Six Modern Plagues and How We Are Causing Them (Hardcover)

Emergence of new diseases and the reemergence of old ones is indeed a real concern, but Walters's politically correct philosophy prevents him from offering any real useful advice. Instead, the book amounts to little more than a well-written rant about the horrors of modern society and technology. Walters's view is basically that mankind's disruption of nature is causing "ecodemics"-disease outbreaks caused mankind's tampering with nature by doing such things as building homes (or sprawl as he calls it), entering the forests, and world travel.

It is true that human actions do spread disease. But that is hardly a revelation since many diseases spread by human contact or by traveling vectors like mosquitoes. World travel throughout the ages has spread diseases across continents and Western nations are now seeing the emergence of new diseases and the reemergence of old ones. Clearly, we do have a need for disease-control efforts, and we should learn from the past, which Walters might say is his point. But that's not where his argument leads.

Walters says we must address these causes by "protecting and restoring ecological wholeness upon which our health depends." The implication is that there should be fewer people, living in smaller, more isolated communities. But Walters's cure is more imaginary than achievable. How are we going to drastically reduce population and return to isolationist societies? It just isn't going to happen, and it wouldn't be a good thing. Thanks to globalization, economic growth, and human ingenuity, the average lifespan is now longer than anytime in history. With economic growth, we have been able to make remarkable progress in the battle against disease. Aggressive human action has removed smallpox from the menu of diseases in the transmission cycle (only an act of terrorism could bring it back). Determined efforts, rather than passive responses (which Walters recommends), have made the last decade less disease-ridden.

That is not to say the challenges don't continue. In addition to emerging infections in the Western world, people in developing nations suffer from diseases on a catastrophic scale. Consider the simple fact that people living in huts lack things that most people have in those "sprawling" neighborhoods that Walters dubs "shortsighted efforts to make the world more hospitable for humans." They lack, for instance, barriers to mosquito entry such as screened windows-leaving them exposed to malaria-carrying insects that produce several hundred million illnesses and several million deaths every year. Most of malaria's victims are children. The spraying of DDT on the walls of these homes-one of the most affordable options for the poor-could act as an alternative barrier to mosquitoes. But Walters never offers such advice or even bothers to acknowledge the millions who die owing to primitive living conditions.

Walters's presentation of the "facts" about many of the diseases should also be read with a critical eye as he often doesn't tell the whole story. For example, consider his chapter on antibiotic use in animals, which he suggests is creating antibiotic resistant organisms in our food that pose serious risks. He basically says that farmers give these medications to farm animals because they are lazy and just want to make "extra money." While there is some risk of resistant microbes developing, the impact is far more limited that Walters suggests, and risk can be managed. Most resistance problems result from the use of antibiotics in hospitals. Walters doesn't note that fact or offer useful advice about how to address the problem. For example, proper cooking of meat can greatly reduce risks, but he doesn't recommend that. Nor does he note the benefits of antibiotics-which reduce other risks and make this agricultural practice a net benefit to society. Agricultural antibiotic use means that animals are healthier can be raised on less feed. As a result, less land is planted to feed animals, reducing farm related runoff problems and making more land available for wildlife. Lower production costs and higher production means that more people can eat at a lower cost. And reduced feed intake means reduced animal waste, which reduces the environmental impacts of such waste. Antibiotics produce healthier animals, which translates into healthier meat for human consumption.