Speaking with a physician can often be a disconcerting affair. But you wouldn’t think it would have that effect when the subject is about something as innocuous as “spinach”. Boy, was I in for a mild surprise. Figuring that what was good for Popeye should be good for us all I asked, “What’s up with all this bad spinach and the outbreak of E-coli?” My doctor friend’s answer took the form of a series of questions about our current epidemic of sphincter spasms that caused mine to pucker. The conversation went something like this:
First he asked, “When you plan a trip to Mexico what does a doctor tell you to do?”
I responded, “I’ve been told to take lots of anti-biotics and paregoric.”
“And, what else are you told about how to limit your eating habits down there?”
“I think the rule is to not eat any raw vegetables or salads … or, put differently, don’t eat anything that isn’t well cooked, boiled or fried … right?”
“Right. And why it is that you take the medicine and follow that rule?”
I responded, “Because everybody knows that, if you don’t, you are likely to get ‘the runs.’”
“And, what causes the runs?”
I didn’t know, and so I said, “I don’t know … what does cause the runs, doctor?”
“Things like E.coli.”
“So, doctor, what’s the point. The bad spinach causing an outbreak of E.coli is in this country, not Mexico.”
“Well, have you ever considered that maybe the bad spinach in this country maybe coming to us from someplace like Mexico? When you think about it, there would be little difference between a bad salad tainted with E.coli bacterium that you wouldn’t eat while in Mexico and the same salad, if it were brought to your home via your local grocer. The only real difference would be that, because it is placed on your dining room table, you would be more inclined to eat it. The effect on your bowels, however, would most likely be the same, wouldn’t it?”
“Come to think of it, it probably would. But our government wouldn’t let that happen, would they?”
“I don’t know, but I can say this, ‘Welcome to one of the probable future side- effects of globalization and free-trade.’”
My friend then went on to explain that, generally speaking, E.coli is produced by feces located either on or in the soil where vegetables are grown. And, when that bacterium is transferred to humans via those vegetables grown in proximity to the feces (i.e. spinach) it produces cramps, nausea and diarrhea similar to what we have observed recently with the current spinach debacle in this country. He pointed out that farming conditions that would permit this to occur usually are found in third-world countries with less strict sanitation standards. So, when an outbreak of the type we have witnessed occurs in this country, logic would suggest that one of the first questions should be to ask, “Where did the bad spinach come from?” That is the first question that was asked when mad cow disease was spotted in Washington State, he said, and within days it was determined that the diseased cow had come from Canada. Then why is that question not being asked of the bad spinach? One can only speculate, of course, but could it be because the government investigating the E.coli outbreak is also the same government that is currently promoting the importation of agricultural products that have been grown in other countries?
If so, the short of it is this: the health and sanitation standards of the countries that are growing the food we eat, for all practical purposes become our health and sanitation standards, and, to say the least, that may not always be a good thing for us here in America. But, wait. Don’t go away. It gets even better. My friend noted that, just as E.coli can be imported into this country via bad veggies, so can other diseases hosted by, not only the foods we import, but by the people we allow to come into our country. In the past, it used to be the practice at ports of entry into this country, like on Ellis Island, to segregate sick immigrants from those that were healthy. Obviously, this was done to prevent an influx of various contagions into our population. That, however, is no longer the practice, my friend pointed out. What with our government’s open border policy with Mexico, allowing anyone who wants to come in to this country, whether or not they are sick has been made acceptable. And, apparently many are. Therefore, according to my friend’s ruminations, in the near future we me well see resurgence in this country of illnesses we thought had been eradicated for all practical purposes except for in some distant parts of the third world like diphtheria, whooping cough, tuberculosis, small pox and polio.
Thus, the ultimate question posed by my friend was, with our open border policies, could these illnesses soon be reappearing locally in our neighborhoods because our government has permitted them to be brought to our doorstep? If so, my friend warned, the diarrhea we are now witnessing could well be viewed in hindsight as the least of our problems. His point? When we see an outbreak of diarrhea erupting across our nation’s fruited plains, we may do well to ask if it is not evidence that it is our very own government that has been caught with its pants down vis-à-vis an open border policy that quite possibly could imperil the future health of Americans? And if is determined that is the case, at minimum, wouldn’t you have to conclude that’s a policy that stinks?
© 2006 Clifford C. Nichols, Esq.
Cliff Nichols is an attorney practicing criminal defense in Santa Monica, California. He may be contacted regarding this editorial at either (310) 917-1083, cliff@cliffnicholslaw.com or www.cliffnicholslaw.com and you may join his blog at www.thedailystand.com.