Arsenic Reducing Techniques & Unwarranted Hurdles
The Bangladesh Observer 14 Jan 2003 / NFB 10 Feb 2003 by Sylvia Mortoza
The human body can excrete arsenic only at a certain maximum rate. This rate
may vary with the individual but when arsenic is ingested at a rate greater than
can be excreted by the kidneys, it will build up in the liver, spleen and blood
because arsenic is a cumulative poison. However it is possible to help people if
arsenic can be excluded from the diet altogether, in which case whatever has
accumulated in the body, this will be excreted within a matter of days or weeks
with the exception of the portion that has been sequestered in the nails and
hair. What this means in practical terms is, if the patient is able to drink
only arsenic-free water, and provided the victim has not reached the point of no
return, he will be put back on the road to good health. This is why technologies
for reducing the amount of arsenic in the water are so important, at least until
a permanent solution can be found....
We know that scientists and others are working round the clock to find
solutions. As such it comes as a surprise to find the government has placed a
ban on the marketing and distributing of such technologies. Whereas we agree
there is a genuine need to assess all possible technologies and put them through
their paces, to place any restriction on technologies that have been properly
tested is to our minds, immoral especially when Bangladesh is struggling to
mitigate the arsenic toxicity in the drinking water. Surely a more sensible
approach is called for when nearly 80 million people are at risk? And as this
dreadfully toxic element is in the food chain too, we cannot afford to waste
time. Unfortunately, according to reports, people without scruples are busy
making money at the expense of the afflicted and this is quite untenable. How
people can profit on other people's misery is beyond our comprehension but when
genuine people who have kept in mind the special needs of Bangladeshi people
like efficiency and the appropriateness of the technology, are being handicapped
by red tape, we despair for our nation. The process of testing tubewells is also
too slow for us to drag our feet where technology is concerned. Therefore the
process of certification must be speeded up.
Already the official mitigation project has earned a bad name and been termed
"weak-kneed and lacking in coordination" (between implementing
agencies and donors). It has also been said that some western marketing
companies, aided and abetted by some of the donor agencies, are taking full
advantage of the situation and are carving out a market for their arsenic
filtration devices. This too must not be allowed more especially when there are
some promising home-grown technologies that are economically viable and socially
acceptable available. In other words once a technique has been field tested and
found suitable there is no logical reason for not releasing it to the public.
|