Why have we ventured to use chemicals as if it was like spraying fertiliser on fields, which was the recommended practice. and have after months been advised otherwise?
by Victor Cherubim
Sri Lanka is ranked 61 among 66 emerging economies by The Economist, some five places over Venezuela, as one of the nations most in peril,due to COVID-19 pandemic.
We are informed that this is due to Sri Lanka's high public debt, its mounting foreign debt repayments which are due this year and its low foreign reserves. It is thus ranked the worst hit economy in South Asia.
It is well known that The Economist has taken umbrage with Sri Lanka over a long period.It is also known that Sri Lanka would find it awfully hard to rebut these figures due to its weak
position especially at this crisis time,tackling both a pandemic and an economic situation.
But as is known, Debt is not only a Sri Lankan problem,but a world problem. The world debt stands around US$ 250 Trillion. The world has never been so indebted.The problem has been brewing for decades, at least since 2008,which itself was a problem about debt. The situation has become worse,with the virus being a catalyst to bring it to world attention.
Any debt is deflationary, so to reduce it will cause a reduction in demand,already hit by three factors, the virus,demography and technological advancement.
Deflation makes debt more expensive and makes assets cheaper,the same assets that much of this debt is based upon. By quantitative easing or throwing even more money at the problem, nations hope to do their best to stop it, and in the end they may well win, but the cost would be inflation in double digits.
No one wants the world economic system, or the economy of Sri Lanka to freeze up, but what exactly is the message sent by the Economist in its ranking of Sri Lanka and other similar nations? Is it their plan to drive us to "economic nationalism"? Do we have our Action Plan B to contain, both the debt and the virus?
It is up to us to challenge, those who think that Sri Lanka is a pushover, perhaps,at a time of our choosing?
Why use Decontamination Chambers and disinfectant sprays on people?
While tracing,testing and repulsing the spread of COVID-19 in Sri Lanka, have we tried to better the West?
Over the weeks we see on TV of mass decontamination chambers,the spraying of chemical disinfectants on people and places, inside trains, buses,private vehicles, as a precautionary hygiene measure.
Today, we are told by Sri Lanka College of Microbiologists that "spraying of people with chemical disinfectants ,such as chlorine compounds,oxonated water and soapy water and (UV) radiation is physically and psychologically harmful and does not limit either the spread of COVID-19, nor has it been tested, as clinically acceptable".
Whilst the West and UK in particular, has always been guided by a team of Scientists and have not resorted to spray of chemicals on people or places,Sri Lanka,appears to do better.
While it is accepted that each nation has tackled the virus in its own way.
If spray of chemicals is a so called,"weak science," in UK, why is it any different in Sri Lanka?
Why have we ventured to use chemicals as if it was like spraying fertiliser on fields, which was the recommended practice and have after months been advised otherwise?
The contention is "even if a person is infected with the COVID-19 virus,spraying the external part of the body does not kill the virus inside the body and may worsen the clinical condition of the individual",microbiologists now warn.
Why was this advice not available to all all concerned earlier?
Why was the WHO "World Health Organisation" recommendation against the spraying of individuals or groups with chemical disinfectants or detergents" not acted upon?
Perhaps,in our anxiety to protect the public and to sanitise the mode of transport, have we tried to better the "science"?
Post a Comment