A Scatological Comparison of Selected Latin American Nations

A Google search for websites containing both the words “travel” and “diarrhea” results in 1,860,000 links, and that only includes the small subset of pages in which “diarrhea” is spelled correctly. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimate that there are 50,000 new cases of traveler’s diarrhea every day (CDC 2008). One might expect, therefore, that a wealth of information must be available to help the cautious traveler assess risk levels of potential trips. After all, a careful consideration of the risk of traveler’s diarrhea is at least as important as a consideration of the number of national parks or pristine beaches a travel destination offers, because the traveler’s intestinal state is likely to determine whether those parks or beaches will even been seen by the traveler.

However, most travelers just go to one country for a week or two, and although many return with a disgusting story, virtually none have actual data to go along with it. As a result, little objective data is available for use in risk assessment. The few previous studies have identified travel destination as the most important risk factor (Steffen et al. 1983; von Sonnenburg et al. 2000). The CDC has therefore divided the world into three categories with regard to risk for developing traveler’s diarrhea - high, intermediate, and low (CDC 2008). High-risk areas include Mexico, all of Central America, all of South America (except Argentina and Chile), all of Africa (except South Africa and Lesotho), and all of Asia (except Japan and Russia). In other words, 78,846,672 square kilometers of the Earth’s land surface, or 58.2% of the total land surface (excluding Antarctica, which CDC does not categorize), are classified as high-risk areas.

This qualitative, broad-brush approach to risk assessment is unfortunately not very useful to the traveler. Diarrhea can range from the merely annoying to the completely incapacitating, yet CDC makes no attempt to classify severity. As a result, there is little information that would help you plan a trip unless you automatically exclude a visit to 58.2% of the world. There is an urgent need for a universal, quantitative, objective methodology for rating countries so that travelers can accurately assess the likelihood of developing an urgent need at each potential destination.

During a recent trip to Latin America, I had quite a lot of time to sit and think about this issue on the very first day due to a bad tamale I ate at a bus station, and I realized I had an opportunity to begin solving this problem by determining which is the crappiest country in Latin America.

Methods

I traveled from Tucson, Arizona, USA to Buenos Aires, Argentina, mostly by bus, between November 28, 2001 and March 3, 2003. I rated every bowel movement I had during that 15 month period according to the scale displayed in Table 1.

I did not visit every Latin American country, so several countries are excluded from the analysis. Furthermore, due to an imminent mortar attack on the capital city, I remained in Colombia for just three days and excluded it from the analysis due to the low sample size. The countries included in this study are Argentina, Brazil, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, and Venezuela.

The rating scale was initially designed as a negative logarithmic scale in terms of looseness, much like a pH scale is a negative logarithmic scale in terms of acidity, with 1 being the most loose and 10 being the least loose. However, when I devised the scale I did not realize it was possible to crap straight liquid blood, so during the course of the study I had to add a zero rating. While this does mean that the scale can no longer be considered truly logarithmic, the change does not affect the analysis or results.

The advantage of the non-linear scale is that it allows us to focus more closely on the looser end of things. Therefore, the “one-wiper,” the Holy Grail of crapping, is not a 5, but an 8. Generally speaking, the further from 8 you are, the less comfortable you are likely to be. The ratings are designed to be self-explanatory and objective. Fractional ratings, such as 4.5, were permitted when necessary. When there were multiple bowel movements in the same day, I rated each separately.

To compare countries, I used multiple regression to determine whether there were rating differences between them after accounting for differences in the number of days spent in each country and in the number of months I had been traveling when I visited each country.

One potentially confounding factor is that I occasionally used ciprofloxacin, an antibiotic, to combat various illnesses during my trip. I typically took antibiotics for three days each time, and started treatments on December 29, 2001 (Mexico); May 15, 2002 (Honduras); December 19, 2002 (Brazil); and January 26, 2003 (Argentina). However, given that the effective period of the antibiotics was short compared to the length of time spent in any country, I have disregarded this factor in the analyses.

Results

In total, I produced 406 craps during my 490-day trip. Table 2 lists the countries visited in order of visitation, days spent there, and craps taken in each.

During the course of my trip, I produced craps that spanned the entire rating scale, from 0 to 10 (Figure 1).

Countries differed significantly in terms of level of crappiness (F = 18.20, df = 7, 396, P < 0.0001), even after taking number of days in country and number of months on the road into account.

The country with the lowest rating (i.e., the crappiest) was Guatemala, scoring a craptacular 3.3, which is just barely more solid than vegetable soup in beef broth (Table 3). Argentina was the second crappiest country I visited, where the mean looseness of my craps was the same as hearty sirloin and vegetable soup. Argentina was closely followed by Honduras. Argentina was the only country in which I produced craps with a zero rating (blood). Argentina and Guatemala were the only countries in which I achieved ratings of 1 (clear water), although there was one 1.5-rated crap in Nicaragua.

The least crappy country I visited was Panama, which scored well ahead of all other countries at a breathtakingly pleasant 7.6 (between meatloaf and one-wiper). Following Panama was Mexico, with a 6.7 rating, and Costa Rica, with a 6.3. Venezuela was the only country in which I produced craps with a 10 rating (diamond), but I achieved at least one 9 rating (charcoal) in Brazil, Mexico, Nicaragua, and Panama.

Discussion

Keeping in mind that I only sampled nine Latin American countries, the data indicate that Guatemala is by far the crappiest country in Latin America. Interestingly, Argentina is the only country I sampled that is considered by CDC to be an intermediate risk rather than high-risk country for traveler’s diarrhea, yet Argentina is the second worst country for diarrhea according to my study.

Mexico has long been feared by American travelers as a place of intestinal unpleasantness. Hence one often hears of Montezuma’s Revenge, which attributes the experience of pissing out of your rectum to a curse the last Aztec emperor placed on foreign visitors. Nonetheless, this study indicates that Mexico is in fact among the least crappy countries in Latin America.

Although 406 craps were analyzed for this study, all were produced by the same person, which technically means that the results of this study can only be directly applied to me. However, the data are likely to be generally applicable to other people as well. As such, I recommend Panama as the Latin American destination of choice to those travelers who wish to tour more than just a country’s toilets, and I submit that spending a week in your own bathroom will provide a similar experience to a week in Guatemala at a much lower price.

Most importantly, this study proves that it is possible to differentiate between countries with a simple, objective rating system. Please note that Table 1 can be easily printed out, laminated, and carried in the field. If this rating system is used by other researchers in the future and the results published, we will be able to someday determine which is the crappiest country in the world.

Sources cited:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 2008. CDC Health Information for International Travel 2008. Atlanta: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service.

Steffen R., F. van der Linde, K. Gyr and M. Schar. 1983. Epidemiology of diarrhea in travelers. Journal of the American Medical Association 249(9): 1176-1180.

von Sonnenburg, F., N. Tornieporth, P. Waiyaki, B. Lowe, L.F. Peruski Jr., H.L. DuPont, J.J. Mathewson, R. Steffen. 2000. Risk and aetiology of diarrhoea at various tourist destinations. Lancet 356: 133-134.

photo by nicolasnova on Flickr

11 Volcanoes in the Americas That You Can Climb

Maybe it’s because they seem primordial, or because you did really well in rocks for jocks, or actually know a thing or two about geology. Or perhaps just because it’s there, and well, so are you. But for some (perhaps magnetic) reason, where there is an accessible volcano, there are travelers (and sometimes locals) bathing in its hot-springs, scaling its slopes and marveling at its lava flows.

As you make your way around this still-forming planet, consider the following fairly accessible volcanoes for part of your next been-there-done-that party. It goes without saying that climbing or getting close to an active volcano carries risks, but most travelers find that those risks pale in comparison to lava, fumaroles, lava tubes, tumbling rocks and the kshgrrrrburbleburble that volcanoes whisper and shout to you when you’re nearby.

Below you’ll find a list of accessible volcanoes for your hiking and viewing pleasure in the Americas. Sadly, Kilauea in Hawai’i is politically but not geographically in the Americas, so we’ll have to save that for a special ring of fire edition of the volcano walking for the mildly intrepid. For now you’ll have to make do with these beauties.

Mount St. Helens – Washington, USA

Since May of 1980, when Washington state’s Mt. St. Helens blew her cone and covered Seattle with ash that my friends tell me looked like snow, she has gained respect from locals and travelers alike. On a clear day, she is visible in the distance, from Seattle and Portland, Oregon as well, a flattened giant that blew her top.

Since 1987, the southern slopes of Mt. St. Helens have been open to climbers who wish to climb close to (but not into) the crater. Monitor Ridge is a popular trail that starts at Climber’s Bivouac, and takes between 7 and 12 hours to climb. Climbers can gain views of the crater, blast area and other nearby volcanic peaks, but those wishing to climb above 4,800 feet (the rim is at 8,365) must seek a permit.

More details are on the Mt. St. Helens website.

Mt. Redoubt – Alaska, USA

Mt. Redoubt is an active stratovolcano that erupted violently in March 2009, and is probably best seen from nearby, as opposed to up close. Until recently, climbing Redoubt required some technical expertise, fixed rope climbing and a peakside scramble to the top, but there’s no telling what things will be like after the eruption finally stops, so do your research before packing your gear.

For now, views of Redoubt volcano (from the Russian Sopka Redutskaya meaning “fortified place”) are best taken from afar. The 9,000-foot volcano is less than 200 miles from Anchorage.

You can also get a (less sulphuric) peek from home at the Alaska Volcano Observatory webpage.

Tequila Volcano - Mexico

In Mexico, there are a number of volcanoes that can be easily accessed, including Tequila Volcano, where visitors can actually drive to the edge of the crater and peer inside to see the forests that have sprung up inside. Not surprisingly, this volcano is located a stone’s throw from the town of Tequila, better known for another kind of liquid fire.

Rock climbers will want to summit “the plug”, a lava column that formed inside the mouth of the volcano and was then thrust upward by geologic pressure. Its sheer walls are not for the uninitiated, nor the acrophobic.

Other climbable volcanoes in Mexico

Also near the state of Jalisco is the Nevado de Colima volcano (inactive), which can be climbed, and Volcan de Fuego, which is active, and therefore best seen from down below. High-altitude treks would take climbers to the peaks of Iztaccihuatl and Orizaba (the highest peak in Mexico at 18,404 feet), but these are not for the inexperienced, the guideless or those who are short of time as they require a few days.

Volcan Arenal - Costa Rica

This starring player in Costa Rica’s ecotourism route is far too active and explosive to be climbed safely. It is often socked in with clouds, but nighttime visits to the nearby hot springs bring vantage points to see the small lava explosions and red-hot rocks tumble forth from the cone.

The area has grown in recent years with Costa Rica’s runaway tourism, and you may find more souls with whom to say “oooh” and “aaaah” than you were expecting.

Several hotels and outfitters in the town of Arenal, and nearby Fortuna, run tours, and the Arenal Observatory Lodge offers volcano views from right inside.

Horseback riding and bicycling are popular in this area, with all eyes trained towards the volcano, day and night.

Pacaya - Guatemala

Guatemala’s Pacaya volcano’s ash-lined slopes have been calling to travelers since the gringo trail first appeared. Volcano-lovers generally stay in the colonial town of Antigua, where tours can easily be arranged, and which is a pleasant, oft-visited spot on its own.

The hike up Pacaya starts with a steep climb through a pine forest, up through a strenuous section up slippery ash-lined slopes (two steps forward, one step back). Views from the top extend down to the pacific lowlands and all the way to El Salvador. A guide is recommended as the volcano’s activity is unpredictable, and the route may not always be clear. Also, historically there have also been muggings on this volcano, so going with a tour is a safer option.

For those aspiring vulcanologists for whom one Guatemalan volcano is not enough, you might consider taking a five-day tour with an outfitter that leads hikers up Pacaya, Sta. Maria, Acatenango and Fuego with camping on the slopes of the volcanoes.

Ometepe - Nicaragua

Nicaragua is home to several active volcanoes, including Masaya, which can be toured at night, and which has lava tubes which visitors can explore. A headlamp is a nice touch, as it keeps your hands free, but a flashlight is fine as well. Nicaragua’s Ometepe Island in Lake Nicaragua attracts volcano lovers as well for the two volcanoes that comprise the island (Ometepe means two mountains), Maderas and Concepci?n, neither of which tops 6,000 feet.

Concepci?n is the world’s highest lake island and is considered a fairly perfect example of a cone volcano. It remains active. Maderas is terraced in places where farmers take advantage of fertile growing conditions on her slopes.

For those visitors for whom these three volcanoes in Nicaragua have not quelled their need to see the world’s geology lab might consider also visiting Cosig?ina, in the northwest corner of the country. This volcano’s violent eruption in 1859 spewed ash and rock, and contributed to the formation of some of the islands in the Gulf of Fonseca. It’s now considered dormant, and is only 900 meters high, and covered in dense vegetation.

Boiling Lake - Dominica

Of sixteen active volcanoes in the Carribean, Dominica is home to nine, and since no significant eruptions have taken place since Columbus’ time, the rainforests are lush and mostly undisturbed. Visitors to this eco-destination can visit Morne Trois Pitons National Park, a World Heritage site since 1997, which is named for the remains of what was once an enormous volcano.

The park contains several volcanic features, including the hot springs at the Valley of Desolation and a 13 km, 3-4 hour hike up to the world’s second-largest boiling lake, a bubbling, burping greyish-blue 200-foot-wide lake which geologists believe to be a flooded fumarole. Locals consider it to be a right of passage, but except for the guides, you won’t find many repeat visitors. It’s messy business, especially since in addition to being highly volcanic, Dominica is also the rainiest of the Carribean islands. “Stinking hole” is another feature here, a lava tube in the middle of the forest that leaks sulphuric fumes.

For those who prefer their waters a little clearer, Dominica also offers an unusual underwater view of volcanic activity in the form of Champagne, an underground vent system that releases ticklish sulphuric bubbles that visitors can snorkel through. This is accessible by tour, or by kakaying out to the access point.

Soufri?re Hills - Montserrat

The formerly dormant Soufri?re Hills volcano on Montserrat came back to life in 1995, triggering fears of an imminent eruption, and chasing half of the island’s 12,000 inhabitants away. In 1997, the volcano made good on its threats, and covered the southern part of the island, including Plymouth, the 200-year-old capital, with a giant, lava-spilling eruption.

Ever since the volcano stabilized, travelers teem there to see the aftermath, and investments pour in from abroad to keep the economy going. Guests at Hot Rock Hostel get front row seats to the spectacle, and hiking and boat tours are also available. For details on what the volcano is doing at any given time, you can also visit the Montserrat Observatory site.

An overview (if brief) glimpse of the contrast between the two sides of the island, destroyed and unscathed is perhaps best gleaned from up above, which you can achieve by flying to one of the nearby islands, such as Dominica, a volcanic powerhouse in itself (see above). In fact, some experts suspect that Dominica is primed for an eruption on a similar scale to that suffered on Montserrat.

Villarica Volcano - Chile

Villarica Volcano is 19 km from Puc?n, Chile’s adventure sports capital in the Lakes District, in the middle-south of this stringbean of country. Outfitters charge a pretty penny to suit you up with mountaineering boots, a nifty waterproof jumpsuit, helmet, and piolet, or ice axe. A several hour-long climb takes you up to about 9,000 feet, and when the snow cooperates, much of the descent is done on little sleds on snow chutes set up by the guides, and stopped (hopefully) through self-arrest with an ice axe, which has led to more than one emergency-room visit in recent years.

Thousands of hikers climb this volcano every year, though weather turns many people back before reaching the top. Depending on the wind, the sulfur fumes can be blinding, and the temperatures punishing up at the top. Other volcanoes in Chile that can be climbed in a relatively short time period include Guallatiri in the far north, and Lincancabur and Lacsa from touristy San Pedro de Atacama. The Llaima and Chaiten volcanoes (in the south) have both erupted very recently and at the moment are not considered climbable.

There is also a short ski season during the southern winter up on the slopes of Villarrica and Osorno (near Puerto Varas) volcanoes. The mother of all volcanoes, and the highest (probably active) volcano in the world is Ojos del Salado on the Argentine/Chilean border, but this is a several day trip that requires serious mountain gear.

Cotopaxi - Ecuador

Ecuador is home to Pichincha, Riminahui, Cotopaxi and Chimborazo volcanoes, and of these, Cotopaxi is perhaps the most emblematic and the most frequently climbed, though is does require an overnight at a refuge. At 19,347 feet, it is the second highest volcano in Ecuador (the first is Chimborazo), but not on the continent. That honor goes to Ojos del Salado, on the Chile/Argentina border (see above)

From Quito, you can hire a guide, though since the starting point of the hike is at nearly 15,000 feet, a number of days’ acclimation in Quito beforehand, as well as climbing some smaller, nearby mountains would be wise. Hikes up Cotopaxi start the day before, gain several hundred feet of elevation over the course of a few hours, and then have climbers resting/sleeping from 6 PM to around midnight. At 1 AM climbers begin their summit attempt. It generally takes approximately 7 hours to summit and 3 to arrive back to the parking lot. For those who just want to get close and then put the volcano behind them, some Quito outfitters offer mountainbike trips down from the park’s entrance.

El Misti - Peru

Beautifully symmetrical El Misti Volcano is 19,101 feet high, and is accessible from “the white city” of Arequipa in Per?, which itself is 2400 meters above sea level, which will help travelers to acclimate. Misti (which means the gentleman in Quechua) last erupted in 1870 and is the source of much of the white stone of which the city itself (the second largest in Peru) is constructed.

This trip takes two days and one night, and gives hikers the chance to descend into one of the three concentric craters, should energy abound. The first day involves a 4×4 trip to the end of the road, followed by a 6-8 hour hike, a night of “sleep” at 4800 meters, and a 4 AM wakeup to make the summit in about five hours. Participants can expect to drink copious amounts of coca tea and be cold, even in their -15C sleeping bags. Tour agencies recommend booking this trip before arriving in Arequipa, as it is quite popular.

For a list of volcanoes of the world, visit the Global Volcanism Project. For a list of volcanoes with recent and ongoing volcanic activity, please see the International Volcano Research Centre’s website.

If you’ve climbed one of these volcanoes, or another in the Americas, let us know in the comments.

Read about author Eileen Smith and check out her other BootsnAll articles.

Photo credits:
Mt. St. Helens by barcar on Flickr, Redoubt on wikicommons, Tequila by mickou on Flickr, Arenal by pawpaw67 on Flickr, Pacaya by Bruno Grin on Flickr, Conception by tarariffic7 on Flickr, Dominica on wikicommons, Monserrat on wikicommons, Cotopaxi on wikicommons, Villarica by andyinsouthamerica on Flickr, El Misti on wikicommons