environment/disease

Which is a bigger deal, environmental degradation or disease? I'm going to have to go with the environment, if for no other reason than that the loss of biodiversity resultant from pollution and our reckless behavior with nature could mean the loss of possible cures for the world's diseases. We already get many key medicines from plant sources and that's just the tip of the iceberg. It may sound idealistic to say we can find cures to something like AIDS by keeping rain forests intact, but it's not such a crazy idea. Given the possible medicinal value of nature, we should work to preserve as many species as possible.

Besides, what's the point of curing someone of a disease if they have nowhere to live because their home has become a desert or has become submerged? We Americans and Westerners can rest confidently in the fact that our money and mind-power will allay the bulk of the effects of environmental damage, but the rest of the world won't be so lucky. People are going to die faster for lack of food or water than because of a disease and the more we put off making changes to how we treat the environment, the more we doom them to a brief and miserable life.