4 ms·

This is important work. An effective non-toxic indoor mosquito control device will eliminate much suffering and death. Malaria prevents Africa from developing

This is important work. An effective non-toxic indoor mosquito control device will eliminate much suffering and death. Malaria prevents Africa from developing to middle-class societies with stable populations and functioning governments that are able to control environmental pollution. Therefore malaria indirectly affects all humans. I think an effective indoor mosquito control system will detect mosquitos with microphones, aim with a zoom camera, and shoot mosquitoes with soapy water droplets. Soapy water kills bugs. The soap eliminates water's surface tension. Once the bug touches the droplet, it sticks to it. As the bug struggles, it gets pulled inside the droplet. The water blocks respiration, causing the bug to suffocate. For manual insect killing, a spray bottle with soapy water is far better than an aerosol bottle of toxic chemicals or a laser.

vagrantJin 6y ago
> middle-class societies with stable populations and functioning governments that are able to control environmental pollution I'm not entirely sure if this is sarcastic trolling or an actual belief of a sane individual but this, this is a load of garbage. So what, if Malaria gets solved the whole continent will suddenly have functioning governments and economies? Do you know how big the continent is? It's history? I hope you were trolling.
- mleonhard 6y ago
  I grew up in Ghana. I saw first-hand that women in poverty have many children but those with middle-class circumstances have fewer. Africa's population explosion [0] will slow only when the people climb out of poverty [1]. Total world population is half of the climate change CO2 equation. Malaria has an incredible suppressing effect on entire societies [2]. Many young children get sick with it monthly and miss school. Older children miss school to care for sick siblings. Parents miss multiple weeks of work every year because of it. And even after they're well enough to work again, they're not 100%. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Africa#Population_growth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Africa#Populat... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_and_fertility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_and_fertility [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria#Economic_impact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria#Economic_impact
  - vagrantJin 6y ago
    And Ghana is a good analogue for an entire continent? > I saw first-hand that women in poverty have many children but those with middle-class circumstances have fewer. This is true everywhere. Even in super rich first world post industrial nations. > Parents miss multiple weeks of work every year because of it. Yes. Otherwise known as sick leave. What's your point? If a country cannot afford to administer its own healthcare and economic policy, that has nothing to do with Malaria. The anecdotal evidence is appreciated, and well worth looking into, but the claim that an entire continent's economic and development future hangs on the existence of a treatable disease is hogwash, ignorant and downright irresponsible. Theres work to do here, and spreading dangerously ignorant information does not help one bit.
    - mleonhard 6y ago
      I did not mean to imply that malaria is the only thing preventing Africa's development. African societies have various problems which prevent their development. Malaria is a common one. Parents missing work leads to reduced wealth production. For the 65% of Africans who rely on subsistence farming [0], sickness at critical times (harvest) can result in drastic economic losses. Children frequently missing school end up with lower education levels and reduced lifetime wealth production. Malaria can also cause lifelong intellectual disabilities [1], which destroy lifetime wealth production. > If a country cannot afford to administer its own healthcare and economic policy, that has nothing to do with Malaria. This is a bold claim. Can you please explain? It seems to me that a country's wealth influences its ability to address specific health problems. And when those health problems reduce wealth production, there is a vicious cycle. The question is, "How big is the effect of malaria on wealth production?" Gates Foundation says it's "billions of dollars per year" [1]. That is tiny compared to Africa's $2.6T GDP. I think Gates Foundation is oversimplifying. I believe multiplying effects exist, especially with education and childrens' health. This was seen with long-term deworming experiments [2] which showed that even the siblings of treated children, born long after the treatment period, also had higher lifetime earnings. > is hogwash, ignorant and downright irresponsible. Please try to disagree without insulting others personally. [0] https://borgenproject.org/tag/subsistence-farming/ https://borgenproject.org/tag/subsistence-farming/ [1] https://www.gatesfoundation.org/what-we-do/global-health/malaria https://www.gatesfoundation.org/what-we-do/global-health/mal... [2] https://blog.givewell.org/2016/07/26/deworming-might-huge-impact-might-close-zero-impact/ https://blog.givewell.org/2016/07/26/deworming-might-huge-im...

vagrantJin 6y ago

> middle-class societies with stable populations and functioning governments that are able to control environmental pollution I'm not entirely sure if this is sarcastic trolling or an actual belief of a sane individual but this, this is a load of garbage. So what, if Malaria gets solved the whole continent will suddenly have functioning governments and economies? Do you know how big the continent is? It's history? I hope you were trolling.

mleonhard 6y ago
I grew up in Ghana. I saw first-hand that women in poverty have many children but those with middle-class circumstances have fewer. Africa's population explosion [0] will slow only when the people climb out of poverty [1]. Total world population is half of the climate change CO2 equation. Malaria has an incredible suppressing effect on entire societies [2]. Many young children get sick with it monthly and miss school. Older children miss school to care for sick siblings. Parents miss multiple weeks of work every year because of it. And even after they're well enough to work again, they're not 100%. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Africa#Population_growth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Africa#Populat... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_and_fertility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_and_fertility [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria#Economic_impact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria#Economic_impact
- vagrantJin 6y ago
  And Ghana is a good analogue for an entire continent? > I saw first-hand that women in poverty have many children but those with middle-class circumstances have fewer. This is true everywhere. Even in super rich first world post industrial nations. > Parents miss multiple weeks of work every year because of it. Yes. Otherwise known as sick leave. What's your point? If a country cannot afford to administer its own healthcare and economic policy, that has nothing to do with Malaria. The anecdotal evidence is appreciated, and well worth looking into, but the claim that an entire continent's economic and development future hangs on the existence of a treatable disease is hogwash, ignorant and downright irresponsible. Theres work to do here, and spreading dangerously ignorant information does not help one bit.
  - mleonhard 6y ago
    I did not mean to imply that malaria is the only thing preventing Africa's development. African societies have various problems which prevent their development. Malaria is a common one. Parents missing work leads to reduced wealth production. For the 65% of Africans who rely on subsistence farming [0], sickness at critical times (harvest) can result in drastic economic losses. Children frequently missing school end up with lower education levels and reduced lifetime wealth production. Malaria can also cause lifelong intellectual disabilities [1], which destroy lifetime wealth production. > If a country cannot afford to administer its own healthcare and economic policy, that has nothing to do with Malaria. This is a bold claim. Can you please explain? It seems to me that a country's wealth influences its ability to address specific health problems. And when those health problems reduce wealth production, there is a vicious cycle. The question is, "How big is the effect of malaria on wealth production?" Gates Foundation says it's "billions of dollars per year" [1]. That is tiny compared to Africa's $2.6T GDP. I think Gates Foundation is oversimplifying. I believe multiplying effects exist, especially with education and childrens' health. This was seen with long-term deworming experiments [2] which showed that even the siblings of treated children, born long after the treatment period, also had higher lifetime earnings. > is hogwash, ignorant and downright irresponsible. Please try to disagree without insulting others personally. [0] https://borgenproject.org/tag/subsistence-farming/ https://borgenproject.org/tag/subsistence-farming/ [1] https://www.gatesfoundation.org/what-we-do/global-health/malaria https://www.gatesfoundation.org/what-we-do/global-health/mal... [2] https://blog.givewell.org/2016/07/26/deworming-might-huge-impact-might-close-zero-impact/ https://blog.givewell.org/2016/07/26/deworming-might-huge-im...