The
Human Petri Dish
I received my first lesson in overpopulation, by
accident, in a high school biology class when I performed a science experiment
with bacteria. I was tasked with growing bacteria on a Petri dish using agar
and providing the bacteria with a stable environment to grow. A few days later,
I noticed some colored dots, proving that the bacteria were growing and
multiplying in number, consuming the nutrients in the plate as necessary.
Because my only task consisted of watching how the bacteria used nutrients and
grew with certain environmental conditions I forgot about my plate for a while.
But after viewing the plate again, I saw that it was covered with grey scum,
showing that the bacteria had consumed all of the nutrients and died. Despite
human beings having a higher intellect and the ability to think and reason,
humans as a species are controlled by individual drives to survive and
reproduce much like the bacteria in the Petri dish. It appears that human beings
use their higher intellect in an attempt to outsmart nature, and try to fit
more of our kind into our Petri dish. The most pressing problem facing the
Earth is human overpopulation. It creates a plethora of consequences that
disturb natural processes that produce life, leading to the massive extinction
of non-human life, and if unchecked, inevitably to the extinction of human
life. The human overpopulation problem will unavoidably resolve itself like it
did in the Petri dish. In addition, as resources become scarce and the
population grows uninhibited the quality of human life will severely diminish forcing
many to live in a state of survival diminishing their capacity to enjoy life. Therefore,
it is imperative that we as a species cease attempting to find ways to fit more
people into our world, and focus instead on keeping our population in check.
If one studies the way ecosystems function, basic
food webs he or she would see that every organism seems to have a relationship
with another. Organisms’ populations are kept in check through predator and
prey relationships, and these relationships are continuously changing due to
evolution. Evolution has granted human beings a superior intellect and the
ability to dominate all other species on the planet Earth. But what is the
consequence of our domination? The ability to live and grow uninhibited aside
from the occasional war, famine, plague, etc. Since the dawn of the
agricultural revolution, the human population has grown exponentially. However,
one can see through a brief study of human history, that our population was
kept in check through disease. Many diseases ravaged the human species in the
past, because of a lack of understanding of medicine, microscopic organisms,
and personal hygiene. For example, the bubonic plague wiped out a majority of
the European continent and acted as a major check in the balance of the human
population. However,
Since the time of the Bubonic Plague in the 1400’s, the growth of
population has been on a constant increase. Between
the time of the
plague and the 21st century, there was been hundreds
and thousands of
wars, natural calamities and man-made hazards.
However, none of these
have made a dent on the population.
Medicine changed the course of history, and
has led to the unprecedented growth of the human species. Since the early
1900’s diseases like Typhoid Fever, smallpox, Cholera, and a plethora of other
devastating and deadly diseases have been eradicated. While the eradication of
these diseases has been wonderful for the millions of individuals who either
suffered from the diseases or lost family to them, the ramifications of wiping these
diseases out has led to problems for us as a species. There are hardly any
diseases left in the world, which could act as a consistent check to our
population. Instead, humans are able to live longer than ever before. The
average age for humans in most countries has increased from low to mid 40’s in 1900 to the 70’s and 80s in 2016. A stable population growth would occur when birth rates equal
death rates, while overpopulation occurs when birth rates are greater than
death rates. The increased lifespan of humans in recent years has been a major
cause of the exponential growth in human population.
It is clear that medicine played a major role in
lengthening the life of humans and has become one of the reasons for
overpopulation as a result. However, there are more reasons for the overpopulation
problem than just medicine. One is the way some areas of our society have
failed to adapt to the increase in life expectancy. In the past a very small
part of the population had enough money to live in comfort and a majority of
the population was forced to give birth to large families in order to make up
for the high infant mortality rate, as more children were needed to work and support the family. The problem lies in the fact that infant mortality rate is not nearly
as high anymore, most of the children that are born in these families survive
and “consume resources that are not sufficient in nature.” Thus, the children that were once a
necessity to support a poorer family become a burden from an economic and
resource perspective. Families would need to sacrifice more of their quality of
life in order to provide for more children and would undoubtedly require more
resources to support them. To put things
into perspective, one should understand how much medicine as well as a few
other major factors have affected the population growth thus far.
The human population grew at the slow rate of less than 0.002 percent a year
for the first several million years of our existence. Since then the average
annual rate of human population has increased to an all-time high of 2.06
percent in 1970. As the base number of people undergoing growth has increased,
it has taken less and less time to add each new billion people. It took 2
million years to add the first billion people; 130 years to add the second
billion; 30 years to add the third billion; 15 years to add the fourth billion;
and only 12 years to add the fifth billion. We are now approaching the seventh
billion!
One
can see that the human population is growing at an alarming rate; but the real
question is, how badly does overpopulation actually affect us? There seems to
be an overwhelming consensus among our species that, humans will simply figure
out new ways to continue adding more humans to this planet, and just find ways
to grow more food and provide for all. For example, In the New York
Times piece, for instance:
Ellis Erle asserts that after studying the ecology of agriculture in China and talking to
archaeologists, he reached the conclusion that technologies have always been
able to overcome any anticipated exceedance of carrying capacity. A key corroboration
marshaled for this view refers to a retrospective assessment of Chinese farming
by archaeologists. It purportedly claims that new and more efficient
technologies invariably enabled local farmers to overcome any anticipated
exceedance of carrying capacity.
Unfortunately,
this type of thinking is delusional and outright wrong. One needs to look no
further than the overwhelming amount of famines that have ravaged the Chinese
lands because of the attempt to provide for more than the carrying capacity of
the lands. The requirement of more resources results in the overuse of lands
and improper farming techniques, which can be recognized as the causes for
famine. We can see the horrible effects of our attempts to provide for more
than the Earth’s carrying capacity when we look at what is happening to the
environment. Entire rainforests are being decimated, wildlife is hunted in reckless ways, and
greenhouse gasses are released into our environment causing global warming.
Some may argue that overpopulation cannot be the cause of all of these events.
However, these things are being done because the human species and its growing
population requires more wood, food, oil, and a number of other resources. The
human overpopulation of the earth results in a constant need for more land and resources,
which also leads to the destruction of biodiversity on our planet. For proof,
one needs to look no further than Israel.
Israel offers a microcosm of the global situation: A meeting point of three
continents, at the middle of the twentieth century, this tiny country was still
home to an astonishing assemblage of mammals, birds and reptiles. That’s
because in 1949 there were one million people living in Israel. Today there are
eight million. The equation is simple: more people means less wildlife.
Accordingly, about a third of the country’s 115 indigenous mammal species today
are either endangered or critically endangered. The amphibian population is
almost entirely extirpated.
Some
may argue that the destruction of biodiversity and animal wildlife is
inconsequatial or that it is necessary to support human life. This type of
thinking is absurd for a few reasons. From a scientific viewpoint, the Earth
contains a complex web of relationsihps between organisms living on the planet.
When these organisms begin to be taken out of the equation, whether they be
plants or animals, dramatic effects will occur for the entire world as every
living thing depends on another in some way or another to survive. From a moral
viewpoint, human beings share this planet with countless other organisms, so it
is morally wrong for humans to deem all other life as less important. The destruction of biodiversity and the
overconsumption of resources affects human life in more ways than one.
Now that a more thorough
understanding of the tragic effects human overpopulation has on the
environment, let us explore the ramifications of overpopulation on humans. As
the population continues to grow, the availability of freshwater will become a
major issue. As it stands, water is
being consumed faster than it is being replaced, which has resulted in the
drying up of many freshwater sources. This will not only cause a fight for
water as a natural resource in the future, but it has also caused an increased
amount of dust particles coming from the dried water sources, which pollute the
air and contribute to a plethora of health problems. Overpopulation causes major strain on resources, leading to a larger
divide between the haves and the have not’s. A larger demand for a decreasing
amount of resources, will undoubtedly lead to future conflicts and an increase
in poverty. When resources become dangerously low, it goes without saying that
wars will be waged over said resources, and many will live suffering in a
poverty stricken land. The push to provide for a larger population would affect
the comfort of everyone. The continued growth of our species would result in a
lower quality of life for most of the world, as many would be forced to fight
for resources that are be naturally abundant for a smaller population. Do we
continue allowing our population to grow despite its clear, detrimental
ramifications? Now is the time to keep our numbers in check, because once the
numbers are too large, it will be impossible. In addition to education and
accessibility of contraceptives, it is a critical time to implement social
change through family planning laws.
There are a few things that may help humanity alter
its current course. One of the first things to be done should be implementing
social change. Overpopulation is caused by the whole of humanity, so the whole
of humanity must work together to remedy the situation. Education must be given
to all about the seriousness of the situation at hand, and the necessity to
have one or two children at the most. Lessons in family planning and the
availability of birth control will greatly help the situation. Women must be
educated and empowered to make their own reproductive choices. This is
especially necessary in many areas of the world where using any form of birth
control is frowned upon. While achieving these goals would be difficult, it is
certainly not impossible. A few countries like Iran have already been
successful and improving their overpopulation problem, by implementing a strong
family planning policy. For example some of these policies include:
Encouraging women to wait three to four years between
pregnancies, discourage childbearing for women younger than 18 or older than 35
— and limit family size to three children. In May 1993, the Iranian government
passed a national family planning law that effectively encouraged couples to
have fewer children — by restricting maternity leave benefits after three
children. It also called for the Ministries of Education, of Culture and Higher
Education, and of Health and Medical Education to incorporate information on
population, family planning, and mother and child health care in curriculum
materials.
In
order to improve the overpopulation problem, it seems that governments need to
provide incentives for their citizens to limit their family size. Having fewer
children is economically favorable for a family in which income level does not
depend on child labor. While some may argue that implementing fines to control
family size is a feasible method, providing incentives to families seems much
more rewarding. This is because in many situations families may not have the
means to pay a fine, but would surely benefit from some form of financial
reward. In addition to family planning incentives, sex education should be made
an initiative by governments of developing countries. Using resources to
implement these changes would ultimately also benefit the government itself
because a controlled population would result in less conflict, manageable
competition for resources, and general higher quality of life.
One must
understand that family planning will inevitably affect a countries age
demographic later on, and will inevitably have some consequences. It is a real
concern, because once these family planning laws are implemented, there will be
a time where the aging population will be too large for the young population to
support economically. This is a large hurdle that must be passed; but,
eventually the population demographic would normalize out because the same
policies would still be in place and following generations would follow the
same pattern of development. The demographic change could be controlled by
having transient stages of family planning. This would ease the stress of
demographic change. Ultimately, the efforts of family planning will control
population growth at least to some extent, which is significantly better than
no control at all. The difficulties of implementing and maintaining such
policies are completely worth avoiding the consequences that are at stake.
An inevitable consequence of uncontrolled population
growth is what will happen to the value of a human life. When there are so many
people in the world, all competing to survive in an environment of limited
means, the value of life would undoubtedly be compromised. Along with that, the
quality of human life would be in question. The reason humanity has been able
to thrive is that for many, survival has become less of a source of stress than
it was early in human history. Though it is still a reality for some, for
others survival is not a pressing stressor. This has allowed humanity’s time
and effort to go into bettering itself and making advancements as a species. If
humanity’s growth exceeds the feasibility of support by Earth, humanity will
regress into a primal instinct world where survival is the only priority. In a
world where the stress of survival again becomes very primitive, progress would
slow and the general quality of life would plummet dramatically. At this imagined point in time that could
easily become reality, life’s value would be forgotten and we would face the
possibility of extinction. Now is the time to risk making some people
uncomfortable or angry if it means taking steps toward managing the
exponential, uncontrolled population growth of humans.
