The Conversation had a provocative article by Stanford professor Richard White about how America has a bad pattern of wasting infrastructure spending. In light of the surprisingly bipartisan $1 trillion infrastructure bill recently passed by the Senate, this seems like something we should be giving some serious thought to.
I’ll posit that we’re doing it again, by not adequately
addressing the potential that our excreta, to be polite, offers to detect
health issues, including but not limited to COVID-19.
Illustration by Ori Toor for The New York Times |
No shit: excrement can be an important tool in public -- and personal -- health.
COVIDPoops19 Twitter picture |
According
to Kaiser Health News, the University of California San Diego’s
program has
identified 85% of COVID-19 cases over the last year, using a largely
automated monitoring system. Infected
people shed virus particles long before they show symptoms, allowing such
programs to act as an early detection system.
“University campuses
especially benefit from wastewater surveillance as a means to avert COVID-19
outbreaks, as they’re full of largely asymptomatic populations, and are
potential hot spots for transmission that necessitate frequent diagnostic
testing,” said
UCSD study first author Smruthi Karthikeyan, PhD. Any university debating vaccine
or mask mandates in order for students to return to campus should seriously be considering
this kind of monitoring mechanism.
Similarly, the University of Minnesota has been sampling
the wastewater of 65% of the state’s population, and has
correctly predicted the rise and fall of each of the three waves in the
last year. North Carolina has
also had success.
Credit: Biobot Analytics |
What else can you say that about?
The CDC is piloting the National
Wastewater Surveillance System (NWSS) to create a federal database of such
data. “We think this can really provide valuable data, not just for
covid, but for a lot of diseases,” Amy Kirby, a microbiologist leading the CDC
effort, told
KHN.
Wastewater monitoring is an important tool, but it
suffers from a few weaknesses. It is most
effective at a macro-level: a city, a neighborhood, perhaps a building (e.g., a
dorm). Heavy rainwater can distort
results. And, as results begin to drill down to the DNA
level, privacy starts to become an issue (as controversy about using wastewater
data to
spot illicit drug use has already shown).
So, where’s the money in the new infrastructure for this
kind of monitoring?
The infrastructure bill does include an eye-popping
$55b for water and wastewater infrastructure, but spending is more focused on threats
like lead pipes and emerging contaminants.
Building 21st century public health monitoring systems against
threats like COVID-19 doesn’t seem to be a top priority.
As Professor White points out about our infrastructure history:
Many of these projects did not end well. The problem wasn’t that the country didn’t need infrastructure – it did. And the troubles weren’t the result of technical failures: By and large, Americans successfully built what they intended, and much of what they built still stands.
The real problems arose before anyone lifted a shovel of earth or raised a hammer. These problems stem from how hard it is to think ahead, and they are easy to ignore in the face of excitement about new spending, new construction and increased employment.
We’re not thinking ahead. Getting rid of lead pipes and cleaning water
of contaminants is basic 20th century infrastructure; we should
expect it. Automated monitoring of
public health threats is 21st century infrastructure.
Even wastewater monitoring is not thinking far enough
ahead. If comprehensive wastewater
monitoring should be a universal 2130 infrastructure, smart toilets should be a
2150 one.
Smart toilet illustration. Credit: SciTechDaily |
There is lots of progress in the field. In April, Stanford researchers reported
on a smart toilet “that can detect a range of disease markers in stool and
urine, including those of some cancers, such as colorectal or urologic cancers.”
The monitoring add-ons can be mounted on
traditional toilet bowls.
Lead researcher Sanjiv Gambhir pointed
out: “The thing about a smart toilet, though, is that unlike wearables, you
can’t take it off. Everyone uses the
bathroom — there’s really no avoiding it — and that enhances its value as a
disease-detecting device.”
In May, Duke researchers presented smart
toilet advances that categorized stool images using A.I., allowing much more
accurate and objective reports about things like consistency, frequency, and
bleeding. That kind of information is
important for people with I.B.S. or who may have cancer.
Sonia Grego, PhD, a lead researcher on the study and founding director of the Duke Smart Toilet Lab said:
We are optimistic about patient willingness to use this technology because it's something that can be installed in their toilet's pipes and doesn't require the patient to do anything other than flush,
An IBD flare-up could be diagnosed using the Smart Toilet and the patient's response to treatment could be monitored with the technology. This could be especially useful for patients who live in long-term care facilities who may not be able to report their conditions and could help improve initial diagnosis of acute conditions.
The Duke
Smart Toilet Lab, in case you weren’t aware, “is dedicated to the
opportunities that human excreta offer to empower people to manage their own
wellness.” It
now has its own spin-off, Coprata. We're going to see lots more start-ups like it and Biobot.
--------
Our politicians are proud of including broadband in
the infrastructure bill. That’s so
2010. We should be thinking much further
out, making investments now for the infrastructure our health will depend on. We don’t like to think of bodily wastes, but
we should be building the infrastructures to take advantage of them. What else aren’t we thinking enough about?
No comments:
Post a Comment