Frontier 40th video
Giant Book Sale

Article Tools

Use the form below to share this article via email.


Your name:

Your email:

To email:

Message:

Possibly Related:

Advances to improve world health

Last updated: 03/01/10 11:47pm

The advances in technology each day are absolutely incredible. We have come to the point where, if we think outside of the box, we can help developing countries take the first step in creating a healthier population.
What am I talking about?

Paper “chip” technology:
George Whitesides, a chemistry professor at Harvard University, has successfully merged an entire medical laboratory’s worth of equipment into a paper chip no bigger than the size of a fingerprint.

According to a CNN story, “Phones, paper ‘chips’ may fight disease,” Whitesides finished developing the prototype for the paper “chip” technology this year. The paper chip can be used in developing countries to test for diseases and their severity in patients. The chip will test for diseases such as HIV, malaria, tuberculosis, hepatitis and gastroenteritis.
This contraption costs about a penny to manufacture and is expected to be available in a year.
It’s simple — patients place a drop of blood on one side of the paper. The other side of the paper will then turn into a colorful pattern shaped like a tree. Depending on the colors, the chip can tell medical professionals whether people are infected with a specific disease and how severe their disease is.
If patients can’t get to their doctors to translate the information, they can take pictures of the color pattern and send it to their physicians for review. Whitesides said he is also working with cell phone makers to develop an app that would give patients their results immediately instead of waiting on their doctor.

DIY adjustable eyeglasses:
Josh Silver, a physics professor at Oxford University, invented a special set of eyeglasses that patients can manipulate to fit their personal prescription, according to The Guardian’s “Inventor’s 2020 vision: to help 1 billion of the world’s poorest see better.” People would no longer need to use expensive equipment from an optician’s office to determine their prescription.
Silver found that the fatter the lens, the more powerful it becomes. Inside the plastic lenses are two clear circular sacs filled with fluid, which are connected to a small syringe attached to the arms of the glasses.
The wearer puts the glasses on and simply increases or reduces the amount of fluid in the sacs, which in turn changes the prescription being used. The syringe is then removed and the person can go about their daily work. The glasses cost about $1 each.

Portable water filter:
LifeStraw, created by the Danish company Vestergaard Frandsen, is a thick plastic straw that acts as a portable water filter. This device allows people from developing countries to safely drink from polluted bodies of water and have clean water.
The filter takes out more than 99 percent of life-threatening waterborne bacteria and viruses, along with other particles. Each filter costs about $3.50 and lasts about a year — filtering about 2 liters per day. The filter is also said to be easy to clean, as well as the purifier cartridge.
According to Vestergaard Frandsen’s Web site, the filter was created in the hopes of eradicating the Guinea worm disease, which is a painful infection caused by waterborne parasites. The parasites create a blister, which people try to clean in polluted water. Cleaning the wound with dirty water stimulates the worms to emerge and release their larvae.

What do these medical advances mean to the developing world?
Trained specialists are in such high demand in impoverished countries that they are hard to come by when people need them the most. People usually have to travel great distances, by public transportation or foot, to access any sort of medical clinic.
Many diagnostic tests are also too expensive for people in developing countries to afford. This crisis makes countless numbers of people go undiagnosed and without treatment until the disease is at its peak.
These innovations can provide people in the poorest areas of the world with the treatment they so desperately need. It can give them the ability to have clean drinking water without the fear of getting sick. (Keep in mind that more than 1 billion people in the world don’t have access to safe drinking water, according to the Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council.)
It can give them the ability to see late at night while they work their trade to make $2 to $4 a day. It can let their doctor know, no matter how far the medical clinic is, the condition of their health and what medical supplies or medicine they need.
But it can also assist countries that provide aid to Third World countries. It can assure that people have the correct prescription needed, instead of receiving secondhand eyeglasses, which aren’t guaranteed to give the wearer clear vision. It can help other countries donate the medicine that is in the highest demand. It can even help natural disaster survivors receive clean drinking water, if nothing else.
However, countries with the money and capability to give these devices to Third World countries aren’t going to give these medical technological devices away for free forever. No matter how small the manufacturing cost is. After a while, one penny and one dollar will quickly add up, especially when you take into account the billions of people who need it. This isn’t including all of the people within our own neighborhoods that need access to these essential things as well.
Governments of Third World countries need to step it up and create awareness. They need to let other countries know in-depth information of their medical capabilities and propose solutions to get their hands on these devices. If they let the whole world know their situation, I’m sure wealthy governments can figure some sort of exchange. Or maybe wealthy countries will realize that health is more important than profit and the cost of these devices will become scalable.

Published March 1, 2010 in Columns, Opinion

Upcoming Events

 

11 comments



Sarah

March 3, 2010 at 8:11 PM
Flag this comment

You jus watched The Colbert Report…


David Wilson

March 5, 2010 at 8:01 AM
Flag this comment

More medical ‘advances’ in third-world countries will INCREASE misery there, not decrease it. All our well-intentioned interference over the last 50 years has made the effects of famine and drought worse, not better.

The fact is the human population has to be in balance with the land. The Native Americans understood that, but western cultures don’t.

Read more …

What we need everywhere, but especially in so-called ‘developing nations’ is to change expectations, and control population growth. We need to encourage women in particular to stop having children. We need to globally manage our population down to something the Earth can sustain; perhaps half of what we have at the moment.

Isolated tribes in places like the Amazon basin have known this, and done it for generations. They do not produce more people than the land can support. They live in balance and harmony with their surroundings. THIS is the lesson we should be teaching, not striving to save more people by technology, only to increase the strain on the planet’s resources.


slowhike

March 9, 2010 at 6:05 PM
Flag this comment

Mandatory sterilization would be a progressive medical advancement for third world countries. Sterilize the population until the economics will support an increase in population w/o help from other countries.


Summerspeaker

March 9, 2010 at 6:44 PM
Flag this comment

Solid article about an important issue. Though I fully support the goal of reducing human population growth, David, your statement against saving people with technology strikes me as immoral. We actually have plenty of space and stuff for the planet’s billions, enough for everyone to live the good life. Technology can be used rationally and sustainably for the common good. Only the greed of the bosses stands in our way.


Damian

March 9, 2010 at 7:51 PM
Flag this comment

Oh summerspeaker,

You poor poor oppressed child. Here, let me take from my children and give it all to you.

Read more …

Spoiled American, you should hear yourself.

I have a few questions that I know that you cannot consistently answer: Who grants you the authority of what is the “common good”? Is that good for everyone? Or is it only who the master (thats you spoiled american) determines is worthy of the productiveness of others?

Your supposed philosophy of “anarchism” is simply fake and I am happy to expose it. Its nothing but collectivism using an attractive term. Collectivism has proven to bring misery and horrendous poverty to billions of people. Read about it.


slowhike

March 9, 2010 at 8:15 PM
Flag this comment

Since we know people can’t live in civility and order without leadership; tell us Summerspeaker once you kill off all the bosses and steal the wealth of their companies to make sure every one “lives the good life” – who leads at that point? do you or some one like you think you could lead?

And once the wealth is distributed to your illegal immigrants and they demonstrate the inability to regenerate an adequate amount of wealth to keep everyone “living the good life”. Where do you lead us so that we can have a chance to steal more accumulated wealth from some other bosses?


Summerspeaker

March 9, 2010 at 8:50 PM
Flag this comment

Though messy, notions of the common good have meaning. For me, it’s about equality of access to consumption. In practice, it has to be negotiated by all involved. Y’all’s rhetoric about stealing amuses me. It’s the bosses who’ve stolen so much from the workers. Who do you think actually built the computers we’re typing on and houses we’re sitting in? Not the rich and powerful, that’s for sure. But that whole narrative assumes a level of scarcity that technology now allows us to overcome. In a society rationally organized for general welfare, everyone would enjoy a high standard of living. Bosses would lose their place in the hierarchy, not their lives or comfort.


Damian

March 9, 2010 at 9:10 PM
Flag this comment

Wrong.

People are different in both beauty and in intelligence. To deny it is to deny nature and reality.

Read more …

It takes a brain to take oil from the ground and turn it into oil. It takes a brain to develop a microchip. It takes a brain to develop the computer that you are typing on. These things dont just “happen”.

YOu say its not the “rich and powerful”, but they get to “rich and powerful” by producing something that the public voluntarily decide to use…to better their lives, for their own good. And what is good for each individual is all that really matters.

What reality are you living in? Have you ever studied communism? Are you that naive to suggest something that you know absolutely nothing about?

I mean, its really nice that you want everyone in the whole wide world to be happy and at peace and have lots of money. This vision is shared by millions of people who refuse to acknowledge that you must work for what you have. ANd you seem like a nice girl. However, you must understand that first, money isnt everything and second, there are a hell of a lot more nastier people than the “bosses”, all bosses do is provide you with a contract and an income, take it or leave it. YOu dont have to work for them and they dont have to pay you.

Just know that you do have it pretty good here, you have the liberty to choose and the liberty to do almost anything. But it all comes at the price of having to earn it. Which is better than having to work for parasites.


Slowhike

March 9, 2010 at 9:17 PM
Flag this comment

SS, if I am walking down the street and I see another man approaching me wearing a nice suit and a rolex watch and I am wearing jeans and a T shirt. I say to myself “I wish I had a watch like that”. What I don’t say to myself is this “I don’t have a watch like that guy, because he’s got one, and what needs to happen is he needs to sell his watch so that we can both wear Timex watches.” That’s a regressive communist application that creates no wealth, but redistributes what wealth there is.

What I could do is get off my lame ass and work my ass off, make some money, get an education, and earn enough to wear a Patek watch. That’s the way wealth is created, it’s not created by spreading what’s already here around.


Summerspeaker

March 9, 2010 at 9:22 PM
Flag this comment

Bosses are parasites, Damian. They take the lion’s share because they have violent, state-supported control over the means of production. That’s not liberty or choice but coercion.


Peace

March 9, 2010 at 9:22 PM
Flag this comment

Population control?

I doubt isolated tribes in the Amazon consciously calculate the amount of people their village can support and then implement an authoritative restriction on reproduction to their women. When a tribe is suffering from lack of nutrition, there is no need for authoritative action on population control.

Read more …

People in devoloped countries have no need to care about the “tribe”. If a developed country acts like the US does, reproduction is actually encouraged, as we are counstantly bambarded with the temptation of fornication from the media, another way we differ from the isolated tribes.

The tribes carry their evolutive mammalian instincts to the highest order. The sharing and brotherhood of a family is one such instinct, as the parent supports the child. This basic instinct is being strangled by our culture and replaced with an instinct of every man for themselves, a prominent classification of the reptillian animal kingdom. Greed is the product of such instinctual modification.

Greed will never let peace be free.

Comments are closed for this item.