- 2,238
- 79
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2009
This guy is rich as #%%# he needs to retire and not give a**** about anything
Bill Gates Foundation accused of forcing vaccination at Gunpoint.
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by thorrocksjs,
- Start date
- 1,177
- 10
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2008
Yeah I understand, Africa has been completely destroyed by previous events.
But it seems like Bill Gates has helped out the country a lot with all the effort and money he's put into it.
I don't think he wants to cause these people harm, but he see's the enormous potential Africa has and he wants to help put them back on track.
I saw Food, Inc. and they mentioned the Monsanto Seeds.
I heard they also make the other seeds in the area obsolete too by affecting their DNA or something.
I am against the genetic enhancement of plants, but they do have their slight upside.
While longterm is probably very bad, I think it can help the starvation issues of Africa if these genetically enhanced seeds are used there.
- 2,328
- 2,078
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2010
Time will tell, but we know one thing about China... it doesn't go around touting ideals and playing world police. As a victim of western rape itself, with thousands of years of history doing business with Africa, I'm confident they will play a helpful hand. You're right about Darfur/Human Rights issues (let's not forget all the US/EU crimes in Africa/the world as a whole), but at the end of the day China is no saint, we all know it wants resources, but it also pours millions into developing African infrastructure. It's also doing the same in South America. For arguments sake, you can look at who the US/EU ally with (Israel). Anyway I'm not some sort of cheerleader for China or anything but the help has to come from somewhere, and IMO China is the most capable/best option right now. Certainly a better option than turning to IMF/World Bank sharks.
- 3,791
- 12
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2007
LOL
china has an atrocious human rights record.
this thread is ridiculous
- 8,065
- 118
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2005
You can't be serious. China, a beacon of hope in the fight for human rights.
james earl zones
Banned
- 2,876
- 10
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2009
I hear you though.
- 3,370
- 771
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2010
I mean, is it really that hard to believe that someone (say the richest person in the world, no less) could be that sinister? I'm completely convinced that, if I were totally wealthy and heavily ingrained in the upper social echelon, I would feel like I can make some waves in the world. Not hard for me to believe some rich nerd dude would want to promote population control, as well as help educate poor people.
It's easy to laugh the stuff off, but you really have to ask yourself why your so willing to jokingly dismiss it all.
It's easy to laugh the stuff off, but you really have to ask yourself why your so willing to jokingly dismiss it all.
- 5,217
- 118
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
Because you guys have absolutely nothing to go off of besides pure unsubstantiated speculation.
"Bill Gates MUST be a eugenist because his dad was on the board of Planned Parenthood which was started ninety some years ago by a woman who believed in eugenics!"
- 2,328
- 2,078
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2010
To the guys above...
If you read, my post was actually criticizing China's human rights record.
The point of the post was economic development.
If you read, my post was actually criticizing China's human rights record.
The point of the post was economic development.
- 2,409
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
Imperialism is no longer about going in with an army and taking land by force. Imperialism today is large, well off nations going into poorer countries with large swaths of fertile land (i.e. like many in Africa) and BUYING the land from the people who inhabit it. This is what imperialism has become, nothing like what has been stated in this thread.
- 3,791
- 12
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2007
lol you realize all these ridiculous theories heated up when bill gates lectured about climate change?
he said he wanted to cut the world's carbon footprint to 0 in 50 years or something semi-ridiculous like that.
and he said that in order to ensure this would happen, we would need to curb the explosive population growth the world is experiencing.......which of course is occuring in developing nations. the richer a country gets, the lower the birthrate....countries like germany japan etc. actually have declining populations due to low birthrates. nations like india, many sub-saharan african nations, etc. have very high birthrates.
all of these points are valid.....the current population already is putting a strain on the world's ecological framework, not to mention its limited natural resourced
the current population growth we're experiencing is unsustainable
so of course the conspiracy theorists take these hardly-radical, oft-repeated ideas (bill gates is hardly the first person to say any of this) and twist it into the gates family being some sort of evil new world order eugenics-practicing monsters masquerading as philanthropists.
quite a leap.
he said he wanted to cut the world's carbon footprint to 0 in 50 years or something semi-ridiculous like that.
and he said that in order to ensure this would happen, we would need to curb the explosive population growth the world is experiencing.......which of course is occuring in developing nations. the richer a country gets, the lower the birthrate....countries like germany japan etc. actually have declining populations due to low birthrates. nations like india, many sub-saharan african nations, etc. have very high birthrates.
all of these points are valid.....the current population already is putting a strain on the world's ecological framework, not to mention its limited natural resourced
the current population growth we're experiencing is unsustainable
so of course the conspiracy theorists take these hardly-radical, oft-repeated ideas (bill gates is hardly the first person to say any of this) and twist it into the gates family being some sort of evil new world order eugenics-practicing monsters masquerading as philanthropists.
quite a leap.
- 3,370
- 771
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2010
That's cute and all, but I never said that haha. I'm just saying, if I were someone like Bill Gates, this is something I would be a proponent of, population control I mean.
Also, what's actually wrong about "unsubstantiated speculation"? I'm not quite clear on what's actually absolutely wrong about this, but maybe wu lyfe can help me. Oh come at me bro. Come at me.
b smooth 202
Banned
- 10,298
- 106
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2004
Nothing is wrong with piecing together what's going on in our world today. We live in a world over-ridden with shallow, uncreative, rational, empirical, weak-minded men, where everything is ruled by chemistry and rationality, therefore he accepts everything he is told as long as it has a crap load of data and cherry-picked statistics next to it.
Anything requiring faith in unseen factors or supposedly unscientific arguments are 'unsubstantiated speculation' to Mr Chang.
Mr. Shallow, its not about vaccinations. It's about reinforced social relationships and economic dependency. You're not worried about that though because your too busy working on the next pharmaceutical instead of working of something practical for people.
'coherent isn't my strong suite' funny for YOU to say that.
...just because you don't understand doesn't mean my presentation is incoherent. Sorry we can't put it into a chemical equation for you to solve.
Vaccinations aren't going to fix Africa. The best vaccination for us would be to get rid of the REAL disease plaguing the entire human race.
Anything requiring faith in unseen factors or supposedly unscientific arguments are 'unsubstantiated speculation' to Mr Chang.
Mr. Shallow, its not about vaccinations. It's about reinforced social relationships and economic dependency. You're not worried about that though because your too busy working on the next pharmaceutical instead of working of something practical for people.
'coherent isn't my strong suite' funny for YOU to say that.
Vaccinations aren't going to fix Africa. The best vaccination for us would be to get rid of the REAL disease plaguing the entire human race.
- 2,409
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
No actually. People that ask you to back up your wild assumptions are not weak minded, they just don't live in a world where it's acceptable to jump from point A to point X without some serious evidence to back up your ridiculous claims. If you don't have that evidence then it becomes quite clear you're pulling +#%* out of your +%%, and your opinion (because that's exactly what this is) is completely invalidated.
Faith and facts do not coexist. They are two completely separate things. In an argument as serious as this, to say you simply believe something is happening because you have a feeling or faith that it is going on, then you should be laughed at.
What is wrong with unsubstantiated speculation? Is that a serious question? That is literally like asking "What is wrong with race theory? I have no proof to back up that white people are superior and all other races should be subservient to them, but I FEEL like this is true, therefore it is. Therefore it shall be." Unsubstantiated speculation blurs the line between facts and fallacies to a point where everyone's OPINIONS are accepted as FACTS. There is a huge difference between these two things, and when opinions are accepted as facts you are entering dangerous anti-intellectual territory.
Faith and facts do not coexist. They are two completely separate things. In an argument as serious as this, to say you simply believe something is happening because you have a feeling or faith that it is going on, then you should be laughed at.
What is wrong with unsubstantiated speculation? Is that a serious question? That is literally like asking "What is wrong with race theory? I have no proof to back up that white people are superior and all other races should be subservient to them, but I FEEL like this is true, therefore it is. Therefore it shall be." Unsubstantiated speculation blurs the line between facts and fallacies to a point where everyone's OPINIONS are accepted as FACTS. There is a huge difference between these two things, and when opinions are accepted as facts you are entering dangerous anti-intellectual territory.
b smooth 202
Banned
- 10,298
- 106
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2004
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/font]
What is evidence then? What evidence do you need other then whats right in front of you?
Who are you to say anything? You typed that paragraph like you said something factual when it was really grey. You ended with some bit about 'anti-intellectual territory'
My point is even if stories like these seem overly mystified and far fetched now...its because the public is finally conceptualizing what is really going on in reality.
[/font]
What is evidence then? What evidence do you need other then whats right in front of you?
Who are you to say anything? You typed that paragraph like you said something factual when it was really grey. You ended with some bit about 'anti-intellectual territory'
My point is even if stories like these seem overly mystified and far fetched now...its because the public is finally conceptualizing what is really going on in reality.
- 5,490
- 14
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2007
There's def something more to it than pure benevolence.
Things just don't add up on Gates' part. Why is he obsessed with this?
You can claim it's because a lot of people are dying but that's not really the case. Look at the worlds population. It's not being driven by developed countries either. Countries that have low vaccination rates have some of the highest population growth rates in the world.
You can claim that he wants to help but wouldn't focusing on economic development in those countries help more than on vaccinations? The overwhelming problem in those countries is poverty as a result of political and economic corruption. It is not death from lack of vaccinations.
The usual explanations do not address Gates' seeming obsession (evidenced by the amount of money he's put behind it) with this.
Either he's doing it for other reasons or he's completely misguided on this point which is pretty bad as well because delusion makes people justify doing horrible things.
Things just don't add up on Gates' part. Why is he obsessed with this?
You can claim it's because a lot of people are dying but that's not really the case. Look at the worlds population. It's not being driven by developed countries either. Countries that have low vaccination rates have some of the highest population growth rates in the world.
You can claim that he wants to help but wouldn't focusing on economic development in those countries help more than on vaccinations? The overwhelming problem in those countries is poverty as a result of political and economic corruption. It is not death from lack of vaccinations.
The usual explanations do not address Gates' seeming obsession (evidenced by the amount of money he's put behind it) with this.
Either he's doing it for other reasons or he's completely misguided on this point which is pretty bad as well because delusion makes people justify doing horrible things.
- 5,490
- 14
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2007
Why is that such a far leap if what is claimed is true.
It all hinges on the claim that a lot of these vaccinations contain sterilizing effects. Whether that's intentional or not is a moot point. This would be fairly simple to test and disprove I would think.
I also believe that the world's population has grown too large but this kind of underhanded approach isn't the way to solve the problem for the long term.
I can see where he'd believe that he has the money and drive to pull it off because the government of these countries have clearly failed at this. It's very easy to justify questionable actions when you're mentality is "the ends justify the means". If one truly believes that the world will be doomed if population growth isn't curbed than the view that sterilization through vaccines is not such horrible thing is easily justified.
Would you rather have mass starvation? Attrition from wars fought for ever decreasing resources amongst an ever growing population?
This isn' as far fetched as you think. This may actually be the most "benevolent" course of action if oen believes that the end result of not curbing this problem is mass death.
The truth is, exploding population growth used to be curbed by famines, disease, or war. These are no longer a real threat. GMO and modern agra tech tech insures a steady and abundant supply ( distribution is diff argument) to maintain growth. The widespread distribution of cheap rudimentary sanitation/ health supplies (soap, detergent, bleach, anti biotics etc) insures against mass death from disease. Nuclear weapons insure against a true world war and death on a mass scale as seen in WW1 and WW2.
There are only so many ways one can curb population growth. Either the birth rate drops or more people die/ get killed than are born.
- 8,333
- 216
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2011
"This is saving lives for well less than 1% of what you would spend in the rich world. And if you think lives are created equal -- this at least says well, are they at least worth 1%. And that's ignoring the sickness you avoid.
There was a survey recently that showed half the kids in Africa, because of infectious disease, have IQs of 80 or lower. That's cerebral malaria, that's malnutrition because their brain doesn't fully develop. And if you want them to be stable and on their own, you have got to make sure that terrible sickness, that permanently hurts them their entire life, is not there.
By and large, it is the one health intervention that can get to everyone. In fact, it is so simple, people often forget what a big deal this is. The 2 million people that would have died from smallpox now don't think, "Wow, I'm alive today because of vaccinations," but that's the case."
There was a survey recently that showed half the kids in Africa, because of infectious disease, have IQs of 80 or lower. That's cerebral malaria, that's malnutrition because their brain doesn't fully develop. And if you want them to be stable and on their own, you have got to make sure that terrible sickness, that permanently hurts them their entire life, is not there.
By and large, it is the one health intervention that can get to everyone. In fact, it is so simple, people often forget what a big deal this is. The 2 million people that would have died from smallpox now don't think, "Wow, I'm alive today because of vaccinations," but that's the case."
- 5,490
- 14
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2007
The study please. I'm not saying it isn't true but I'm skeptical. Mainly because there was a study done in 2008 which showed that 25% of survivors of cerebral malaria had long term deficits. Twenty-five percent is quite substantial but it isn't 50%.
- 5,217
- 118
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
You didn't say that but others in this thread have definitely alluded to that if not straight up claimed that. You're just saying that you would be in favor of population control if you were Bill Gates? Oh.
What's wrong with unsubstantiated speculation is that it's not an honest attempt at seeking the truth through facts. It's a lazy and ignorant way of trying to make sense of things by piecing together pieces of a jigsaw puzzle that might not even be from the same set. The problem with conspiracy theorists is that they'll take whatever pieces they think MIGHT fit and try to piece together their own preconceived and warped worldview. It's just absolutely dishonest.
WU LYF
- 5,490
- 14
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2007
Boys Noize wrote:
You didn't say that but others in this thread have definitely alluded to that if not straight up claimed that. You're just saying that you would be in favor of population control if you were Bill Gates? Oh.
What's wrong with unsubstantiated speculation is that it's not an honest attempt at seeking the truth through facts. It's a lazy and ignorant way of trying to make sense of things by piecing together pieces of a jigsaw puzzle that might not even be from the same set. The problem with conspiracy theorists is that they'll take whatever pieces they think MIGHT fit and try to piece together their own preconceived and warped worldview. It's just absolutely dishonest.
WU LYF
You just said a whole bunch of nothing.
I haven't seen you dissect the issue. I'm all ears. A lot of the variables are known in this argument. Break it down and come up with something past "the other side is wrong!"
That's not an adequate response.
I know many on NT have only worked retail slinging kicks and phones but if you work in a serious business then you actually need to develop your side.
Where's yours?
- 5,217
- 118
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
My god, you really are dense. You're really trying to argue that the truth is found through "how one feels" as opposed to hard facts? You're really trying to argue that speculation without evidence is valid? That you can accuse people of something as serious as racial cleansing without actual evidence?Originally Posted by B Smooth 202
Nothing is wrong with piecing together what's going on in our world today. We live in a world over-ridden with shallow, uncreative, rational, empirical, weak-minded men, where everything is ruled by chemistry and rationality, therefore he accepts everything he is told as long as it has a crap load of data and cherry-picked statistics next to it.
Anything requiring faith in unseen factors or supposedly unscientific arguments are 'unsubstantiated speculation' to Mr Chang.
Mr. Shallow, its not about vaccinations. It's about reinforced social relationships and economic dependency. You're not worried about that though because your too busy working on the next pharmaceutical instead of working of something practical for people.
'coherent isn't my strong suite' funny for YOU to say that....just because you don't understand doesn't mean my presentation is incoherent. Sorry we can't put it into a chemical equation for you to solve.
Vaccinations aren't going to fix Africa. The best vaccination for us would be to get rid of the REAL disease plaguing the entire human race.
Your stance on vaccinations is no different than the nut jobs like Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey. It's a dangerous stance because it sends the message that vaccinations are harmful which is just simply untrue and NOT supported by scientific fact. But then again, you feel like they might be used for population control.
I have no idea where you got the idea that I'm some kind of scientist or chemist. This isn't the first post that you've alluded to that and it's left me incredibly confused. Living ones life by forming decisions rationally is not a job (although sometimes it feels like it reading some of the garbage you guys post on here.) And uncreative and weak-minded? I'm an artist, not a scientist, and I know for a fact that I have more creative ability in one eyelash then you will ever possibly possess. Don't take that to heart though, it's just unsubstantiated speculation.
- 5,217
- 118
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
You didn't say that but others in this thread have definitely alluded to that if not straight up claimed that. You're just saying that you would be in favor of population control if you were Bill Gates? Oh.
What's wrong with unsubstantiated speculation is that it's not an honest attempt at seeking the truth through facts. It's a lazy and ignorant way of trying to make sense of things by piecing together pieces of a jigsaw puzzle that might not even be from the same set. The problem with conspiracy theorists is that they'll take whatever pieces they think MIGHT fit and try to piece together their own preconceived and warped worldview. It's just absolutely dishonest.
WU LYF
You just said a whole bunch of nothing.
I haven't seen you dissect the issue. I'm all ears. A lot of the variables are known in this argument. Break it down and come up with something past "the other side is wrong!"
That's not an adequate response.
I know many on NT have only worked retail slinging kicks and phones but if you work in a serious business then you actually need to develop your side.
Where's yours?
There is no issue. What Bill Gates is doing with his foundation is incredibly positive. He's not only delivering vaccines to Africa, there are a slew of other ways in which his foundation is trying to alleviate poverty and to better world health.
I've read a couple of your posts in this thread and you don't come off like the other ignorant posters. You at least seem to understand that overpopulation is a problem in undeveloped countries. The problem is you've drawn a link between a lack of vaccinations with high birth rate.
Correlation does not imply causation. Those countries have a high birth rate because of various reasons such as tradition and a lack of proper birth control and sex education. Traditionally, many families are large due to agricultural needs. You needed sons and daughters to help you work the fields. Mortality rates have also always been quite high in undeveloped countries so larger families make sense. The problem with that is that with more people you need more food to feed them and, at the current rate, it's unsustainable. So no, it's not because of a lack of vaccinations that they have a high birth rate. You also have to keep in mind that while these undeveloped nations have high birth rates, they also have incredibly high child mortality rates.
The lack of vaccinations can be attributed to the cost of them. Poorer nations simply can't afford them. Which is where foundations like Bill Gates' comes in.
I've actually studied populations in Asia for a course in school and extensively studied places like China, Bangladesh, and India; all of which of unique population issues not unlike those in developing African countries. China once had an out of control population growth rate but because of government policy they have slowed it down. At the rate they were going at, the country would have fallen into famine and there would have been mass death. As it stands, it seems they have averted the bigger problem but they still have issues feeding their huge population. They've recently begun buying land in Africa (controversial to say the least) to farm it and export it back. Ironically, it's because of China's rigid Communist governing that such a policy would work. If you look towards India and Bangladesh, where there's no government intervention with population control, you'll see an example of what happens when high population growth goes unchecked. Rampant poverty, increasing gap between rich and poor, political and social unrest, famine. What I'm trying to say is these issues facing Africa are not exclusive to it so it absolutely kills me when I read ignorant posts claiming "racial cleansing."
Maybe we can talk about the real issues facing these places such as weak governments, corruption on a state and local level, lack of education, lack of disease control, poor health care, and unstable food supplies instead of reaching into thin air for conspiracy.
- 1,177
- 10
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2008
1. Africa isn't the only thing he is obsessed with, another is improving the education in the US, and a few years ago it was Robotics (lol this is going to stir up some conspiracy theories). Also, vaccinations aren't the only thing he's obsessed with in Africa, he is obsessed with their Education, Technology, and Agriculture as well. He's also been helping Africa for the last two decades I think, and if I had his money, I would be doing exactly what he is doing, trying to help the world.
2. What? What's your point here? Are you saying that Gates is trying to kill these people? The reason there are high birth rates in undeveloped countries is because they lack healthcare (birth control), and also because in less developed countries they also lack technology. So they are basically living in the past where more children = more helping hands. The bad thing with more children is that more children = more time, work, money. If your country is poor, your children may not end up getting all the benefits because you might not be able to take care of them all because of the conditions of the country. Gates wants to give these children vaccinations because that is one step into getting the country out of shambles because children are the future. Think about it, when you are sick, can you really think? What do you focus on when you are sick? Especially when you have multiple illnesses? You most likely focus on the pain. So giving children vaccinations rids them of these sicknesses where they can focus on other things like education, and ultimately improve their country. By the way, the life expectancy in most African countries is in the low 30's I believe. Giving them vaccinations will greatly help them.
3. Well once again, giving the people vaccinations gives them the physical and mental strength to do other things rather than fighting off the illness. You need healthy people in order to have a successful country. So therefore, vaccinations and keeping people healthy is the first step. Also, with vaccinations, this helps economic development because it keeps the people of Africa healthy so they can work more to improve their economy. Their life expectancy is in the 30's, and many of their people are sick, so this is one reason why their economy is in shambles. So by giving the people vaccinations, it is helping their economic development. In order to also help their economic development, Bill Gates is also trying to improve their Agriculture and Technology as well. Also, as stated before, by giving these people vaccinations it gives them more physical and mental strength, where they are able to revolt against their leaders. I also think the main reason why Africa is in such shambles is because of the leaders, this is also why I don't agree with China helping because they are supporting weapons to a corrupt leader. The biggest problem with most corrupt leaders is that they will stay in office until death, but by making the citizens healthy, it gives them more willpower to take action against the corruption. Plus, there are bigger things involved with these corrupt leaders that I don't think Bill Gates can change.
- 5,490
- 14
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2007
Correlation does not imply causation. Those countries have a high birth rate because of various reasons such as tradition and a lack of proper birth control and sex education. Traditionally, many families are large due to agricultural needs. You needed sons and daughters to help you work the fields. Mortality rates have also always been quite high in undeveloped countries so larger families make sense. The problem with that is that with more people you need more food to feed them and, at the current rate, it's unsustainable. So no, it's not because of a lack of vaccinations that they have a high birth rate. You also have to keep in mind that while these undeveloped nations have high birth rates, they also have incredibly high child mortality rates.
The lack of vaccinations can be attributed to the cost of them. Poorer nations simply can't afford them. Which is where foundations like Bill Gates' comes in.
I've actually studied populations in Asia for a course in school and extensively studied places like China, Bangladesh, and India; all of which of unique population issues not unlike those in developing African countries. China once had an out of control population growth rate but because of government policy they have slowed it down. At the rate they were going at, the country would have fallen into famine and there would have been mass death. As it stands, it seems they have averted the bigger problem but they still have issues feeding their huge population. They've recently begun buying land in Africa (controversial to say the least) to farm it and export it back. Ironically, it's because of China's rigid Communist governing that such a policy would work. If you look towards India and Bangladesh, where there's no government intervention with population control, you'll see an example of what happens when high population growth goes unchecked. Rampant poverty, increasing gap between rich and poor, political and social unrest, famine. What I'm trying to say is these issues facing Africa are not exclusive to it so it absolutely kills me when I read ignorant posts claiming "racial cleansing."
Maybe we can talk about the real issues facing these places such as weak governments, corruption on a state and local level, lack of education, lack of disease control, poor health care, and unstable food supplies instead of reaching into thin air for conspiracy.
There is a direct correlation between poverty and birth rate. There is causation in this case. Look at the average size of European families before the industrial revolution and now or the birth rate among developed Muslim Nations and underdeveloped. It doesn't have much to do with tradition except in a select few religious cases (i.e. Orthodox Jews) . It has more to do with economies centered around agrarianism and manual labor. Economics drives culture and traditions more so than the other way around.
The high child mortality point is moot except for a few areas in Sub Saharan Africa. Then an argument can be made that the birth rate is fairly high because, on average, the population can't tell how many children will survive. Even then, mortality rate has a loose correlation with poverty in the sense that there are wealthier nations with a higher mortality rate than their poorer counterparts (US and Mexico as an example). You have to look at the population figures as a whole. If the overall population is growing over the long term then that means that child mortality is relatively low in the scheme of things. It might be high in nominal terms but not in real terms.
I agree that this isn't about racial cleansing or just Africa but it is about the growth rate of the underdeveloped world's population. Various speculation is out there because the publicly provided reasons do not provide the full truth behind the Gates foundation involvement in this. When you look at the facts this simply cannot be only about lowering mortality/ disease rates. It doesn't make sense from that end alone.