Considering Alternate Pathways of Drinking-Water Contamination: Evidence of Risk Substitution from Arsenic Mitigation Programs in Rural Bangladesh

Deep tubewells are a key component of arsenic mitigation programs in rural Bangladesh. Compared to widely prevalent shallow tubewells, deep tubewells reduce ground-water arsenic exposure and provide better microbial water quality at source. However, the benefits of clean drinking-water at these more distant sources may be abated by higher levels of microbial contamination at point-of-use. One such potential pathway is the use of contaminated surface water for washing drinking-water storage containers. The aim of this study is to compare the prevalence of surface water use for washing drinking-water storage containers among deep and shallow tubewell users in a cohort of 499 rural residents in Matlab, Bangladesh. We employ a multi-level logistic regression model to measure the effect of tubewell type and ownership status on the odds of washing storage containers with surface water. Results show that deep tubewell users who do not own their drinking-water tubewell, have 6.53 times the odds [95% CI: 3.56, 12.00] of using surface water for cleaning storage containers compared to shallow tubewell users, who own their drinking-water source. Even deep tubewell users who own a private well within walking distance have 2.53 [95% CI: 1.36, 4.71] times the odds of using surface water compared to their shallow tubewell counterparts. These results highlight the need for interventions to limit risk substitution, particularly the increased use of contaminated surface water when access to drinking water is reduced. Increasing ownership of and proximity to deep tubewells, although crucial, is insufficient to achieve equity in safe drinking-water access across rural Bangladesh

COVID-19 Highlights the Need for More Effective Wildlife Trade Legislation

Over the past three decades, most new human pathogens with substantial impacts on human health or economies have originated in wildlife [1,2]. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is among the latest of these zoonotic diseases and is now a pandemic that has resulted in more than a million fatalities globally as of 1 October 2020 (https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019). Direct contact between people and animal species due to the wildlife trade and increased human–livestock–wildlife interactions through rapid fragmentation of wildlife habitat are two major factors that contribute to the spread of zoonotic diseases [3,4]. Although localized quarantines and lockdowns around the world appear to be having some minor positive effects on the environment, these short-term successes should not be glorified in view of the profound negative environmental, social, and economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic (https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-2020). We call for urgent action to regulate the trade of wildlife, expand protection for native ecosystems, and reduce consumer demand for wildlife parts and products to lower the risk and severity of future zoonotic diseasesPeer reviewe