Advertisement
The PLoS Medicine Debate

Which Single Intervention Would Do the Most to Improve the Health of Those Living on Less Than $1 Per Day?

  • Gavin Yamey mail,

    To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: gyamey@plos.org

    X
  • on Behalf of the Interviewees
  • Published: October 23, 2007
  • DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040303
  • Published in PLOS Medicine

Reader Comments (7)

Post a new comment on this article

What would be the most helpful?

Posted by plosmedicine on 31 Mar 2009 at 00:16 GMT

Author: James Grimm
Position: Founder, Rain Harvester International
Institution: No affiliation was given
E-mail: hro.jim@gmail.com
Submitted Date: November 27, 2007
Published Date: November 28, 2007
This comment was originally posted as a “Reader Response” on the publication date indicated above. All Reader Responses are now available as comments.

I believe that providing a local, clean source of water to all communities would provide one of the best benefits. A plentiful source that would be used for cooking, drinking, irrigation and industry would increase the health of the community members.

It has also been noted that many people travel long distances to get their drinking water. How much productivity would be gained back if a source was local? How many other uses this water could have if it was local? Uses that are ignored if all the water you have is what you can carry? How much productivity is lost to water-borne disease?

Clean water allows for better health, crop production, animal husbandry and the use of water for light industry, etc... With clean water comes many things.

Competing interests declared: I am the founder of a water resource company in the concept stage that will attempt to service the developing world as well as the rich.