Zero
Population Growthof Greater Boston
Zero
Population Growth
Volume 9, Number 3 |
May/June 1999 |
When? - On May 15th, Saturday, from 10:00 AM to 4:30 PM
Why? - Because, this year, the Earth will reach six billion people. This is twice as many as existed on Earth 40 years ago, four times as many as existed on Earth a hundred years ago, ten times as many as existed on Earth three hundred years ago, and half as many as are going to exist on Earth in fifty more years. And we are using up nonrenewable resources before we have had the chance to figure out if we are going to be able to live without them. Think about it. 6,000,000,000 people!
What can we do about it? Find out.
Speakers?
As the 20th century draws to a close, we find that we are being overwhelmed by our success as a species. The human population grows without restraint, our activities are steadily destroying the global ecosystem in which we evolved, and we occupy and dominate all major ecosystems. We are no longer a few bands of inconsequential primates roving the grasslands of East Africa as we were 3 million years ago.
The human species, through the instrument of culture, has become the dominant force of planetary ecological change and species extinction. Our adaptations have become maladaptive for us and catastrophic for other species. Moreover, the human species as a whole now displays all four major characteristics of a malignant process: rapid, uncontrolled growth; invasion and destruction of adjacent normal tissues (ecosystems); metastasis (distant colonization); and dedifferentiation (loss of distinctiveness in individual components). We have become a rapacious, malignant epieco-pathologic process engaged in the conversion of all plant, animal, organic, and inorganic planetary material into human biomass or its adaptive adjuncts. If this diagnosis (hypothesis) is true, what is the prognosis -- what are the consequences? As those whose specialty is the study of human beings, what is the response of anthropologists to this question? This interdisciplinary symposium, with the same title, was rejected twice by the American Association for the Advancement of Science for its 1993 and 1994 annual meetings because of its controversial title; rejection was accompanied by the instruction "You may not ask that question."
One of my favorite games is "If I Were King". It has one player: me. Naturally, it's lots of fun -- because I always win.
But I don't mean to be selfish. You can play too. Would you like to give it a try?
The rules are simple. You are the King and Supreme Ruler of your country. (Pick any country; it doesn't matter.) Your subjects are adoring and fanatically loyal, so they obey your every whim without question. You get to set all policies--including the structure of government, the laws of the land, the legal and enforcement systems, foreign policy, and so forth. It's all up to you.
OK, it's your turn. Go!
Oh, you say. But I've never run a country. I don't have any experience in this sort of thing. I've never given it any thought. I would have no idea what to do.
Well, I say. If you won't play, then I will. Here goes!
(Actually, first I should warn you that I have given it some thought. Quite a bit, in fact -- mostly as a result of reading lots of books about the environment. So my rules might not be to your liking. If not, feel free to take over my kingdom and change the rules to anything you wish.)
Never happen, you say? Hopelessly idealistic? And incredibly naive to boot?
Well, maybe not. In fact, that's just about how humans lived for most of their hundred thousand year history. Most of the rules would have simply not applied, since technology was not sufficiently advanced. And the rest would be too obvious to state. It's only in the last hundred years or so that we've had to worry about this stuff.
Yes, I know. That was then, and this is now. We can't go back to some misty-eyed vision of our past. We have to deal with reality.
OK, you're right. I yield.
Your turn!
Man has overcome many of the forces that threatened his existence in former centuries. His life span has been increased by medical science, his technology has advanced rapidly, he has become increasingly more in control of his environment, which has been his adversary, and a higher percentage of the world’s population has more economic security and creature comforts than at any other time during man’s history on earth....By the late 1960s, there was a hypothesis that has not only held up for several years, but that has also been strengthened by new evidence and the work of others. The hypothesis postulates that man’s increasing anxiety is a product of population explosion, the disappearance of new habitable land to colonize, the approaching depletion of raw materials necessary to sustain life, and growing awareness that “spaceship earth” cannot indefinitely support human life in the style to which man and his technology have become accustomed. Man is a territorial animal who reacts to being “hemmed in” with the same basic patterns as the lower forms of life. Man tells himself other reasons to explain his behavior while important life patterns are the same for non-thinking animals. Man has always used “getting away from the crowd” as a way of allaying anxiety and stabilizing his adjustment. The thesis here is that man became increasingly aware that his world is limited in size through rapid communication and television, and rapid travel. When animals are confined to a limited space, their numbers are increasing, they test the limits of the compound, there is more mobility and moving around, and they finally come to live more in piles that spread evenly over existing space. Man has become more mobile the past twenty-five years, more people move more often, and a higher percentage of the population is coming to live in the large metropolitan centers.
Another theoretical notion is important to this background thinking; it is another predictable characteristic of man. With his logical thinking and knowledge, he could have known decades ago that he was on a collision course with his environment. His emotions, reactiveness, and its cause-and-effect thinking prevent him from really “knowing” what he could know...Science has enabled man to get beyond cause-and-effect thinking in many areas of life. He was first able to use systems in astronomy, far removed from him personally. Later he was able to “think systems” about the physical sciences, and later in the natural sciences. In the past decades, he had some notion that systems thinking also applies to himself and his own emotional functioning, but in an emotional field, even the most disciplined systems thinker reverts to cause-and-effect thinking and to taking action based more on emotional reactiveness than objective thinking. This phenomenon plays an important part in man’s decisions and actions about social problems.
Murray Bowen developed a new theory of human behavior, “Bowen theory” or “family systems theory”. He believed that the study of relationships, including that of nation to nation, needs to be given high priority if mankind is to avoid extinction.
As all ZPG members know, there is a tremendous gap between the public's understanding of the problem of overpopulation and the severity of the problem. This is the gap, or chasm we can call it, that ZPG needs to help fill. To not do so will result in a human disaster greater than all the other disasters in history put together.
Now, isn't that a lot of responsibility to put on an organization made up almost exclusively of volunteers? Yes, but what is the alternative?
There are actually three. One is to let history run its course and watch how the effects of human overpopulation are going to turn the human race from the pinnacle of evolutionary development to a hoard of rampaging savages trying to gobble up the last remaining resources on the planet before collapsing itself. We are already seeing examples of this future with declining biodiversity, global warming and brutal wars being fought over resources and space. It's in the papers everyday.
The next alternative is to talk about it. This alternative includes going to meetings and/or lectures, and writing an occasional letter-to-the-editor. As this is more than most people are doing, it is easy to feel comfortable with this alternative.
The third alternative requires some degree of sacrifice. There will be nobody around to encourage us to do this. There will be plenty of people around to criticize us for sounding the alarm. It will require an additional burden to our already busy schedules and most likely will result in a financial shortfall.
As members of ZPG, we have a choice. Excuses for the first two alternatives, there are plenty of. And nobody will criticize us for acquiescing to these easier paths, at least not while we are still alive. But, if there is to be any hope at all, we need more people to work for change. Those are our choices.
During the past year the Chapter had two provocative presentations by Mr. Roland Van Liew in support of Quinacrine sterilizations. Quinacrine is an inexpensive sterilization method mired in controversy that has surrounded and blocked its use. Quinacrine has been used as an anti-malarial drug for six decades by millions of people worldwide in the treatment of giardia, lupus, and malaria, and the FDA has long accepted it for these purposes. Roland Van Liew, an enthusiastic supporter of Quinacrine sterilization, reported that two physicians, Dr. Stephen Mumford and Dr. Elton Kessel, developed a technique to use Quinacrine in pellet form that caused sterilization when inserted into the uterus, by scarring and blocking the oviducts, thus preventing the eggs from reaching the uterus. These two doctors purchased the pellets from a Swiss pharmaceutical company and distributed them in third world countries such as Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, and Vietnam. Since 1980 more than 100,000 women have taken Quinacrine. Mumford and Kessel claim that thousands of lives were saved, as pregnancies were avoided, thus reducing deaths from the complications of childbirth. They believe Quinacrine to be a very successful method, made all the more so because of the low cost and simplicity of its application. They state that there were no serious side effects, much less pain, and fewer complications than are associated with pregnancies or surgical sterilization.
However, major problems have arisen that block its use almost completely. Quinacrine has not been approved by the FDA for use in sterilization. There have been claims that Quinacrine has not been appropriately tested and found safe and that Mumford and Kessel have used women in developing countries as test subjects with little concern for their welfare. Mumford and Kessel insist that the FDA had approved the drug, then withdrew their approval for sterilizations.
There has been a great deal of controversy in the U.S. and abroad about the motivations of the two men and about its safety and efficacy. Mumford and Kessel's primary stated concern is to slow the world's population growth and to reduce immigration into the U.S. Concern has been raised in the population, public health and women’s rights communities about the use of Quinacrine on women in developing countries without US FDA support and approval. As government officials and women’s rights groups in developing countries learned that Quinacrine sterilization was being used without FDA support, many were suspicious of the motives of Mumford and Kessel. Mumford and Kessel charge that the Vatican and groups against all contraceptives and sterilization continue to fight vigorously against Quinacrine through the media and political channels. But this overlooks the opposition to Quinacrine by groups that have long supported family planning. The World Health Organization, AVSC and Family Health International all have stated that there needs to be further testing before Quinacrine is used on women. India and Vietnam have banned its use (two countries not known for their subservience to the Vatican).
The problem with any future testing in order to get FDA approval is that there is no money to be made by the pharmaceutical companies, (Quinacrine is cheap and readily available, and is being replaced by other drugs as an antimalarial medication.) Therefore, few if any companies would put up the funds (about $8 million) to support the extensive necessary testing.
Yet USDA and FDA standards are respected worldwide and cannot be disregarded. Without FDA approval, Quinacrine will remain under a cloud and its potential use will be blocked. People and organizations, including ZPG, will not support the continued use of this drug (or any drug for contraceptive purposes) until it is approved by the FDA. This is largely because, given the history of some coercive family planning programs, it is imperative that every contraceptive is judged to be safe for US and other citizens, by some internationally recognized approving agency, such as the FDA. ZPG believes that efforts to bypass the health and safety of women and children are wrong and will only set back the cause of humanely stopping population growth and reaching a sustainable balance of population and resources.
We think that Quinacrine should be tested by the Food and Drug Administration to be determined either safe or unsafe for women in the US and around the world. Its cost and ease of distribution holds the potential to help women around the world by offering another alternative form of sterilization.
If you wish to learn more about this topic, there are several web sites presenting both sides of the arguments. Here are a few:
www.Quinacrine.com
http://www.AVSC.org/workpap/wp6/wp_6.html
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/grhf-asia/watches/techwatch/quinacrine.html
(original published link; now obsolete)
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/grhf-asia/suchana/9999/quinacrine.html
(replacement link for above)
http://www.choice.org/2.quinacrine.012699.html
http://www.nurseweek.com/news/98-10/26g.html
The discussion brought up the desperate need for more contraceptive
choices both in the US and around the world. We urge readers to contact
your elected officials and encourage them to support research and testing
of new contraceptives, including Quinacrine in order to give women and
men more and safer contraceptive methods. Access to reproductive health
care and empowering women are the crucial if we wish to stop population
growth and improve quality of life!
After 4 years of brilliant editing of the chapter newsletter, Barbara Clapp is looking to switch jobs in the chapter. If you have a computer, email and editing skills and a desire to help spread the message, call or email Barbara at 603-643-6517, b.clapp@valley.net.
Join us for the ZPG/Boston Chapter’s Annual Meeting, on Monday, May 17th at the North East Brewing Company, 1314 Commonwealth Avenue in Boston (Brighton). This location is near Harvard Street. Dinner will be at 6:30 PM, and the meeting will begin at about 7:30 PM. Come anytime after 5:30 for drinks (individually purchased) and camaraderie.
There will be a buffet, simple but plentiful, with a chicken and a vegetarian pasta dish. The cost for the entire event, tips and taxes included, will be $17.25 per person. All drinks, other than tap water, will be extra. The same applies to desserts or other items ordered individually.
Main Agenda Items: a report on the May 15th Conference (Six Billion People Day), a brief presentation by Shannon Shurick on the progress of the Coalition working to pass the Contraceptive Coverage Bill, some discussion of where the chapter should direct its energies during the coming year, and the election of officers for this coming year.
Directions by subway: Take the 'B' train on the Green Line to Griggs Street or Long Avenue (two names, one stop), which is one or two stops past Harvard Street. The North East Brewing Company is on the left side of Commonwealth Avenue if you come from Boston, directly across from the subway stop, with an obvious sign which you can see the moment you step off the train.
If coming by car: #1314 is several blocks (one or two subway stops) west of the intersection of Commonwealth Avenue and Harvard Street. There is valet parking for $5.00 for those who do not wish to look for parking in this over-populated world.
RSVP by Wednesday, May 12th, with your check made out to ZPG Boston, to Mary Van Vleck at 146 Chestnut Circle, Lincoln, MA 01773. If you have questions or a last minute change of plans, please call Mary at (781) 259-9828
Reservations re requested but not required. But in either case, let us know that you’re coming.
Please see the meeting schedule for general information and other meeting dates.
