It seems to actually have numerically common non-pathogenic forms and the ones with enterotoxin genes appear to have recieved them from bacteria targeting viruses. If I understand correctly, the toxin genes are integrated (but dormant) within bacterial genomes and infection by bacteriophage CTX triggers their expression.
This point is mostly in response to the focus here on habits and norms. Not to say that if someone couldn’t work on those productively, but I suspect that environmental effects like “mere proximity” to to have a lot more influence over people in general than they assume without factoring in consciously. The cholera example comes bundled with this message, with the authors cited in the OP mostly focusing not on hand washing but on the design of water purification infrastructure.
For myself, I tend to assume that if changes to my habits are to have any significant influence on me many of them must be focused around shaping and choosing environments that support the kinds of thinking and living that I want to do. I’m still working on this process for myself and have few unambiguously positive results to report and the negative results are too embarassing to list and would take a lot of text to describe any in useful detail :-P
For lack of such text I’ll recommend “Lady of Mazes” for it’s exploration of themes around technology, “nearness”, social networks, medium-message distinctions, choice architecture, suggestions systems, personal character, political awareness, value-technology interactions, and having a life that is felt to be meaningful. This book is less accessable than “Accelerando” but, for me, it has had much more staying power.
Two points...
POINT ONE: The cholera example is even more fascinating when you drill down. The bacteria involved is “Vibrio cholerae”.
http://www.textbookofbacteriology.net/cholera.html
It seems to actually have numerically common non-pathogenic forms and the ones with enterotoxin genes appear to have recieved them from bacteria targeting viruses. If I understand correctly, the toxin genes are integrated (but dormant) within bacterial genomes and infection by bacteriophage CTX triggers their expression.
http://www.mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk/genomes/madanm/articles/cholera.htm
POINT TWO: It is probably worth keeping in mind the fundamental attribution error.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/4545312
This point is mostly in response to the focus here on habits and norms. Not to say that if someone couldn’t work on those productively, but I suspect that environmental effects like “mere proximity” to to have a lot more influence over people in general than they assume without factoring in consciously. The cholera example comes bundled with this message, with the authors cited in the OP mostly focusing not on hand washing but on the design of water purification infrastructure.
For myself, I tend to assume that if changes to my habits are to have any significant influence on me many of them must be focused around shaping and choosing environments that support the kinds of thinking and living that I want to do. I’m still working on this process for myself and have few unambiguously positive results to report and the negative results are too embarassing to list and would take a lot of text to describe any in useful detail :-P
For lack of such text I’ll recommend “Lady of Mazes” for it’s exploration of themes around technology, “nearness”, social networks, medium-message distinctions, choice architecture, suggestions systems, personal character, political awareness, value-technology interactions, and having a life that is felt to be meaningful. This book is less accessable than “Accelerando” but, for me, it has had much more staying power.
http://www.amazon.com/Lady-Mazes-Karl-Schroeder/dp/0765312190
http://www.amazon.com/Accelerando-Singularity-Charles-Stross/dp/0441012841