The Necessity to Fund Researches on Brain-Eating Amoeba - Essay Example

Brain Eating Amoeba Naegleria Fowleri is the scientific for the brain-eating amoeba, which is a free-living organism, found in freshwater sources; when one is infected by this organism, death is sudden irrespective of an individual’s health. The single-celled organism was first discovered in 1965, in the US although there have been cases where it has been found in other continents. Deaths are extremely rare, and it is estimated that out of over ten million people exposed to water with the amoeba, only one is infected. As is often the case with a rare condition, traditional sources of revenue for research purposes have proven unwilling to support the quest for a cure. This is a likely explanation for why there has been so little in the way or research to come up with a treatment. The contention of this paper is to argue that despite the low infection rates, concerned organizations and governments have a moral obligation to fund research and find treatment for this amoebic infection. The amoeba is mostly found in warm freshwater areas; it is known to survive at temperatures as high as 113 degrees Fahrenheit, they breed in puddles, warm lakes, household and spa water that has not be treated. The amoeba gets into the brain by passing through the nose into the brain where 7 days after exposure, the victim begins to experience symptoms (Viegas). They are similar to those of viral meningitis and include; headaches, fever as well as hallucinations blurred vision and other depending on the individual’s physiology. Various treatments have been experimented on with some degree of success; some doctors treat it using powerful antibiotics and blood transfusions. However, while this has been known to work, it is often a gamble between antibiotics and the amoeba, one that they have no way of controlling or manipulating to their advantage. One of the few Doctors in the world researching on the amoeba Dr Cabral says it is very difficult to get funding since most funding bodies do not consider it a very serious threat (DePompa). Furthermore, pharmaceutical firms are especially reluctant to fund expensive research, which is unlikely to yield returns since its very low demand. From a business point of view, this might sound logical but taking to account some of the isolated cases and the potential for more infection albeit small, one is forced to question the morality of such reasoning. Take the case of Hally a 9-year-old Kansas girls who died after a case of the amoeba. It is suspected she had been infected after swimming over the Fourth of July weekend with her friends (Yan and Cohen). The amoeba brought to a close a promising life of a girl who according to her obituary was outgoing, friendly and aspired to become a basketball player in the future. The fact that it is not even possible to tell how or when she was infected is worrying since it means every time someone is swimming or are in contact with water, they are at risk. The implication is that water sports are a gamble since one cannot be sure if they will be infected although they are almost guaranteed death should they be. This is the second time someone has died of the same course in the course of the last 3 years in the Kansas area after a boy succumbed to the same in 2011. The fact that children are the most common victims should provide justification, at least from a humanistic perspective for availing the requite funds to develop a treatment. In St. John Parish, the water systems were scheduled for chlorine burning after it was discovered that the water in the domestic and industrial reservoirs was infected with the amoeba. Some of the preventive actions that have been taken aside from the burn include, having public pools closed, even water taps, and domestic water sources temporarily replaced with distilled or bottled water (Dall). While admitting that prevention is indeed better than cure, the fact that such efforts to curb the disease are being taken suggest that the issue can potentially get very serious. When the amoeba can get into domestic water supplies, it means that children playing with water whether in the kiddie pool of even the bathtub are exposed to the amoeba. That children are the most likely victims weakens claims that preventive measures can be applied since they may not even understand the threat or how to implement the precautions. Because of the complicated water supply systems, it is impossible for anyone to be sure that the water they use is free of amoeba (Siddiqui and Naveed 1817). Therefore, governments should put more emphasis on developing treatment since essentially, the fact that the amoeba are present in many water sources means everyone especially young children are at risk and should be provided with the safety net of a cure. Some people may argue that given the low incidence of infection, the money that may be spent looking for a cure for the condition caused by the amoeba would be better-put in researching on bigger problems like AIDs and Cancer. These other diseases cause millions of deaths per year and therefore they have been touted as investments that are more worthwhile. While this argument sounds plausible, it is one sided and fundamentally flawed. To use hypothetical case study, imagine a situation where the police discovered there is a serial killer whose modus operandi involved killing once every ten years. Naturally, the fact that they are also aware of more urgent crimes that involved more victims does not make them ignore the killer they have identified. In the same way, it should be considered that when Halley and other victims die, to their families it does not really matter if the disease is common or not. To them and those who will lose family and friends to the amoeba in future, it is no different from HIV or cancer because the ultimate result of all of them is fatal. The moral thing to do is prioritize tasks and resources such that each concern in addressed no matter how trivial it appears. Furthermore, the fact that infection is almost an automatic death sentence has caused many people to fear participating in water sports since they can never be sure of their safety especially if cases of infections have been reported. As a result, areas that depend on tourism and sporting activities for their revenue stand to lose millions of dollars as tourists opt to go to places where the risk is lower. In the course of the last half century it has been discovered, it is quite possible that more money has been lost in terms of tourist revenues than what it would cost to develop a cure. Although this paper is not agitating a cure to replace preventative measures which are unequivocally more important. It is likely that if people knew they could access both preventive and curative intervention, they might feel safer in water whether at home or in water sports. Conclusion Ultimately, stakeholders such as public hospitals universities, government labs and private and public research institutions have a moral obligation to potential victims of the amoeba. Failure to fund research on the amoeba is immoral since it proves that those responsible for providing funding and research are interested in projects likely to bring bigger profits and that healthcare and welfare have been commercialized. It is critical for the concerned organizations to remember that they have a duty to victims of all diseases and that the fact that the effects brain eating amoeba can likely be treated makes it morally objectionable to balk on research funding. Works Cited Dall, Tania. “Brain-eating amoeba found in Louisiana parishs water system”. US Today. August 28 2014. Web. 18 Sep. 2014 DePompa, Rachel. “VCU expert on brain-eating amoeba”. NBC Studio 12. June 30 2012. Web. 18 Sep. 2014 Siddiqui, Ruqaiyyah, and Naveed Ahmed Khan. "Is ritual cleansing a missing link between fatal infection and brain-eating amoebae?." Clinical infectious diseases 54.12 (2012): 1817-1818. Viegas, Jeniffer. "Brain-eating amoeba thrives in warm, fresh water." Discovery News. August 18, 2011. Web. 18 Sep. 2014http://news. discovery. com/human/brain-eating-amoeba-110818. html. Yan, Holly and Cohen, Elizabeth. 9-year-old girl dies from brain-eating amoeba in water. CNN News. 2014. Web. 18 Sep. 2014 http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/15/health/brain-eating-amoeba/ Read More