Mayat korban tsunami tak berbahaya?

(CNN) -- Rotting corpses pose little threat to the health of 
survivors, and there is no need to rush to bury or cremate them, 
health officials have said.
"A person who dies is not, in themselves, a health threat to people 
around," Dr. David Nabarro, executive director for sustainable 
development and healthy environments at the World Health 
Organization, said Wednesday.
"After a number of hours, the pathogens inside the dead person's body 
become not dangerous. They usually decompose and die. And the dead 
person therefore is not a primary threat to the health of others."
While there might be other reasons not to wait to give the bodies a 
decent burial, "We should not be rushing to do mass burials for the 
sake of public health," he said.
Survivors faced the greatest risk of disease from exposure to feces 
or other contaminants produced by live people, Nabarro said, and that 
means it was critical for health officials to move quickly to provide 
survivors with clean drinking water and sanitation facilities.
"That must be given priority," he said.
The mistaken belief that decomposing bodies lead to outbreaks of 
diseases often leads authorities to undertake mass burials or 
cremations, which can add to the suffering of survivors, said Dr. 
Dana Van Alphen, an adviser to the Pan American Health Organization 
(PAHO), which is a regional office of WHO.
"In too many cases," said Van Alphen, "authorities rush to bury 
victims without identifying them, under the false belief that bodies 
pose a serious threat of epidemics. It is just not true." 
The practice also violated the human rights of victims and survivors, 
she said.
Burials should be conducted so that the bodies could later be 
exhumed, health officials said.
Bodies should be buried at least a meter (three feet) below ground 
and far from water sources, according to "Infection Hazards of Human 
Cadavers," a chapter in "A Guide to Infection Control in the 
Hospital" (B.C. Decker Inc. 1998).
"The major hazard facing emergency service personnel is spilt blood 
and any risk can be greatly reduced by preventing contact with blood 
(use of gloves, face and eye protection, and protective clothing 
where necessary)," the authors wrote.
The major public health concern now is lack of potable water, Dr. 
Daniel Lopez-Acuna of PAHO said.
Contaminated water can lead to outbreaks of dysentery and cholera, 
malaria and dengue, he said.
"This is, without a doubt, the major problem we need to be looking 
at." 
 
Are Dead Bodies Dangerous?
David Plotz
Posted Monday, Aug. 23, 1999, at 4:15 PM PT 
News reports covering the earthquake in Turkey have emphasized the 
health dangers posed by the decomposing bodies of its victims. The 
Turkish government is digging mass graves, and Muslim clerics have 
suspended Islamic burial rules so that the country can dispose of 
corpses more quickly. Do these bodies endanger public health?
The rotting corpses of earthquake victims are a "negligible" threat 
to public health, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).
A corpse is only a danger to public health if the victim died of an 
infectious disease. (In that case, the disease organisms can infect 
living people who come in contact with the cadaver.) But when someone 
dies of trauma, as most earthquake victims did, the decomposition 
process is harmless, if disgusting. Bacteria within the body--
especially E. coli from the gut--immediately start to consume the 
flesh. Maggots hatched from eggs laid in the corpse also eat the 
cadaver, as can wasps, beetles, and other insects. Larger animals 
such as birds, rats, and dogs pick at unguarded corpses.
The bacteria involved in decomposition are not dangerous, because 
living people already carry identical germs in their own bodies. The 
maggots and other insects, though revolting, also constitute no 
threat to public health. Rats do host fleas, which can transmit 
typhus, typhoid fever, plague, and other diseases. But rats endanger 
public health wherever they mingle with people: They are no more 
harmful when they feed on corpses than at any other time.
Despite ancient fears of death's "miasma," the foul odor emitted by 
the body as it rots is innocuous.
Some reports hint that unburied corpses could contaminate Turkey's 
water supply. This is not a serious danger. In a very few cases, 
bacteria from corpses can cause illness when they contaminate 
drinking water in large quantities. But water in Turkey is much more 
likely to be contaminated in other ways, especially ruptured sewer 
lines that dump bacteria into reservoirs and aquifers.
Because the public health threat from corpses is minimal, the WHO has 
even urged Turkey to allocate more resources to aiding the injured 
and fewer to disposing of the dead.
 Next question?  
Explainer thanks Dr. Kenneth Iserson, author of Death to Dust and 
professor of surgery at the University of Arizona, and Dr. Michael 
Graham, medical examiner of St. Louis.
David Plotz is Slate's deputy editor. You can e-mail him at   
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  . 

 
Dead bodies and health risks
>From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
After catastrophes with extensive loss of life due to trauma, much 
resource is often expended on burying the dead quickly, and applying 
disinfectant to bodies, to prevent disease.
According to health professionals the fear of bodies spreading 
disease is not justified. Amongst others, Steven Rottman, director of 
the UCLA Center for Public Health and Disasters, said that no 
scientific evidence existed that bodies of disaster victims increased 
the risk of epidemics, adding that cadavers in fact posed less risk 
of contagion than living people.
In disasters where there is competition for resources, more effort 
should be spent caring for survivors (improving sanitation, providing 
clean water or facilities for boiling or otherwise disinfecting 
water, providing food, clothing and shelter), and less disinfecting 
and disposing urgently of the dead. Religious and cultural practices, 
the stench, and the effect on morale must of course also be taken 
into consideration.
The incorrect notion that dead bodies inherently spread diseases is 
probably a combination of (a) the incorrect miasma hypothesis of 
disease: diseases are spread by foul air � you get malaria from 
breathing marsh air, cholera from breathing foul air from untreated 
sewage, and diseases from the stench of decomposing corpses; and (b) 
the true fact that corpses of those who died from certain contagious 
diseases do, indeed, spread disease.
While, of course, research and evidence must override any 
commonsensical arguments, there is not even any logical reason for 
non-diseased corpses to spread disease: micro-organisms do not come 
into being by spontaneous generation, any more than flies are 
generated spontaneously by rotting rubbish, rather than hatching 
eggs. Disease micro-organisms are not the same as those causing decay.







------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Help save the life of a child.  Support St. Jude Children's Research Hospital's
'Thanks & Giving.'
http://us.click.yahoo.com/0iazvD/5WnJAA/xGEGAA/asSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

Dapatkan informasi kesehatan gratis
Mailing List Dokter Indonesia
http://www.mldi.or.id 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dokter/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Kirim email ke