tomar proti ti sokal jeno kate cacktaser bisanay
tomar prti ti khon jeno kate cacktaser katay|
amar chokher osru jokhon jabe furie---
tobu parthona tomar osru jeno bohee jibon vore..|
...
tomar hasi te jeno amar kanna na payy
tobu tomar kanay jeno ami hesse jai |
amar soker nodi jokhon stobdho
tomar dukher paal tule nouka sekhane khujbe dik-hin digonto|
amar hridoyer kalo megh jabe dure sore-
tomar buke kannar jhor boibe jibon vore|
vebeso tumi sartho porotar purno sudha koresi ami paan-
tumi to sikhieso sarthoporotar gaan|
বৃহস্পতিবার, ২৯ জুলাই, ২০১০
বুধবার, ২১ এপ্রিল, ২০১০
Changing Concept of Public Health
Changing Concept of Public Health
World Health Organization defines health as “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.”
Public health is the science and art of protecting and improving the health of communities through education ,promotion of healthy,lifestyles,and research for disease and injury prevention.
Public health helps improve the health and well being of people in local communities and across our nation.
Public health helps people who are loss fortunate achieve a healtheir life style.
Public health works to prevent health problem before it occurs.
Public health is typically divided into
epidemiology
bio statistics and health services.
Environmental
social, behavioral, and occupational health are also important subfields.
History of Public Health
Historians tell us public health began with human waste sanitation thousands of years ago. Later, clean water was brought into the ancient City of Rome by its famous aqueducts. Still other efforts by public health brought us ways to end widespread disease outbreaks, such as cholera and smallpox.
Promotion of health at community level by government rather than on an individual basis. Public health includes the prevention of disease through the provision of clean water and sewage disposal, legislation for clean air, health education programmes, and medical care for the whole population through doctors, nurses, and hospitals. Levels of public health have varied through time, reaching a first peak under the Romans, when cities and towns were supplied with public baths, sanitation, and clean water.
After centuries of regression following the end of the Roman Empire in AD 476, public health became an issue again in the 19th century during the Industrial Revolution. Government acceptance of responsibility for public health, which began in the UK with a limited Public Health Act in 1848, increased throughout the late 19th and 20th centuries. By the end of the 20th century, with the introduction of the welfare state, National Health Service, and health education and protection measures, government responsibility for the health of the nation was not only complete, but also expected.
Early public health measures
Public health did not exist in the prehistoric world. The lack of settled communities, absence of government structures, and small size of settlements made it unnecessary. During the ancient Egyptian period developments such as toilets and bathing were introduced, but this was on a private level. While Egyptian religious beliefs encouraged washing the body, thereby improving the health of the population, this was not part of a public health programme.
The ancient Greeks also failed to develop a public health system despite the great advances in Greek medicine. The Greeks encouraged healthy living, and pursued regimens of exercise and hygiene such as those prescribed by Hippocrates in his Regimen and Regimen in Acute Diseases (4th century BC). Patients visiting the temples of the god of healing, Asclepius, were encouraged to take part in exercise, but the temples were not part of a public health system.
There was some development of public health by the Minoans, a Mediterranean civilization that flourished on Crete about 3000-1050 BC. The Minoans built baths, and constructed channels to supply clean water and remove waste. However, these facilities were lost when the Minoan civilization collapsed, and their palaces and towns were destroyed by natural disasters and invading Greek forces. Aqueducts (bridges carrying water) were also constructed; one of the first great aqueducts was built in 691 BC to carry water for 80 km/50 mi to Ninevah, capital of the ancient Assyrian Empire. However, the scale of the public health system introduced by the Roman Empire from around 300 BC was without precedent in the Western world.
Public health in the Roman Empire
The Romans controlled a vast empire stretching from the Middle East to the British Isles, and including much of North Africa and northern Europe. Rome, the capital, was the largest city in the world at that time, with a population of over 1,000,000 by about 4 BC. Such a city produced huge amounts of waste products, and required vast amounts of fresh water for the survival of its people. To ensure the smooth running and health of the city, the government of Rome developed a highly structured public health system, and this method was followed in other cities and towns established across the Roman Empire.
Aqueducts were built to carry fresh water from the mountains to the cities, such as the Pont du Gard (8 BC) that served Nîmes in southern France. The water was filtered before being piped to wells and buildings. Fresh drinking water was provided in drinking fountains around the cities using the water brought in by the aqueducts. Public baths were built where people came to wash, relax, swim, and receive massages. Public toilets were provided with running water cleaning away the waste, and sewers were constructed to carry soiled water into the local rivers.
The Cloaca Maxima was Rome's largest sewer and discharged into the River Tiber. The swamps around Rome were drained to stop the spread of bad air and smells that were believed to encourage disease. Soldiers were ordered not to drink water from swamps to maintain their health.
Public health was further enhanced by the army hospitals that were built across the empire, as these also treated civilians. Access to doctors was given free to the poor. In general wealthy Romans distrusted doctors, preferring to rely on good diet, exercise, and clean water, though good doctors were very much in demand and commanded huge fees.
The Romans were able to implement public health measures as they had an organized, centralized government, and the money to pay for the work. Such a vast system of public health was unprecedented in history, and made the Romans a much healthier people. The Romans did not know about bacteria and the true causes of disease, but they observed that swamps caused illness and that a lack of fresh water was damaging to health. By the end of the Roman Empire in AD 476, the Roman public health system was more advanced than any system of public health would be in Europe for the next 1,400 years.
Public health in the medieval period
During the Middle Ages (5th-15th centuries) in Europe, public health systems collapsed and became virtually non-existent, particularly during the period known as the Dark Ages (around 500-1000). The towns and cities of the Romans were often abandoned, and the aqueducts, sewers, and baths were allowed to fall into disrepair. Medieval governments and wealthy people in society no longer felt the responsibility or need to provide public health. Money was not spent on providing fresh, clean water or removing waste, but on more pressing concerns, such as the provision of armies and defences for the almost continuous wars that raged throughout the period.
Streets were often used as dumping grounds for slaughterhouse waste or the contents of chamber pots from people's houses. Action was only taken during outbreaks of disease such as the Black Death, an epidemic of bubonic plague that swept across Europe in the mid-14th century, killing between one-third and half of the population. When the plague arrived in England in 1348, Edward III ordered the lord mayor of London to clean up the streets of the capital, and keep animals and slaughterhouses out of the city. Public toilets were to be introduced and the dumping of waste in the streets was forbidden. The improvements continued until the end of the 14th century, but the measures were often poorly enforced, and had little effect on the overcrowding and lack of cleanliness that was rife in the larger towns and cities. Few hospitals existed and doctors were far too expensive for the poor to consult, so ill health and disease were unchecked and spread rapidly.
Smaller towns had less of a disease problem, and often had more effective sewage systems. York in England had stone sewers by 1300. However, the larger cities of medieval Europe, such as London or Florence, were far less healthy places in which to live, even though many were built on the sites of great Roman cites; London occupied the former site of Londinium, and Florence the Roman city of Florentia. The achievements of the Romans can be seen as even greater when considering that Rome had a population of around 1,000,000 in about 4 BC, whereas London's population was only about 40,000 in 1400 (following the loss of an estimated third of its population during the outbreak of plague in the mid-14th century).
Public health during the Renaissance
Public health continued to be poor in Europe during the Renaissance period (15th-mid-18th centuries). Despite the vast number of discoveries in science and medicine, the development of public health was not a priority for most cities and towns. Understanding of the causes of epidemics such as the plague remained poor, and religious explanations continued to dominate alongside practical, though usually incorrect, theories. Governments acted in response to outbreaks of the plague, but their actions were too late to stop the disease from killing thousands. An outbreak of bubonic plague in London in 1665 killed about 100,000 of the 400,000 inhabitants. Laws were passed to force people with the plague to stay in their homes, and guards posted outside plague-infested houses to stop the spread of the disease. Carts were organized to collect the dead each morning, and the corpses had to be buried at least 2 m/6 ft deep to stop animals digging up the diseased bodies. Conditions in the streets of major cities were not much better than those of the 14th century, although there was usually better access to clean water and some public toilets. In addition, many cities employed people to remove the rubbish from the streets. Nevertheless, the growing size of these cities meant that conditions were unsuitable for healthy living. Health measures were piecemeal and governments accepted little responsibility for public health.
The impact of the Industrial Revolution
The Industrial Revolution, beginning in the middle of the 18th century in the UK and spreading across Europe and North America during the 19th century, brought public health problems on a scale never witnessed before. Factories and mills were built in the growing towns and cities of northern England, and the workers required housing. Rows of back-to-back terraces were built in industrial centres such as Manchester, Leeds, and Birmingham. The economic idea that drove the massive industrial growth of the age was laissez faire, ‘let alone’, a theory that the state should not intervene in economic affairs.
The attitude of the rich and powerful to government intervention in the problems of the poor reflected the same belief. It was even considered that the government could not solve the problems, as the poor only had themselves to blame for their high levels of disease and short life expectancy. The idea of laissez faire in economics meant that businesses were able to operate their factories and other enterprises with little or no interference from the government. The high profits that resulted encouraged them to believe that self-reliance should be applied to the poor and public health.
As a result of laissez faire ideas, builders were not required to provide sewerage or clean water to the houses they constructed. Landlords were able to cram whole families into single rooms, and even let out the cellars to another family. The streets were either not cleaned by the local councils, or where such cleaning did occur, the alleyways of the newly built back-to-backs were so narrow that the refuse carts could not get access to them and the filth and rubbish simply piled up. The growth rate of the towns was huge. Leeds grew from 16,000 people in 1750 to 172,000 in 1851, an increase of 975%; Manchester from 18,000 to 303,000, an increase of about 1,580%; and Liverpool from 22,000 to 376,000, an increase of about 1,610%. Such increases were unparalleled in history, and the existing systems of local government and sanitation were totally unsuitable. It took the deaths of over 100,000 people in four deadly cholera epidemics (1831-32, 1848-49, 1853, and 1865-66) to get the British government to drop its laissez faire attitudes and take action to improve public health in the cities of the UK.
Reform movement
The problems of disease and ill health were obvious, but a number of social reformers began to research the living conditions of the poor and try to improve them. In 1838 Thomas Southwood-Smith surveyed the living conditions of the poor in Whitechapel, East London. He discovered that people lived in such appalling conditions that they were often too ill to work, increasing their suffering. From 1839 William Farr collected statistics from parish registers on births and deaths. He was able to show the impact of poor living conditions on life expectancy and the differences between different areas. His work supported that of Southwood-Smith and another social reformer Edwin Chadwick, who had been appointed an assistant poor-law commissioner in 1832.
In 1842 Chadwick published his Report on the Sanitary Conditions of the Labouring Population of Great Britain, which reinforced Southwood-Smith's findings on a wider scale in Britain. Chadwick found that the life expectancy of all classes of people in cities was as little as half that of people in the countryside. In Liverpool the average life expectancy of a male industrial worker was just 15 years. Chadwick suggested that investment in public health would improve the health and reduce the death rate among the poor.
He argued that the cost of basic public health measures would be less than the cost of having to support a poor and unhealthy population under the poor law system. Chadwick's ideas were widely read and he became a national figure. His findings shocked many leading members of British society and the campaign for action increased. The authoritative reports of the Health of Towns Commission (1844, 1845) provided further evidence of the squalor and disease that existed, particularly in the industrial towns. However, the wealthier inhabitants of the towns and cities of the UK, who controlled the councils, were reluctant to act because they would have to fund any improvements as ratepayers.
Public Health Act 1848
When the second cholera epidemic began in 1848, the first of the Public Health Acts was passed. An act had failed in 1847 because of opposition from members of Parliament known as the ‘Dirty Party’ of MPs. The 1848 act allowed local councils to set up a local board of health if 10% of ratepayers agreed. A Central Board of Health was established in London for five years with the aim of coordinating local action. The costs could be met by borrowing, but much opposition remained from ratepayers who did not wish to pay. The main problems with the first Public Health Act were that it was only a temporary measure to tackle the cholera epidemic of 1848 and, most importantly, it was voluntary.
Most councils took some short-term action, but major public health improvements did not occur. When in 1854 the powers of the Central Board of Health were reduced following pressure from politicians, The Times celebrated, commenting that: ‘We prefer to take our chance with cholera than be bullied into health’.
A few cities, such as Leeds, acted to improve their public health and accepted the cost, but they were the exceptions. Killer diseases such as smallpox, typhus, diphtheria, and tuberculosis remained rife and killed thousands each year. Even less virulent diseases caused chronic illness or death, as the poor were unable to pay for doctors or expensive medical treatments. The vote was still the reserve of the monied and propertied classes, so it was almost impossible for poor people to force the government and ratepayers to drop their laissez faire policies and make real change and improvements.
Scientific and political advances
Between 1854 and 1875 advances were made in the understanding of the cause of disease that would change approaches to public health. In 1854 the Scottish epidemiologist John Snow studied a cholera outbreak centred on Broad Street in London. He concluded that the cause was the water from the Broad Street pump and removed the handle. The outbreak ended. Snow had shown that cholera was caused by contaminated drinking water, a situation that councils and government could remedy by providing clean water.
However, Snow could not prove his theory as he did not know about the existence of bacteria. In the 1860s French chemist Louis Pasteur developed his germ theory of disease. His work showed why Snow was correct in his theory that cholera was waterborne, although it was not until 1883 that the German bacteriologist Robert Koch discovered the bacillus for cholera. Armed with the evidence of germ theory, public health campaigners were able to demand action.
In 1867 a second Reform Act extended voting rights to adult male heads of households in the boroughs, giving the franchise to working men in towns. Politicians in borough seats were now forced to support the demands of the urban poor to achieve election, and one of their main requests was better public health provision. The new political power of the working classes, the growing opposition to laissez faire policies led by religious and philanthropic activists, and the mounting evidence that measures could be taken to reduce death rates contributed to further action on public health.
In 1865 the third cholera epidemic occurred. The death rate in this outbreak, however, was around 10,000 considerably lower than the more than 21,000 killed in 1831-32. Government and council authorities now knew what caused the disease and took rapid action to stop it spreading. In 1872 the government enforced compulsory vaccination against smallpox and virtually eradicated the disease.
Public health measures of 1872 and 1875
In 1872 a second Public Health Act was passed that created a medical officer of health responsible for each region of the country. Two further acts of 1875, however, completely changed the landscape of public health. Conservative prime minister Benjamin Disraeli passed the third Public Health Act and the Artisans' Dwellings Act. The third Public Health Act abolished the concept of laissez faire, and forced councils to take action to improve public health. Unlike the 1848 act it was compulsory and permanent. Councils had to supply clean drinking water and provide proper sanitation and drainage in their towns. Each town had to employ medical inspectors to check on the health of their population and ensure that public health laws were being enforced. The Artisans' Dwelling Act attempted to tackle the problems of slum housing. Councils were given the right to knock down slums and replace them with council houses. However, the costs involved meant that most councils failed to use these new powers.
Although the acts of the 1870s could not solve the UK's public health problems quickly, Disraeli had begun to tackle the appalling conditions caused by the rapid urban growth of the Industrial Revolution and the neglect caused by decades of laissez faire policies.
The effects of chronic poverty
The next spate of action on public health followed the call-up for the Boer War (1899-1902), when the effects of chronic poverty among Britain's lower classes became apparent. The British Army needed over 500,000 soldiers during the war, and recruitment drives were made all over the country. The volunteers were given a medical to check their suitability for active service, and the results shocked the nation. Over 40% of young adult males who volunteered were rejected as unfit for service. This figure rose to over 90% in some inner-city districts, such as those of Manchester and Liverpool. The infant mortality rate (the number of children who die before the age of one) was higher in 1901, at 163 per 1,000 births, than in 1840, when it stood at 150 per 1,000 births. Clearly the Public Health Acts of the 19th century had done much to end epidemics such as cholera, but had not reduced the grinding poverty that gripped Britain's lower classes.
Poverty in 19th-century Britain meant that people lacked the money and necessary resources to sustain the most basic of standards of living. Poverty-stricken families lived in damp and crumbling back-to-back housing, on diets dominated by bread, margarine, and tea. The use of doctors for general health care was impossible because of the expense involved. People had to carry on working into advanced old age as they had only their families to support them, and this was often impossible to do.
Public health reform in the early 20th century
The levels of ill health and poverty did not surprise social reformers such as Charles Booth and Seebohm Rowntree, who had surveyed Britain's cities and reported on the results of poverty. In 1906 a new Liberal government was elected, with David Lloyd-George as chancellor of the Exchequer. Lloyd-George was instrumental in passing laws to end poverty and provide help to the poor. In 1906 free school meals were introduced for the very poorest children, ensuring that they received at least one decent meal a day. In 1907 medical inspectors started to visit schools to check on the health of children and provide basic care. In the same year it became a legal requirement to register all births with a local health visitor, so that mother and baby could be cared for and educated about health risks. In 1909 the Old Age Pensions Act gave a weekly pension of five shillings to the over-70s, removing the burden on families to care for their elderly and allowing old people to retire at a more reasonable age.
In 1909 the Liberal government introduced the Labour Exchange system, similar to modern job centres, to find work for the unemployed poor. In the same year the construction of back-to-back housing was finally banned, marking the end of these poorly constructed, badly ventilated, and overcrowded slum houses. Cities such as Manchester had been trying to ban these dwellings without success since the mid-19th century. Alongside this measure, the government took steps to improve new housing by enforcing building regulations, particularly with regard to the location and size of houses.
In 1911 the groundbreaking National Insurance Act was introduced, which provided the working classes with unemployment benefit or sick pay when required. The worker, employer, and government paid a contribution to the scheme. Free medical care from government-appointed doctors would also be provided, giving many people access to doctors for the first time. Although the National Insurance Act was limited to men and was voluntary, it did provide effective cover for millions of workers for the first time. It was also a massive extension of the responsibilities of government for public health, particularly when seen in conjunction with the Old Age Pension Act.
Public health between the wars
Further advances in public health provision in the UK followed the end of World War I in 1918. The government had promised that soldiers returning to Britain would be given a country ‘fit for heroes’. In order to honour this, the government passed laws that forced local councils to provide housing for the poor in 1919. Council house estates sprang up across Britain in a mass building programme, although the problems of slum housing remained for the next decade as councils did not tackle this issue. Between 1930 and 1935 a nationwide programme to clear slums achieved some success in reducing the quantity of poor housing.
However, poverty still continued to blight the health of the poor. With women and children outside the terms of the National Insurance Act, and health care for men in the scheme limited, the poor were forced to pay for expensive private doctors. Hospital provision was patchy across the country. Voluntary unions paid for by public subscription provided many hospitals, but these only cared for the people who contributed to the funds. No central government control existed over healthcare. The worldwide depression of the 1930s and consequent widespread unemployment highlighted the remaining problems of public health.
Emergence of the modern public health system
Following World War II (1939-45), the public health system of the UK was revolutionized by the development of a full welfare state and a national health service (NHS). The concept had been developed in 1942 when the British economist William Beveridge, who had worked with Lloyd-George on the reforms of 1906-11, produced his Report on Social Insurance and Allied Services, later known as the Beveridge Report. The report listed five basic problem areas in public health: idleness, ignorance, disease, squalor, and want; and proposed a scheme of social insurance that would look after people from ‘the cradle to the grave’. The scheme was introduced under the National Health Service Act (1946) by the minister of health for the new Labour government, Aneurin Bevan. The NHS came into operation on 5 July 1948. All British citizens could now get free doctors, dentists, hospital care, medicines, opticians, and maternity care. The government took over hospitals and the employment of doctors to provide the service. The welfare state extended unemployment benefits to all workers, women included. Family allowance was paid to all parents of children to help with the costs of raising a family. The concept of government responsibility for public health had been totally embraced.
New issues of public health
Further developments in public health in the 20th century included the introduction of environmental health officers to investigate potential hazards such as hygiene in shops and restaurants. The government also launched health education campaigns, such as anti-smoking campaigns to reduce cancer and heart disease, and road safety campaigns to encourage drivers to slow down and pedestrians to take care when crossing the road.
Food safety became one of the biggest issues of public health in the UK. The laws on food safety, such as the Food Safety Act (1990), became increasingly strict, particularly in the wake of outbreaks of salmonella and Escherichia coli (E. coli) poisoning; in 1996 an E. coli outbreak from the sale of contaminated meat pies in Lanarkshire, Scotland, killed 16 people. The outbreak of BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) in British cattle in the mid-1980s and subsequent cases of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) in humans, beginning in the 1990s, increased demands for government action and intervention to protect the health of the public. In 2000 the British government established the Food Standards Agency to coordinate action on food safety and the protection of public health. At the beginning of the 21st century the role of the government in public health is expected and accepted in a way that would have been unimaginable in the mid-19th century.
REFERENCES
• Armstrong, D. (1993) ‘Public health spaces and the fabrication of identity’, Sociology, 27 (3) 393-410.
• Ashton, J.; Seymour, H. (1988) The New Public Health. Open University Press Milton Keynes.
• Baum, F. (1998) The New Public Health: An Australian Perspective. Oxford University Press
Oxford.
• Green, J.; Thorogood, N. (1998) Analysing Health Policy: A Sociological Approach. Longman Harlow.
• Lalonde, M. (1974) A New Perspective on the Health of Canadians. Information Canada Ottawa.
• McKeown, T. (1979) The Role of Medicine: Dream, Mirage or Nemesis? Blackwell Oxford.
• Petersen, A.; Lupton, D. (1996) The New Public Health: Health and Self in the Age of Risk. Sage London
World Health Organization defines health as “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.”
Public health is the science and art of protecting and improving the health of communities through education ,promotion of healthy,lifestyles,and research for disease and injury prevention.
Public health helps improve the health and well being of people in local communities and across our nation.
Public health helps people who are loss fortunate achieve a healtheir life style.
Public health works to prevent health problem before it occurs.
Public health is typically divided into
epidemiology
bio statistics and health services.
Environmental
social, behavioral, and occupational health are also important subfields.
History of Public Health
Historians tell us public health began with human waste sanitation thousands of years ago. Later, clean water was brought into the ancient City of Rome by its famous aqueducts. Still other efforts by public health brought us ways to end widespread disease outbreaks, such as cholera and smallpox.
Promotion of health at community level by government rather than on an individual basis. Public health includes the prevention of disease through the provision of clean water and sewage disposal, legislation for clean air, health education programmes, and medical care for the whole population through doctors, nurses, and hospitals. Levels of public health have varied through time, reaching a first peak under the Romans, when cities and towns were supplied with public baths, sanitation, and clean water.
After centuries of regression following the end of the Roman Empire in AD 476, public health became an issue again in the 19th century during the Industrial Revolution. Government acceptance of responsibility for public health, which began in the UK with a limited Public Health Act in 1848, increased throughout the late 19th and 20th centuries. By the end of the 20th century, with the introduction of the welfare state, National Health Service, and health education and protection measures, government responsibility for the health of the nation was not only complete, but also expected.
Early public health measures
Public health did not exist in the prehistoric world. The lack of settled communities, absence of government structures, and small size of settlements made it unnecessary. During the ancient Egyptian period developments such as toilets and bathing were introduced, but this was on a private level. While Egyptian religious beliefs encouraged washing the body, thereby improving the health of the population, this was not part of a public health programme.
The ancient Greeks also failed to develop a public health system despite the great advances in Greek medicine. The Greeks encouraged healthy living, and pursued regimens of exercise and hygiene such as those prescribed by Hippocrates in his Regimen and Regimen in Acute Diseases (4th century BC). Patients visiting the temples of the god of healing, Asclepius, were encouraged to take part in exercise, but the temples were not part of a public health system.
There was some development of public health by the Minoans, a Mediterranean civilization that flourished on Crete about 3000-1050 BC. The Minoans built baths, and constructed channels to supply clean water and remove waste. However, these facilities were lost when the Minoan civilization collapsed, and their palaces and towns were destroyed by natural disasters and invading Greek forces. Aqueducts (bridges carrying water) were also constructed; one of the first great aqueducts was built in 691 BC to carry water for 80 km/50 mi to Ninevah, capital of the ancient Assyrian Empire. However, the scale of the public health system introduced by the Roman Empire from around 300 BC was without precedent in the Western world.
Public health in the Roman Empire
The Romans controlled a vast empire stretching from the Middle East to the British Isles, and including much of North Africa and northern Europe. Rome, the capital, was the largest city in the world at that time, with a population of over 1,000,000 by about 4 BC. Such a city produced huge amounts of waste products, and required vast amounts of fresh water for the survival of its people. To ensure the smooth running and health of the city, the government of Rome developed a highly structured public health system, and this method was followed in other cities and towns established across the Roman Empire.
Aqueducts were built to carry fresh water from the mountains to the cities, such as the Pont du Gard (8 BC) that served Nîmes in southern France. The water was filtered before being piped to wells and buildings. Fresh drinking water was provided in drinking fountains around the cities using the water brought in by the aqueducts. Public baths were built where people came to wash, relax, swim, and receive massages. Public toilets were provided with running water cleaning away the waste, and sewers were constructed to carry soiled water into the local rivers.
The Cloaca Maxima was Rome's largest sewer and discharged into the River Tiber. The swamps around Rome were drained to stop the spread of bad air and smells that were believed to encourage disease. Soldiers were ordered not to drink water from swamps to maintain their health.
Public health was further enhanced by the army hospitals that were built across the empire, as these also treated civilians. Access to doctors was given free to the poor. In general wealthy Romans distrusted doctors, preferring to rely on good diet, exercise, and clean water, though good doctors were very much in demand and commanded huge fees.
The Romans were able to implement public health measures as they had an organized, centralized government, and the money to pay for the work. Such a vast system of public health was unprecedented in history, and made the Romans a much healthier people. The Romans did not know about bacteria and the true causes of disease, but they observed that swamps caused illness and that a lack of fresh water was damaging to health. By the end of the Roman Empire in AD 476, the Roman public health system was more advanced than any system of public health would be in Europe for the next 1,400 years.
Public health in the medieval period
During the Middle Ages (5th-15th centuries) in Europe, public health systems collapsed and became virtually non-existent, particularly during the period known as the Dark Ages (around 500-1000). The towns and cities of the Romans were often abandoned, and the aqueducts, sewers, and baths were allowed to fall into disrepair. Medieval governments and wealthy people in society no longer felt the responsibility or need to provide public health. Money was not spent on providing fresh, clean water or removing waste, but on more pressing concerns, such as the provision of armies and defences for the almost continuous wars that raged throughout the period.
Streets were often used as dumping grounds for slaughterhouse waste or the contents of chamber pots from people's houses. Action was only taken during outbreaks of disease such as the Black Death, an epidemic of bubonic plague that swept across Europe in the mid-14th century, killing between one-third and half of the population. When the plague arrived in England in 1348, Edward III ordered the lord mayor of London to clean up the streets of the capital, and keep animals and slaughterhouses out of the city. Public toilets were to be introduced and the dumping of waste in the streets was forbidden. The improvements continued until the end of the 14th century, but the measures were often poorly enforced, and had little effect on the overcrowding and lack of cleanliness that was rife in the larger towns and cities. Few hospitals existed and doctors were far too expensive for the poor to consult, so ill health and disease were unchecked and spread rapidly.
Smaller towns had less of a disease problem, and often had more effective sewage systems. York in England had stone sewers by 1300. However, the larger cities of medieval Europe, such as London or Florence, were far less healthy places in which to live, even though many were built on the sites of great Roman cites; London occupied the former site of Londinium, and Florence the Roman city of Florentia. The achievements of the Romans can be seen as even greater when considering that Rome had a population of around 1,000,000 in about 4 BC, whereas London's population was only about 40,000 in 1400 (following the loss of an estimated third of its population during the outbreak of plague in the mid-14th century).
Public health during the Renaissance
Public health continued to be poor in Europe during the Renaissance period (15th-mid-18th centuries). Despite the vast number of discoveries in science and medicine, the development of public health was not a priority for most cities and towns. Understanding of the causes of epidemics such as the plague remained poor, and religious explanations continued to dominate alongside practical, though usually incorrect, theories. Governments acted in response to outbreaks of the plague, but their actions were too late to stop the disease from killing thousands. An outbreak of bubonic plague in London in 1665 killed about 100,000 of the 400,000 inhabitants. Laws were passed to force people with the plague to stay in their homes, and guards posted outside plague-infested houses to stop the spread of the disease. Carts were organized to collect the dead each morning, and the corpses had to be buried at least 2 m/6 ft deep to stop animals digging up the diseased bodies. Conditions in the streets of major cities were not much better than those of the 14th century, although there was usually better access to clean water and some public toilets. In addition, many cities employed people to remove the rubbish from the streets. Nevertheless, the growing size of these cities meant that conditions were unsuitable for healthy living. Health measures were piecemeal and governments accepted little responsibility for public health.
The impact of the Industrial Revolution
The Industrial Revolution, beginning in the middle of the 18th century in the UK and spreading across Europe and North America during the 19th century, brought public health problems on a scale never witnessed before. Factories and mills were built in the growing towns and cities of northern England, and the workers required housing. Rows of back-to-back terraces were built in industrial centres such as Manchester, Leeds, and Birmingham. The economic idea that drove the massive industrial growth of the age was laissez faire, ‘let alone’, a theory that the state should not intervene in economic affairs.
The attitude of the rich and powerful to government intervention in the problems of the poor reflected the same belief. It was even considered that the government could not solve the problems, as the poor only had themselves to blame for their high levels of disease and short life expectancy. The idea of laissez faire in economics meant that businesses were able to operate their factories and other enterprises with little or no interference from the government. The high profits that resulted encouraged them to believe that self-reliance should be applied to the poor and public health.
As a result of laissez faire ideas, builders were not required to provide sewerage or clean water to the houses they constructed. Landlords were able to cram whole families into single rooms, and even let out the cellars to another family. The streets were either not cleaned by the local councils, or where such cleaning did occur, the alleyways of the newly built back-to-backs were so narrow that the refuse carts could not get access to them and the filth and rubbish simply piled up. The growth rate of the towns was huge. Leeds grew from 16,000 people in 1750 to 172,000 in 1851, an increase of 975%; Manchester from 18,000 to 303,000, an increase of about 1,580%; and Liverpool from 22,000 to 376,000, an increase of about 1,610%. Such increases were unparalleled in history, and the existing systems of local government and sanitation were totally unsuitable. It took the deaths of over 100,000 people in four deadly cholera epidemics (1831-32, 1848-49, 1853, and 1865-66) to get the British government to drop its laissez faire attitudes and take action to improve public health in the cities of the UK.
Reform movement
The problems of disease and ill health were obvious, but a number of social reformers began to research the living conditions of the poor and try to improve them. In 1838 Thomas Southwood-Smith surveyed the living conditions of the poor in Whitechapel, East London. He discovered that people lived in such appalling conditions that they were often too ill to work, increasing their suffering. From 1839 William Farr collected statistics from parish registers on births and deaths. He was able to show the impact of poor living conditions on life expectancy and the differences between different areas. His work supported that of Southwood-Smith and another social reformer Edwin Chadwick, who had been appointed an assistant poor-law commissioner in 1832.
In 1842 Chadwick published his Report on the Sanitary Conditions of the Labouring Population of Great Britain, which reinforced Southwood-Smith's findings on a wider scale in Britain. Chadwick found that the life expectancy of all classes of people in cities was as little as half that of people in the countryside. In Liverpool the average life expectancy of a male industrial worker was just 15 years. Chadwick suggested that investment in public health would improve the health and reduce the death rate among the poor.
He argued that the cost of basic public health measures would be less than the cost of having to support a poor and unhealthy population under the poor law system. Chadwick's ideas were widely read and he became a national figure. His findings shocked many leading members of British society and the campaign for action increased. The authoritative reports of the Health of Towns Commission (1844, 1845) provided further evidence of the squalor and disease that existed, particularly in the industrial towns. However, the wealthier inhabitants of the towns and cities of the UK, who controlled the councils, were reluctant to act because they would have to fund any improvements as ratepayers.
Public Health Act 1848
When the second cholera epidemic began in 1848, the first of the Public Health Acts was passed. An act had failed in 1847 because of opposition from members of Parliament known as the ‘Dirty Party’ of MPs. The 1848 act allowed local councils to set up a local board of health if 10% of ratepayers agreed. A Central Board of Health was established in London for five years with the aim of coordinating local action. The costs could be met by borrowing, but much opposition remained from ratepayers who did not wish to pay. The main problems with the first Public Health Act were that it was only a temporary measure to tackle the cholera epidemic of 1848 and, most importantly, it was voluntary.
Most councils took some short-term action, but major public health improvements did not occur. When in 1854 the powers of the Central Board of Health were reduced following pressure from politicians, The Times celebrated, commenting that: ‘We prefer to take our chance with cholera than be bullied into health’.
A few cities, such as Leeds, acted to improve their public health and accepted the cost, but they were the exceptions. Killer diseases such as smallpox, typhus, diphtheria, and tuberculosis remained rife and killed thousands each year. Even less virulent diseases caused chronic illness or death, as the poor were unable to pay for doctors or expensive medical treatments. The vote was still the reserve of the monied and propertied classes, so it was almost impossible for poor people to force the government and ratepayers to drop their laissez faire policies and make real change and improvements.
Scientific and political advances
Between 1854 and 1875 advances were made in the understanding of the cause of disease that would change approaches to public health. In 1854 the Scottish epidemiologist John Snow studied a cholera outbreak centred on Broad Street in London. He concluded that the cause was the water from the Broad Street pump and removed the handle. The outbreak ended. Snow had shown that cholera was caused by contaminated drinking water, a situation that councils and government could remedy by providing clean water.
However, Snow could not prove his theory as he did not know about the existence of bacteria. In the 1860s French chemist Louis Pasteur developed his germ theory of disease. His work showed why Snow was correct in his theory that cholera was waterborne, although it was not until 1883 that the German bacteriologist Robert Koch discovered the bacillus for cholera. Armed with the evidence of germ theory, public health campaigners were able to demand action.
In 1867 a second Reform Act extended voting rights to adult male heads of households in the boroughs, giving the franchise to working men in towns. Politicians in borough seats were now forced to support the demands of the urban poor to achieve election, and one of their main requests was better public health provision. The new political power of the working classes, the growing opposition to laissez faire policies led by religious and philanthropic activists, and the mounting evidence that measures could be taken to reduce death rates contributed to further action on public health.
In 1865 the third cholera epidemic occurred. The death rate in this outbreak, however, was around 10,000 considerably lower than the more than 21,000 killed in 1831-32. Government and council authorities now knew what caused the disease and took rapid action to stop it spreading. In 1872 the government enforced compulsory vaccination against smallpox and virtually eradicated the disease.
Public health measures of 1872 and 1875
In 1872 a second Public Health Act was passed that created a medical officer of health responsible for each region of the country. Two further acts of 1875, however, completely changed the landscape of public health. Conservative prime minister Benjamin Disraeli passed the third Public Health Act and the Artisans' Dwellings Act. The third Public Health Act abolished the concept of laissez faire, and forced councils to take action to improve public health. Unlike the 1848 act it was compulsory and permanent. Councils had to supply clean drinking water and provide proper sanitation and drainage in their towns. Each town had to employ medical inspectors to check on the health of their population and ensure that public health laws were being enforced. The Artisans' Dwelling Act attempted to tackle the problems of slum housing. Councils were given the right to knock down slums and replace them with council houses. However, the costs involved meant that most councils failed to use these new powers.
Although the acts of the 1870s could not solve the UK's public health problems quickly, Disraeli had begun to tackle the appalling conditions caused by the rapid urban growth of the Industrial Revolution and the neglect caused by decades of laissez faire policies.
The effects of chronic poverty
The next spate of action on public health followed the call-up for the Boer War (1899-1902), when the effects of chronic poverty among Britain's lower classes became apparent. The British Army needed over 500,000 soldiers during the war, and recruitment drives were made all over the country. The volunteers were given a medical to check their suitability for active service, and the results shocked the nation. Over 40% of young adult males who volunteered were rejected as unfit for service. This figure rose to over 90% in some inner-city districts, such as those of Manchester and Liverpool. The infant mortality rate (the number of children who die before the age of one) was higher in 1901, at 163 per 1,000 births, than in 1840, when it stood at 150 per 1,000 births. Clearly the Public Health Acts of the 19th century had done much to end epidemics such as cholera, but had not reduced the grinding poverty that gripped Britain's lower classes.
Poverty in 19th-century Britain meant that people lacked the money and necessary resources to sustain the most basic of standards of living. Poverty-stricken families lived in damp and crumbling back-to-back housing, on diets dominated by bread, margarine, and tea. The use of doctors for general health care was impossible because of the expense involved. People had to carry on working into advanced old age as they had only their families to support them, and this was often impossible to do.
Public health reform in the early 20th century
The levels of ill health and poverty did not surprise social reformers such as Charles Booth and Seebohm Rowntree, who had surveyed Britain's cities and reported on the results of poverty. In 1906 a new Liberal government was elected, with David Lloyd-George as chancellor of the Exchequer. Lloyd-George was instrumental in passing laws to end poverty and provide help to the poor. In 1906 free school meals were introduced for the very poorest children, ensuring that they received at least one decent meal a day. In 1907 medical inspectors started to visit schools to check on the health of children and provide basic care. In the same year it became a legal requirement to register all births with a local health visitor, so that mother and baby could be cared for and educated about health risks. In 1909 the Old Age Pensions Act gave a weekly pension of five shillings to the over-70s, removing the burden on families to care for their elderly and allowing old people to retire at a more reasonable age.
In 1909 the Liberal government introduced the Labour Exchange system, similar to modern job centres, to find work for the unemployed poor. In the same year the construction of back-to-back housing was finally banned, marking the end of these poorly constructed, badly ventilated, and overcrowded slum houses. Cities such as Manchester had been trying to ban these dwellings without success since the mid-19th century. Alongside this measure, the government took steps to improve new housing by enforcing building regulations, particularly with regard to the location and size of houses.
In 1911 the groundbreaking National Insurance Act was introduced, which provided the working classes with unemployment benefit or sick pay when required. The worker, employer, and government paid a contribution to the scheme. Free medical care from government-appointed doctors would also be provided, giving many people access to doctors for the first time. Although the National Insurance Act was limited to men and was voluntary, it did provide effective cover for millions of workers for the first time. It was also a massive extension of the responsibilities of government for public health, particularly when seen in conjunction with the Old Age Pension Act.
Public health between the wars
Further advances in public health provision in the UK followed the end of World War I in 1918. The government had promised that soldiers returning to Britain would be given a country ‘fit for heroes’. In order to honour this, the government passed laws that forced local councils to provide housing for the poor in 1919. Council house estates sprang up across Britain in a mass building programme, although the problems of slum housing remained for the next decade as councils did not tackle this issue. Between 1930 and 1935 a nationwide programme to clear slums achieved some success in reducing the quantity of poor housing.
However, poverty still continued to blight the health of the poor. With women and children outside the terms of the National Insurance Act, and health care for men in the scheme limited, the poor were forced to pay for expensive private doctors. Hospital provision was patchy across the country. Voluntary unions paid for by public subscription provided many hospitals, but these only cared for the people who contributed to the funds. No central government control existed over healthcare. The worldwide depression of the 1930s and consequent widespread unemployment highlighted the remaining problems of public health.
Emergence of the modern public health system
Following World War II (1939-45), the public health system of the UK was revolutionized by the development of a full welfare state and a national health service (NHS). The concept had been developed in 1942 when the British economist William Beveridge, who had worked with Lloyd-George on the reforms of 1906-11, produced his Report on Social Insurance and Allied Services, later known as the Beveridge Report. The report listed five basic problem areas in public health: idleness, ignorance, disease, squalor, and want; and proposed a scheme of social insurance that would look after people from ‘the cradle to the grave’. The scheme was introduced under the National Health Service Act (1946) by the minister of health for the new Labour government, Aneurin Bevan. The NHS came into operation on 5 July 1948. All British citizens could now get free doctors, dentists, hospital care, medicines, opticians, and maternity care. The government took over hospitals and the employment of doctors to provide the service. The welfare state extended unemployment benefits to all workers, women included. Family allowance was paid to all parents of children to help with the costs of raising a family. The concept of government responsibility for public health had been totally embraced.
New issues of public health
Further developments in public health in the 20th century included the introduction of environmental health officers to investigate potential hazards such as hygiene in shops and restaurants. The government also launched health education campaigns, such as anti-smoking campaigns to reduce cancer and heart disease, and road safety campaigns to encourage drivers to slow down and pedestrians to take care when crossing the road.
Food safety became one of the biggest issues of public health in the UK. The laws on food safety, such as the Food Safety Act (1990), became increasingly strict, particularly in the wake of outbreaks of salmonella and Escherichia coli (E. coli) poisoning; in 1996 an E. coli outbreak from the sale of contaminated meat pies in Lanarkshire, Scotland, killed 16 people. The outbreak of BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) in British cattle in the mid-1980s and subsequent cases of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) in humans, beginning in the 1990s, increased demands for government action and intervention to protect the health of the public. In 2000 the British government established the Food Standards Agency to coordinate action on food safety and the protection of public health. At the beginning of the 21st century the role of the government in public health is expected and accepted in a way that would have been unimaginable in the mid-19th century.
REFERENCES
• Armstrong, D. (1993) ‘Public health spaces and the fabrication of identity’, Sociology, 27 (3) 393-410.
• Ashton, J.; Seymour, H. (1988) The New Public Health. Open University Press Milton Keynes.
• Baum, F. (1998) The New Public Health: An Australian Perspective. Oxford University Press
Oxford.
• Green, J.; Thorogood, N. (1998) Analysing Health Policy: A Sociological Approach. Longman Harlow.
• Lalonde, M. (1974) A New Perspective on the Health of Canadians. Information Canada Ottawa.
• McKeown, T. (1979) The Role of Medicine: Dream, Mirage or Nemesis? Blackwell Oxford.
• Petersen, A.; Lupton, D. (1996) The New Public Health: Health and Self in the Age of Risk. Sage London
রবিবার, ৪ এপ্রিল, ২০১০
15 villagers injured as BSF opens fire
At least 15 Bangladeshi villagers were injured as India’s Border Security Force and the Bangladesh Rifles traded gunshots at Dibir Haor in the Jaintapur border in Sylhet Sunday afternoon over fishing in Kendri Bil by Indians. Villagers living along the border have left their homesteads.
Tension also mounted in the Pratappur border in Gowainghat as the border guards of the two countries faced off with a 75-yard stretch in between after the Border Security Force again crossed and took position in the bunkers they dug inside the Bangladesh territory Thursday night.
Although the Indian guards left the bunkers and went back into India Saturday night after a flag meeting, they again entered Bangladesh and took position in the bunkers about 9:00am on Sunday.
The latest incidents of intrusion took place days after the border talks between the chiefs of the border guards of the two countries ended in New Delhi on March 11 where both the sides vowed greater cooperation in this regard.
The India guards agreed to stop intrusion into Bangladesh and to exercise restraints to end killing of innocent people in border areas.
Villagers at Dibir Haor said the gunfight began about 2:45pm as the Border Security Force along with Indian Khasia tribesmen fired into the Bangladesh territory and the Bangladesh Rifles fired back.
Both the sides traded more than 500 gunshots till evening in which at least 15 civilians inside Bangladesh were injured. Both the sides were reinforcing deployment of soldiers.
Many of the people remained stranded in the area but most of them living in 10 to 12 bordering villages have left their homes for shelter as bullets fired by the Indian guards reached two kilometres and a half inside the Bangladesh territory.
Fifteen people sustained bullet injuries and 13 of them were admitted to Jaintapur upazila health complex. Two of the people injured critically were sent to Osmani Medical College Hospital in Sylhet, BDR sources said.
Tension mounted in the area Sunday morning as some 80 Indians trespassed into Bangladesh and tried to catch fishes in Kendri Bil. As the BDR soldiers and local people stopped them, the Khasia tribesmen launched an attack with bows and arrows in which at least five people, including elderly freedom fighter Suleman Ali, were injured. The Khasia tribesmen later retreated in the face of BDR resistance.
After half an hour, some 20 people BSF soldiers entered Bangladeshi and reached up to Ukiltila about 300m inside and asked the BDR soldiers to hand over the control of Kendri Bil to them claiming it was inside the Indian territory. The BSF soldiers kept insisting on the Bangladesh Rifles’ handing over the control and later went back to India about 11:00am.
Some 40 Indian Khasia tribesmen about midday again reached Kendri Bil and started fishing. The Bangladeshi people and the BDR men stopped them. The Khasias and the BSF men about 2:15pm started firing into Bangladeshis from beside the Muktarpur BSF camp which resulted in the gunfight between the border guards of the two countries. Sporadic gunfights continued till 4:30pm.
The commander of the 21 Rifles Battalion, Lieutenant Colonel Zahirul Alam, told New Age the Border Security Force deliberately launched the aggression on Bangladesh. ‘We have contacted BSF officials for talks but they did not make any response. Senior BSF officials said their people at the Muktarpur camp would do what they would deem fit,’ he said.
‘Provocative action by the Border Security Force 5 days inside the BDR chief’s amicable meeting with the regional chief of the BSF was unfortunate,’ he said.
The upazila nirbahi officer, Jahangir Alam, along with the upazila administration, was waiting near the Kadamkhal Bridge, four kilometres off the place of occurrence, when the gunfight was going on and they were surrounded by several thousand anxious villagers who left their homes.
The Border Security Force in the Pratappur border at Gowainghat once again intruded into Bangladesh about 9:00am on Sunday and took position in the bunkers they dug Thursday night.
The Border Security Force left the bunkers and went back to India Saturday night after a flag meeting but their return on Sunday morning triggered fresh tension in the area. Both the sides were deploying additional soldiers as backup measures and faced off each other near border pillar 1270.
The return of BSF to the area panicked people in bordering villages and people left their homes for shelter.
Jahangir, a resident of Panthuwai, said all the families of their village left their homes for shelter. ‘We have been out of home for three days. As the BSF men retreated Saturday night, we returned home but left again this morning immediately at the news of the arrival of BSF soldiers,’ he said.
The Bangladesh Rifles said Indians were out to occupy some 150 acres of land inside Bangladesh and continued launching attacks over a few days. The Indians have occupied some 200 acres of Bangladesh land since 1974.
The second-in-command of the 21 Rifles battalion, Major Abdullah Al Mamun, the Border Security Force repeatedly attacked the frontier but the Bangladesh Rifles was showing utmost restraints.
Asked about repeated scuffles in the Bangladesh-India border, including Sunday’s incident in Sylhet, despite decisions at the policymaking level of the two countries to maintain restraints, the foreign minister, Dipu Moni, said, ‘A stray incident [such as the scuffle between the border guards] might happen along the long border stretch. But such incidents are resolved at appropriate local levels through discussions.’
‘We, however, do not expect such incidents to continue,’ she said at a briefing at the foreign ministry on Sunday.
New Age: Dhaka 15th March 2010
শুক্রবার, ২ এপ্রিল, ২০১০
~*~THE BIG TRAGEDY BEHIND THE APRILS FOOL DAY~*~
~~Mostly people celebrated the one day that they could deceit everyone such as friend, brother, parent and teacher where the target didn’t be angry when he was a target of this fault. Someone as a target usually laughted or abused because he was resent for this action. Nowadays, it is popular as The Aprils Fool Day.
~~The Aprils Fool Day beginning from the big tragedy that touched our heart in Islamic history. It was happen on April 1, 1487. Since Islamic warriors liberated Spain in the 8th century by Commander Thariq bin Ziyad, it gradually grew become a prosperous country. Because of kindness Spain authority, so much Spains submitted Islamic religion with honesty and willing. Muslims Spain could not only read Quran but also their conduct that based on Quranic verses. Peaceful situation in that place was going on nearly six century.
~~~Unbeliever or heathen peoples was jealousy with Islamic people. They used some trick in order cleanse Islamic religion in Spain. But, they efforts always failed. Finally, they found way in order to conquer Islam in Spain, that was they must make their faith on Islamic decrease by invasion of thought (idea) and culture. So, they sent alcohol drink and music heard for flattery Muslims people in order they accepted Christians people persuation. They also sent false priest or scholar that it made a disintegration in Islamic people. At last, Spain was collaps and this country could command by Crusade warriors. Marriage of two Christian authority (i.e Ferdinand II from Castille and Isabella from Aragon) made a true unity in order to conquer Spanish muslim people. The last defence of Islamic people was in Granada. Mostly of them hide in their home. But, Christian warriors hunted them continously.
~~~The crusade warriors offered a ship for Muslim people in order go out from Spain. But, muslim people suspected this offer. Some of them would accept their invitation. Thousands of Spanish muslim people in Granada was shocked when they had been looking Crusade warriors burn many ships that could bring out them from Spain. They couldn’t do anything because they had not carry weapons. It’s a easy way for Crusade warriors to kill all muslim people. This tragedy was happened on 1st April, that is celebrated by Christianity religion with The Aprils Fool Day. For Islamic people, it’s a very sad tragedy. That’s a day when our brothers was killed by Crusade warriors in Granada, Spain. Whoever Islamic people that was celebrated The Aprils Fool Day, so he is real celebrate of thousands Muslim people butchering in Granada, Spain, several centuries ago. Naudzubillah min dzalik.
~~The Aprils Fool Day beginning from the big tragedy that touched our heart in Islamic history. It was happen on April 1, 1487. Since Islamic warriors liberated Spain in the 8th century by Commander Thariq bin Ziyad, it gradually grew become a prosperous country. Because of kindness Spain authority, so much Spains submitted Islamic religion with honesty and willing. Muslims Spain could not only read Quran but also their conduct that based on Quranic verses. Peaceful situation in that place was going on nearly six century.
~~~Unbeliever or heathen peoples was jealousy with Islamic people. They used some trick in order cleanse Islamic religion in Spain. But, they efforts always failed. Finally, they found way in order to conquer Islam in Spain, that was they must make their faith on Islamic decrease by invasion of thought (idea) and culture. So, they sent alcohol drink and music heard for flattery Muslims people in order they accepted Christians people persuation. They also sent false priest or scholar that it made a disintegration in Islamic people. At last, Spain was collaps and this country could command by Crusade warriors. Marriage of two Christian authority (i.e Ferdinand II from Castille and Isabella from Aragon) made a true unity in order to conquer Spanish muslim people. The last defence of Islamic people was in Granada. Mostly of them hide in their home. But, Christian warriors hunted them continously.
~~~The crusade warriors offered a ship for Muslim people in order go out from Spain. But, muslim people suspected this offer. Some of them would accept their invitation. Thousands of Spanish muslim people in Granada was shocked when they had been looking Crusade warriors burn many ships that could bring out them from Spain. They couldn’t do anything because they had not carry weapons. It’s a easy way for Crusade warriors to kill all muslim people. This tragedy was happened on 1st April, that is celebrated by Christianity religion with The Aprils Fool Day. For Islamic people, it’s a very sad tragedy. That’s a day when our brothers was killed by Crusade warriors in Granada, Spain. Whoever Islamic people that was celebrated The Aprils Fool Day, so he is real celebrate of thousands Muslim people butchering in Granada, Spain, several centuries ago. Naudzubillah min dzalik.
সোমবার, ২৯ মার্চ, ২০১০
এতে সদস্যতা:
পোস্টগুলি (Atom)
