(no subject)

So I gather there's some asinine Don't Buy Gas Tomorrow campaign going around. Puhlease.

Break the Chain explores why these things don't work. (Via gristmill_rss, who alerted me to this in the first place. (Oh, and Snopes also has something to say.)

Gas prices aren't going anywhere until the market says so. Deal. Want to save money on gas? Carpool, drive less, take public transit, walk, bike, make sure your car's tuned up and its tires are properly inflated, don't speed, go easy on the braking and accelerating, and if you're buying a new car, make sure it's really fuel-efficient. Yes, some of these are only realistic if you live in a city, but a lot of them are available to anyone.

Drivers, I feel your pain. I do. But I'm also somewhat gleeful: we drive far too much in North America, and anything that'll help cut down on that is fine by me. Also my lungs.

I'm so distractible...

ozreison just posed an interesting question: are dead bodies, or are they not, sources of disease following a disaster?

Happily, the Pan American Journal of Public Health is there for us. O. Morgan of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine -- where, incidentally, my cousin Cynthia is going this fall to do a master's -- where was I? -- oh yes, O. Morgan wrote a review article on this very subject last year:

Infectious disease risks from dead bodies following natural disasters. [see comment]. [Review] [34 refs]

( Read more... )

If you scroll down the page I linked to, you'll be able to read an editorial that comments on this study in full. Money quote:

The article’s systematic approach demystifies and rules out the risk of major catastrophic disease outbreaks as a consequence of decaying bodies remaining exposed after natural events or conflicts. The article also offers simple guidelines for those unfortunate workers having to deal in a safe but respectful manner with a large number of unidentifiable bodies. Too often the adoption of exotic precautions, such as masks and protective suits, accompanies a disregard for the basic hygiene and sanitation measures advocated in this article.

The article emphasizes that survivors are a more likely source of disease outbreak. This point is well taken, and it calls attention to an effective strategy of disaster response: a strategy focused on providing primary health care for the victims and their families. Active surveillance and rapid restoration of normal public health services, including the provision of safe water and food, should be the priority.

So, dead bodies per se are not a risk unless the people had an infectious disease of some kind. Of course, as crankygrrl mentioned, if diseases such as cholera are endemic in the area, it's entirely likely that the breakdown of services and the water flooding everywhere could lead to an outbreak.

Help the survivors by supporting the Red Cross or your favourite disaster-response organization. makinglight is keeping a great list of resources.