5 ms·

I think you completely missed the point. The article is talking about developing countries with poor sanitation. Banupur, for instance, has a population of 58,

I think you completely missed the point. The article is talking about developing countries with poor sanitation. Banupur, for instance, has a population of 58,000 per square mile. What the the population density on your grandfather's farm? Do you think doing your business behind a house scales to 58,000 per square mile?

rbanffy 15y ago
> Do you think doing your business behind a house scales to 58,000 per square mile? At that density, you either are long dead from a cholera epidemic, or have a proper sanitation system already in place for decades, rendering this system completely irrelevant for the application being proposed - to provide a "waste disintegrator" for those without plumbing. 56000 people per square mile is about 3 times the density of São Paulo (where I live - about 7500/km2), which is slightly larger than New York's. Let's say it's 4 NYC's one on top of the other. Can you imagine New York without sanitation? Me neither.
- 6ren 15y ago
  Yes, a surgeon who worked in Nepal for charity for 10 years told me that his impact would have been greater digging ditches for sewers. Open sewers are a serious health issue in third world urban centers, enabling disease to spread quickly. The article is misleading in using the world "toilet" - the serious problem it addresses is sewage, not toilets.
bambax 15y ago
> Do you think doing your business behind a house scales to 58,000 per square mile? I don't know, but I wouldn't answer "of course not" right away, as you seem to assume. How do these people currently cope? My point was not that everyone should do as my grandfather's brother, twenty years ago. I'm just wondering why we suddenly need so much technology to solve a problem that's always been with us and that didn't use to be so terrifying. I'm wondering if we're afraid of "human waste" a little more than we should? I'm wondering if maybe there are simpler solutions that would scale a lot more, be a lot cheaper and a lot less disruptive than getting everyone to defecate in a microwave oven. (How do you build the devices? How do you get them to the people who will be using them? How do you make people use them? How to you maintain them? How do you replace them when they're broken? What do you do with the broken ones...?) I read a story some time ago (on HN maybe?) about how very simple advice had tremendous effects on people's health. Telling people to wash both hands after going to the bathroom, for instance, instead of just the one they use to clean themselves, yielded incredible results. I may be wrong, but this project, as described in the original article, doesn't sound right.
- rodh257 15y ago
  It sounds like you are basically saying there is not really a problem as long as you wash your hands? Have a look at some of the health problems that come up due to the fact that around 6-700 million people in india defecate openly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_India http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_... "In India there are 700 million people who do not have access to safe and hygienic toilets. The waterborne diseases this causes kill 500,000 children every year, mostly from diarrhea," http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Health/20071102/toilet_summit_071102/ http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Health/20071102/toilet_summit_0711... While yes the proposed solution does sound complex, it's better to try and make it work than just let the spread of disease continue
  - bambax 15y ago
    Effect of Intensive Handwashing Promotion on Childhood Diarrhea in High-Risk Communities in Pakistan Results: Children younger than 15 years living in households that received handwashing promotion and plain soap had a 53% lower incidence of diarrhea (95% confidence interval [CI], –65% to –41%) compared with children living in control neighborhoods. Infants living in households that received handwashing promotion and plain soap had 39% fewer days with diarrhea (95% CI, –61% to –16%) vs infants living in control neighborhoods. Severely malnourished children (weight for age z score, <–3.0) younger than 5 years living in households that received handwashing promotion and plain soap had 42% fewer days with diarrhea (95% CI, –69% to –16%) vs severely malnourished children in the control group. Similar reductions in diarrhea were observed among children living in households receiving antibacterial soap. http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/291/21/2547.full http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/291/21/2547.full
- hammock 15y ago
  You guys are going to rail me bc I don't have any sources, but I remember hearing that in many cases in the third world where purified clean water is introduced, health actually deteriorates because there is much disease and the clean water prevents children from developing antibodies to the these.
  - 15y ago
graywh 15y ago
The Banupur that has an approximate population of under 12,000?
- simonsarris 15y ago
  Yes, in 0.20 square miles making it the 28th most population-dense city.
- humbledrone 15y ago
  That doesn't mean its population density can't be higher per square mile. It just means that the city is smaller than one square mile. I can't find a direct source for Banupur, but Bally, which is nearby, works out to about 56,000 people per square mile (22,000/sq km), according to the town's official web page: http://howrah.gov.in/Templates/Area_popu.htm http://howrah.gov.in/Templates/Area_popu.htm .

rbanffy 15y ago

> Do you think doing your business behind a house scales to 58,000 per square mile? At that density, you either are long dead from a cholera epidemic, or have a proper sanitation system already in place for decades, rendering this system completely irrelevant for the application being proposed - to provide a "waste disintegrator" for those without plumbing. 56000 people per square mile is about 3 times the density of São Paulo (where I live - about 7500/km2), which is slightly larger than New York's. Let's say it's 4 NYC's one on top of the other. Can you imagine New York without sanitation? Me neither.

6ren 15y ago
Yes, a surgeon who worked in Nepal for charity for 10 years told me that his impact would have been greater digging ditches for sewers. Open sewers are a serious health issue in third world urban centers, enabling disease to spread quickly. The article is misleading in using the world "toilet" - the serious problem it addresses is sewage, not toilets.

bambax 15y ago

> Do you think doing your business behind a house scales to 58,000 per square mile? I don't know, but I wouldn't answer "of course not" right away, as you seem to assume. How do these people currently cope? My point was not that everyone should do as my grandfather's brother, twenty years ago. I'm just wondering why we suddenly need so much technology to solve a problem that's always been with us and that didn't use to be so terrifying. I'm wondering if we're afraid of "human waste" a little more than we should? I'm wondering if maybe there are simpler solutions that would scale a lot more, be a lot cheaper and a lot less disruptive than getting everyone to defecate in a microwave oven. (How do you build the devices? How do you get them to the people who will be using them? How do you make people use them? How to you maintain them? How do you replace them when they're broken? What do you do with the broken ones...?) I read a story some time ago (on HN maybe?) about how very simple advice had tremendous effects on people's health. Telling people to wash both hands after going to the bathroom, for instance, instead of just the one they use to clean themselves, yielded incredible results. I may be wrong, but this project, as described in the original article, doesn't sound right.

rodh257 15y ago
It sounds like you are basically saying there is not really a problem as long as you wash your hands? Have a look at some of the health problems that come up due to the fact that around 6-700 million people in india defecate openly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_India http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_... "In India there are 700 million people who do not have access to safe and hygienic toilets. The waterborne diseases this causes kill 500,000 children every year, mostly from diarrhea," http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Health/20071102/toilet_summit_071102/ http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Health/20071102/toilet_summit_0711... While yes the proposed solution does sound complex, it's better to try and make it work than just let the spread of disease continue
- bambax 15y ago
  Effect of Intensive Handwashing Promotion on Childhood Diarrhea in High-Risk Communities in Pakistan Results: Children younger than 15 years living in households that received handwashing promotion and plain soap had a 53% lower incidence of diarrhea (95% confidence interval [CI], –65% to –41%) compared with children living in control neighborhoods. Infants living in households that received handwashing promotion and plain soap had 39% fewer days with diarrhea (95% CI, –61% to –16%) vs infants living in control neighborhoods. Severely malnourished children (weight for age z score, <–3.0) younger than 5 years living in households that received handwashing promotion and plain soap had 42% fewer days with diarrhea (95% CI, –69% to –16%) vs severely malnourished children in the control group. Similar reductions in diarrhea were observed among children living in households receiving antibacterial soap. http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/291/21/2547.full http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/291/21/2547.full
hammock 15y ago
You guys are going to rail me bc I don't have any sources, but I remember hearing that in many cases in the third world where purified clean water is introduced, health actually deteriorates because there is much disease and the clean water prevents children from developing antibodies to the these.
- 15y ago

graywh 15y ago

The Banupur that has an approximate population of under 12,000?

simonsarris 15y ago
Yes, in 0.20 square miles making it the 28th most population-dense city.
humbledrone 15y ago
That doesn't mean its population density can't be higher per square mile. It just means that the city is smaller than one square mile. I can't find a direct source for Banupur, but Bally, which is nearby, works out to about 56,000 people per square mile (22,000/sq km), according to the town's official web page: http://howrah.gov.in/Templates/Area_popu.htm http://howrah.gov.in/Templates/Area_popu.htm .