Naaa, I am not sure I really agree with the statement from the video: "let's give them the toilets that we use - that's really the ideal".

Really? Many of us wealthy people use flush toilets connected to a sewer system. But is this necessarily "the ideal"? We shouldn't think of technology but of function. That was Bill Gates' idea with "reinventing the toilet", to come up with something better than the flush toilets we have now which are so expensive and so wasteful...

How about rather: "let's ensure they (the poor) can afford a toilet that they like and which is pleasant to us".
(saying "let's give them" is also wrong in my opinion, as it cements the donor - beneficiary relationship rather than business - client).

I do agree that simple pit latrines are usually not what people want, not aspirational and not all that desirable (unless perhaps with a SaTo pan!!). Having a toilet outside of your own house is unlikely to be all the appealing. We all want one right next to our bedroom, don't we? But it doesn't necessarily have to be a flush toilet.

I do like the thinking though of promoting sanitation/hygiene products that we would like to buy for ourselves. To give an example from the menstrual hygiene field: That's why I find e.g. menstrual cups or the new high-tech period panties (see here ) easier to promote than e.g. reusable sanitary pads.

However, with current tech. that might be unaffordable for many even with reasonable subsidies. I wouldn’t mind using something like the Sato pan though I guess

Dear All,

I just thought I would leave this here. Quote from The United Nations Deputy Secretary General Amina J Mohammed.



Best regards,

Doreen