Welcome to your new lodger |
Parasites are unsettling, nay unnerving. There is a bewildering variety of organisms that live by exploiting other organisms to their host’s detriment. Tis a great life being an endo-parasite all tucked up cosy and warm in your host – until the anthelmintic drugs arrive. Anyway, to be a true parasite the organism needs to be totally dependent on the host organism, or organisms. I say organisms because many parasites exploit several host species during different stages of their life cycle.
Many
years ago I was engaged in research involving the snail vector
harbouring the worm responsible for the parasitic disease,
schistosomiasis, also known as bilharzia. This lovely God endorsed
condition is estimated to blight about 225 million people resulting
in 100,000s of deaths worldwide. Eggs from the adult worm find their
way into lakes and static water in regions where this disease is
endemic (Africa, SE Asia). There the egg hatches forming the larval
stage. The free-swimming parasite eventually becomes incorporated
into an aquatic fresh-water snail. Within the snail the parasite
undergoes further development before being released into the aquatic
medium as a free-swimming entity; mayhap doing the parasite
stroke. On contact with human skin, the organism bores into flesh.
Once inside the primary host, the worm migrates to the liver’s
hepatic portal vein. Here it hunkers down with its brethren and
matures. And, as is the nature of things, male and female worms fall
in love and as lovers, they embrace and travel as if on honeymoon to
the gut and bladder. There, the eggs from their romantic endevours are
excreted into the host’s faeces and urine and eventually arrive in the village water supply. The newly hatched larvae seek out a new dormitory
in an unsuspecting snail, and thus the great circle of life begins
anew (how quaint). There have been many expensive/expansive programmes
throughout the years designed to treat infected individuals and
eradicate or at least control the snail population. Although to date,
the disease is still a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the
affected/infected regions. If only the locals would refrain from
urinating and defaecating in the water from which they drink and bathe.
In fact, the simplest, and most cost-effective control, involves
education. If villagers could/would halt from using their
precious waterways as a toilet, then the parasite's life-cycle would
be interrupted/disrupted saving many millions of dollars in expensive
and largely useless schemes. It seems a sensible suggestion, don't ya think? Sadly cultural cycles are more difficult to break than the
parasitical (is this a real word?) kind.
My
personal parasite story: twenty years ago, I had a thorough medical.
One of the procedures involved an examination of my ocular acuity.
And so, it transpired that I was diagnosed with a vivid/livid scar on
my choroid. At some stage, as a toddler, I was allowed to wallow in
dirt infested with a parasite deposited in cat faeces. Children are
naturally curious about environmental issues and to show I was a
young champion of environmental causes I stuffed some dirt into my
gaping maw, unbeknownst to my never vigilant parents. The rest was
smeared in a cosmetic splurge upon a child contemplating how to burn
down the garden shed: from little acorns, mighty oaks shall grow.
Therefore I acquired a parasitic load which destroyed a good
proportion of the vision in my left eye.
Let
me introduce you to an endearing parasitic critter, called Onchocerca
Volvulus. This parasite, a resident of West Africa, is passed on by the native, black fly. After a human is
bitten by an infected fly the parasite migrates to the skin where it
develops into the adult worm. Thereafter it releases myriads of
microfilaria. The worms themselves can cause severe skin problems in
the infected individual resulting in widespread skin damage. But it is
the microfilaria which migrates freely throughout the victim's eye that can result
in permanent blindness in children and adults. This parasite can only
fully develop in a human host. This rather unpalatable fact
introduces the vexed and contentious, leastways for theists: the 'Problem of Evil'.
Parasites
pose a real moral dilemma for theists who believe in the conventional God
of Christianity. How can an all-loving, all-powerful and all-knowing deity provide stewardship for parasites, let alone create them? Even
the most well-adapted parasite causes some harm; tis in the definition. In my opinion, these
inconvenient facts have not been adequately addressed or resolved by
theists in spite of the verbal contortions and semantic contrivances performed by those devoted to
absolve their beloved deity of any wrongdoing. Indeed, a whole branch
of theology has grown up to tackle the ‘Problem of Evil’, called
theodicy. If you would like to see my personal take on theodicy, you
can view it here. To my mind, it is impossible to square the Christian
concept of God with the evil done by parasitic organisms. Of course,
you could argue that God is limited in capabilities allowing a ‘good God’ to be compatible with evil due to impotence. This has never
been a popular view with theists as it implies a limitation of God’s
power and a fall from perfection. Although some Christians, historically and currently, find
this an acceptable solution to the problem of evil, it has never been
a mainstream viewpoint for rather obvious reasons. Therefore, if you
accept a God, as conventionality envisaged, you have to face the
rather unsettling and concerning conclusion that the existence of parasites is part
of God’s grand scheme. This introduces a paradox and a
contradiction: adherents to Christian dogma must accept that God can
do no evil but are faced with the inconvenient reality that God has
created creatures whose sole purpose, or so it appears, is to inflict
pain and misery on God’s beloved creation. Some
Christians appear happy with the explanation that God’s plan and
its implementation are beyond the feeble intellect of man. To anyone
with an ounce of intellectual integrity, this is not a particularly
satisfying solution to a rather intractable problem. Therefore, to
remain a good Christian it is necessary to accept a ‘double
standard’ of innate morality. Personally, I find this stance morally repugnant, repellant and indefensible by anyone with a modicum of
intellectual rectitude: god has been rightly indited, found
wanting and condemned accordingly- discuss.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete