heavily used. It was discovered that the pesticide was leaching into water supplies, remaining in the ecosystem for long periods of time.
In the 1970’s DDT was banned from being used in almost every region of the world. In the areas where malaria was suppressed but not successfully eradicated, the mosquito population and impact of the disease has returned with a vengeance.
DDT is without a question the most successful tool used to date in the attempt to eradicate malaria from the planet. Bill Gates and other supporters encourage the return of DDT, because they are convinced that if spraying is done in small amount in and around the home, water supplies will stand low risk of contamination and millions of lives will be saved as a result.
This data was compiled using data found at www.who.org and www.cnn.comFriday, July 3, 2009
Space Spraying: Thermal Fog vs. Cold Fog
Space spraying can be accomplished using one of two forms of fog; thermal fog and cold fog.
Thermal Fog
The insecticide used in thermal fogs is diluted in an oil-based transporting fluid. Hot gas heats this fluid, causing the oil to become vaporized. When the hot vapor exits the machine distributing the pesticide, it hits cooler air, creating a visible, white, dense fog.
There are several advantages to using a thermal fog. The reaction with the cooler air creates a visible cloud, allowing the operator of the machine to ensure thorough placement of the spray. Because the transporting fluid is oil based and not water based, less active ingredient is needed during the treatment, allowing for a lower concentration of exposure for humans dwelling in the region being treated.
However, there are several disadvantages to this treatment. Thermal fog operations are very expensive. An oil-based transporter in very pricey and can also be a fire hazard in the areas in which it is sprayed. Oil can also cause staining and leave heavy odors. It can leave roadways slick and cause possible traffic casualties.
Cold Fog
A cold fog is just another term for a diluted insecticide. There is no transporter fluid used other than the formula used to create the insecticide. There is no heat involved, and spraying is accomplished by using a high pressure nozzle.
The main advantages to cold fogs are that they are cost effective and pose little to know fire hazard. The water-base keeps roadways from becoming slick and is virtually odorless.
There are issues with cold fogs as well. The fact that they are nearly invisible makes them nearly impossible to observe, impacting the homogeny of dispersion. Without an oil-based matrix, the chemical can often evaporate or deactivate before it treats the area thoroughly.
Which to use?
Thermal fogs would be more appropriately used in areas where the pest being treated was a severe endemic. Areas with few roadways would be ideal. It is also a choice to use when the budget for treatment is larger.
Cold fogs are more appropriate in areas where the pest is not an issue that has grown out of control. It is better for areas with high traffic and heavier populations. It is also the better choice when the budget for treatment is small.
Ideally, in areas where there are both rural and urban populations, both treatments should be used together, breaking up the region into a mosaic of treatment types.
This information was collected from data posted by http://www.who.org/.
Thermal Fog
The insecticide used in thermal fogs is diluted in an oil-based transporting fluid. Hot gas heats this fluid, causing the oil to become vaporized. When the hot vapor exits the machine distributing the pesticide, it hits cooler air, creating a visible, white, dense fog.
There are several advantages to using a thermal fog. The reaction with the cooler air creates a visible cloud, allowing the operator of the machine to ensure thorough placement of the spray. Because the transporting fluid is oil based and not water based, less active ingredient is needed during the treatment, allowing for a lower concentration of exposure for humans dwelling in the region being treated.
However, there are several disadvantages to this treatment. Thermal fog operations are very expensive. An oil-based transporter in very pricey and can also be a fire hazard in the areas in which it is sprayed. Oil can also cause staining and leave heavy odors. It can leave roadways slick and cause possible traffic casualties.
Cold Fog
A cold fog is just another term for a diluted insecticide. There is no transporter fluid used other than the formula used to create the insecticide. There is no heat involved, and spraying is accomplished by using a high pressure nozzle.
The main advantages to cold fogs are that they are cost effective and pose little to know fire hazard. The water-base keeps roadways from becoming slick and is virtually odorless.
There are issues with cold fogs as well. The fact that they are nearly invisible makes them nearly impossible to observe, impacting the homogeny of dispersion. Without an oil-based matrix, the chemical can often evaporate or deactivate before it treats the area thoroughly.
Which to use?
Thermal fogs would be more appropriately used in areas where the pest being treated was a severe endemic. Areas with few roadways would be ideal. It is also a choice to use when the budget for treatment is larger.
Cold fogs are more appropriate in areas where the pest is not an issue that has grown out of control. It is better for areas with high traffic and heavier populations. It is also the better choice when the budget for treatment is small.
Ideally, in areas where there are both rural and urban populations, both treatments should be used together, breaking up the region into a mosaic of treatment types.
This information was collected from data posted by http://www.who.org/.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Space Spraying
Space spraying is a method used to quickly kill a pest population with little to no residual effect. However, this treatment cannot be used in isolation. It is important that the removal of the target population be a collaborative effort between space spraying and other forms of defenses. Populations that can be fought against using this method include houseflies, sand flies and mosquitoes. Space spraying is ideal for use in emergency epidemic situations, and could be a very effective method for helping to eradicate malaria from areas where the disease is endemic such as Ghana, South Africa, and Mexico.
Space spraying is effective at not only killing a disease-transmitting population of insects, but it is also effective at interrupting the transmission cycle of the actual disease. The process consists of a cloud of insecticide droplets that are dispersed over the impacted region. The idea is that the insects will encounter these droplets during flight and die. In order for this method to be effective, the behavior pattern of the specific target insect must be well studied and understood. The right toxins will be needed to shut down the biological system of the insect without posing a great health risk to the human population.
Space spraying is technically a form of fog. The defense is only effective while the droplets are airborne, so it is important that the spray is released during the prime time of flight for the target population. The spray comes in two forms, thermal fog and cold fog. The difference between these two types, the costs, and the effectiveness of each method is what will be addressed in the next report to come.
This information was compiled from data released by the World Health Organization at www.who.org
Sunday, June 7, 2009
AN APOLLO PROGRAM FOR ACCRA
On July 16, 1969 Commander Neil Armstrong was the first man to set foot on the moon. At that time he made the statement "one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind"
On May 25, 1961 President John F. Kennedy of United States announced his support for the Apollo program with the goal of landing men on the moon by the end of 1969. This objective was met with 6 months to spare.
This seemingly impossible feat was accomplished only because the leader of the Country made it a matter of priority, the landing of a man on the moon. At the time it seemed that President Kennedy had taken leave of his senses. In spite of the nay sayers this goal was met within the allotted time frame of eight years.
What I would like to propose at this time is establishing the goal of eliminating malaria in Ghana within 3 years. This is a more achievable objective than sending a man to the moon. The reason, it has already been done in the United States, the Country that sent Commander Neil Armstrong to the moon. Perhaps we should take a page out of their play book on this one. First of all, the Americans did not waste any time or national treasure treating the symptoms. They attacked the cause. The cause of malaria is not the malaria parasite, it is the mosquito. Removing the mosquito from the environment will eliminate malaria. When you break the transmission cycle, the malaria parasite present in the human population will be expelled from the body within about two years. The method used by the Americans to eliminate malaria was a massive aerial application program. This method achieved the objective of dramatically decimating the mosquito population as to destroy its ability to maintain the transmission cycle. It has been some 60 years now since the United States was declared malaria free and it continues to be malaria free until this day.
At present here in Ghana and most African countries, there is a policy of treating the symptoms of malaria, with prophylactic pills, bed nets and indoor residual spraying. The marginal effect of this reactive policy only institutionalizes failure. Meanwhile, our country continues to sacrifice its most precious resource on the altar of malaria, its children and young mothers. In developed countries disease and death affects the old and consumes perhaps 90% of the national medical resources, treating it's citizens with expensive medications and operations for the last 10% of their life span. However the average life span is twice as long as in the developing nations.
In Ghana the death rates are much higher in the young, than the old. This is neither a natural nor an acceptable outcome. This is the reason for an average life expectancy of only 40 or 50 years.
The annual expenditure of 100 million dollars now dedicated to treating the symptoms of malaria in Ghana is perhaps 10 times more than is necessary to eradicate this disease. However over the past several years the problem only gets worse, in spite of grand statements to the contrary. One definition of insanity is the expectation of a different outcome, each time you perform the same act. I can only conclude that the institutions charged with dealing with this problem are certifiably NUTS!
What I would like to propose is a pilot program to eliminate malaria from the City of Accra, with the goal of making Accra the first malaria free City in Sub Saharan Africa, employing the same methods used to achieve success in the United States some 60 years ago. A successful outcome of such a program will have a more far reaching impact than the Apollo program, in that it will serve a humanitarian objective of saving lives, the most precious lives, that of the young.
With this thought in mind, if Ghana government or corporate Ghana will not come together to fund such a project, perhaps the funding source should logically be the PMI or Presidents Malaria Initiative that has dedicated some 17.3 million dollars for malaria in Ghana this year alone. All that would be necessary is 3 million dollars to eliminate malaria for one year in the City of Accra, a City that contains 10% of our population. They can use the rest of the funding to satisfy their bed nets spree.
At this time I would like to ask anyone that has an opportunity to gain the ear of President Obama on his trip to Ghana this coming July to make mention of this proposal for 3 million dollars for this pilot program. If you live in Accra like me, you will be doing yourself a favor.
Hayford Siaw
Executive Director, Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa (VPWA)
Tel : 00233 21 928245
00233 24 3340112
www.vpwa.org
info@vpwa.org
On May 25, 1961 President John F. Kennedy of United States announced his support for the Apollo program with the goal of landing men on the moon by the end of 1969. This objective was met with 6 months to spare.
This seemingly impossible feat was accomplished only because the leader of the Country made it a matter of priority, the landing of a man on the moon. At the time it seemed that President Kennedy had taken leave of his senses. In spite of the nay sayers this goal was met within the allotted time frame of eight years.
What I would like to propose at this time is establishing the goal of eliminating malaria in Ghana within 3 years. This is a more achievable objective than sending a man to the moon. The reason, it has already been done in the United States, the Country that sent Commander Neil Armstrong to the moon. Perhaps we should take a page out of their play book on this one. First of all, the Americans did not waste any time or national treasure treating the symptoms. They attacked the cause. The cause of malaria is not the malaria parasite, it is the mosquito. Removing the mosquito from the environment will eliminate malaria. When you break the transmission cycle, the malaria parasite present in the human population will be expelled from the body within about two years. The method used by the Americans to eliminate malaria was a massive aerial application program. This method achieved the objective of dramatically decimating the mosquito population as to destroy its ability to maintain the transmission cycle. It has been some 60 years now since the United States was declared malaria free and it continues to be malaria free until this day.
At present here in Ghana and most African countries, there is a policy of treating the symptoms of malaria, with prophylactic pills, bed nets and indoor residual spraying. The marginal effect of this reactive policy only institutionalizes failure. Meanwhile, our country continues to sacrifice its most precious resource on the altar of malaria, its children and young mothers. In developed countries disease and death affects the old and consumes perhaps 90% of the national medical resources, treating it's citizens with expensive medications and operations for the last 10% of their life span. However the average life span is twice as long as in the developing nations.
In Ghana the death rates are much higher in the young, than the old. This is neither a natural nor an acceptable outcome. This is the reason for an average life expectancy of only 40 or 50 years.
The annual expenditure of 100 million dollars now dedicated to treating the symptoms of malaria in Ghana is perhaps 10 times more than is necessary to eradicate this disease. However over the past several years the problem only gets worse, in spite of grand statements to the contrary. One definition of insanity is the expectation of a different outcome, each time you perform the same act. I can only conclude that the institutions charged with dealing with this problem are certifiably NUTS!
What I would like to propose is a pilot program to eliminate malaria from the City of Accra, with the goal of making Accra the first malaria free City in Sub Saharan Africa, employing the same methods used to achieve success in the United States some 60 years ago. A successful outcome of such a program will have a more far reaching impact than the Apollo program, in that it will serve a humanitarian objective of saving lives, the most precious lives, that of the young.
With this thought in mind, if Ghana government or corporate Ghana will not come together to fund such a project, perhaps the funding source should logically be the PMI or Presidents Malaria Initiative that has dedicated some 17.3 million dollars for malaria in Ghana this year alone. All that would be necessary is 3 million dollars to eliminate malaria for one year in the City of Accra, a City that contains 10% of our population. They can use the rest of the funding to satisfy their bed nets spree.
At this time I would like to ask anyone that has an opportunity to gain the ear of President Obama on his trip to Ghana this coming July to make mention of this proposal for 3 million dollars for this pilot program. If you live in Accra like me, you will be doing yourself a favor.
Hayford Siaw
Executive Director, Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa (VPWA)
Tel : 00233 21 928245
00233 24 3340112
www.vpwa.org
info@vpwa.org
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Institutional Inertia
The World Health Organization on October 30, 1998, announced the creation of an affiliated organization, that was named, Roll Back Malaria. The reduction of malaria in
Dr. Donald Roberts, Ph.D, an entomologist, Professor of Tropical Public Health at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Maryland, stated, "The Roll Back Malaria program, a partnership of WHO and UN organizations, has been an abysmal failure. Since the RBM founding in 1998, deaths from malaria have steadily increased". This statement was taken from an article showing a graph with a projection of actual malaria deaths at 30% increase over the baseline rate just 10 years ago.
The question is why the increase instead of the projected 50% decrease in mortality over the life of this project? Let us examine the mission statement attached to the press release announcing the inception of this program. It starts out on the first page with the claim "simple prevention and control methods has shown startling results: in trials conducted in the Gambia, Burkina Faso, Kenya and Ghana, the use of bed nets, which are treated with pyrethroid insecticide, was shown to effectively protect sleeping children from malarial mosquitoes, resulting in dramatic reductions in deaths among children under five years of age. Deaths were reduced by average of one fourth in these mega trials". Perhaps the term "dramatic" in this instance is shall we say; "dramatic", in its context, this method is much ado about nothing as in ineffective.
Let's see what other interventions, the Roll Back Malaria mission statement has for our consideration. "Simpler and more effective means of administering medicines" and the encouragement of "new anti-malaria drugs and vaccines", it sounds like a defensive strategy. First you hide under a net to avoid the mosquito, if that does not work; you take a pill to keep the malaria parasite from killing you. As in an American football expression goes, "the best defense resides in a good offense". Why not deep six the little suckers and be done with it.
The reference to development of "new anti-malaria drugs and vaccines" is a fools errand, and overlooks the incredibly complex nature of the malaria parasite. Some 9,000 genes. This parasite has the incredible ability to adapt to anything. Mr. Robert Desowitz, a medical research entomologist in his book, MALARIA CAPERS says, the search for a malaria vaccine has gone on for generations, and none will ever be found, to be effective. This research he says is for the sole purpose of getting grant money for universities, from wealthy individuals, foundations and governments. The cause is noble, however the goal is unobtainable. Meanwhile resources that could be applied to the elimination of this disease are wasted by academics. Even Bill Gates is a victim of this scam, having poured untold millions into this effort.
The failure to eliminate malaria is more than a humanitarian one, it also has a dramatic impact on economic development as well. Included in this Roll Back Malaria mission statement is a quote from Jeffrey Sachs, Professor at Harvard. and says in part "We and other groups of economist researchers are trying to determine the consequences of malaria on economic development" and "Our findings are striking. They point to Malaria as a major impediment to economic development" enough said. I once did an internet search and pulled up a colored graph of the poorest countries on planet earth and a corresponding colored graph of the countries with most malaria. To my amazement they were identical. In the arena of public health, the failure to eliminate malaria in the world is by far the greatest failure. It is not the failure of technology; it is a failure of leadership! The West has proven the technology is available. The Will to do something meaningful about this scourge is absent.
Let us examine the nature of the World Health Organization, the organization that has taken the lead as "expert" to the 80 or so sister organizations known as NGO's or Non Governmental Organizations. The WHO although it is a quasi governmental organization, is by nature a not for profit, additionally there is a kinship since they both provide public services. Any organization is of course a simple legal instrument, so to determine the personality of an organization you have to examine the personality profiles of its leaders.
A person known as a bureaucrat is in charge of this complex multi faceted organization, the nature of a bureaucrat is to keep steady the course of the organization. Stifling anyone who shows creativity or initiative; otherwise how can this organization maintain its identity, if it allows any creative actions on the part of its employees or anyone else for this matter? If any changes are made it is a committee that makes them. Of course in the recorded history of mankind there is no record of a monument ever being erected to a committee; regrettably, only to individuals.
An entomologist is the next personality type that needs examination. An entomologist is a person that studies insects, usually insects that transmit diseases, the WHO in this case would employ an entomologist that knows more than a person wants to know about malaria mosquitoes, mating habits etc. However an entomologist has no training in the art and science of killing mosquitoes only to identify them. The problem lies in the perception in their mind that he is an expert in this endeavor. Hence this is how you get a recommendation for the use of bed nets, an intervention that is only 25% effective. Then you have the medical doctors, with their prescriptions pads ever at the ready, to write a prescription for whatever ails you. In this case a prophylactic pill to keep the malaria you already have from killing you or modifying the disease in the event you get it.
The people who suffer from this misfeasance are of course, the victims of malaria here in
The Solution, eliminate the mosquito! this is the only method that will free
Hayford Siaw
Executive Director – VPWA Ghana (www.vpwa.org)
+233 24 3340112
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)