top of page

By:

Anil D. Salve

21 March 2026 at 8:11:09 pm

A Drought of Wisdom in an Ocean of Information

We live in an age where information is everywhere. With a single click, we can access news from across the world, thousands of opinions, countless videos and endless claims. Knowledge has never been so accessible. Yet, in this overwhelming flow of information, something increasingly scarce is discernment-the ability to distinguish what deserves our belief from what deserves our doubt. Information and knowledge are not the same. Reading, watching or hearing something does not automatically...

A Drought of Wisdom in an Ocean of Information

We live in an age where information is everywhere. With a single click, we can access news from across the world, thousands of opinions, countless videos and endless claims. Knowledge has never been so accessible. Yet, in this overwhelming flow of information, something increasingly scarce is discernment-the ability to distinguish what deserves our belief from what deserves our doubt. Information and knowledge are not the same. Reading, watching or hearing something does not automatically make it true. We need the ability to verify information, understand its context, recognise its purpose and only then form an opinion. In the digital age, this ability has become one of the most important forms of wisdom. Social media has transformed the way information travels. WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook and other platforms have made communication faster, wider and more accessible. But the same speed that connects society can also overwhelm it. Information often reaches us before facts do. A headline is read before the full story. A short video is watched without knowing what happened before or after it. A photograph is circulated without its original context. A message arrives with the familiar words, “Forwarded as received,” and within minutes it may reach thousands of people. By the time the truth catches up, the rumour may already have done its work. The problem becomes even more serious when misinformation is deliberately created and circulated. Rumours may be planted not merely to mislead individuals but to divert public attention from an important issue, create suspicion, damage someone's reputation or push society towards a particular narrative. A distraction does not always need to be completely false. Sometimes a small piece of truth is mixed with exaggeration, selective facts or emotional language. The result can be more powerful than an outright lie because it appears believable. This is how narratives are manufactured. Social media platforms can become powerful tools in this process. A repeated claim begins to look familiar, and familiarity is often mistaken for truth. A provocative post attracts attention. Thousands of reactions create the impression that “everyone” believes it. One emotional video triggers another, comments intensify the mood, and before facts have an opportunity to speak, public sentiment may have already shifted. This is where mob psychology enters the picture. A society can move from calm to anger, suspicion to trust, or optimism to fear with surprising speed. People who would ordinarily think carefully may react differently when they see thousands of others expressing outrage, fear or hostility. The individual begins to follow the crowd, and the crowd begins to reinforce the individual. The danger is not limited to negative emotions. The same mechanism can also be used positively-to mobilise people for social causes, humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, public awareness and community action. Technology itself is neither wise nor foolish. Its impact depends on how information is created, amplified and consumed. The greatest danger, therefore, is not that we have too much information. It is that we may lose the habit of thinking while consuming it. We are increasingly becoming consumers of information rather than creators of thought. Everyone has access to information today, but access does not necessarily mean understanding. The boundaries between a rumour and a report, an opinion and a fact, popularity and truth are becoming increasingly blurred. A post does not become true because thousands of people have liked it. A video does not become evidence merely because it has gone viral. An opinion does not become a fact because it is expressed confidently. An idea does not become correct simply because it confirms what we already believe. This last point deserves particular attention. We often accept information not because it is accurate, but because it is comfortable. We are naturally attracted to information that confirms our existing beliefs and suspicious of information that challenges them. In the digital world, this tendency can be amplified by algorithms that repeatedly expose us to content similar to what we have already watched, liked or shared. Gradually, we may find ourselves living inside an information bubble where we hear many voices-but mostly voices that agree with us. That is not diversity of information. It is an illusion of certainty. Discernment does not mean doubting everything. It means thinking before believing. It means asking simple but powerful questions: Who is saying this? What is the evidence? What is the context? What may be missing? Who benefits if I believe it? And have I heard the other side? These questions may take only a few seconds, but they can prevent hours, days or even years of misunderstanding. This responsibility is particularly important for the younger generation. Children today are growing up in an environment of unprecedented information exposure. They can encounter more information in a few hours than earlier generations might have encountered in weeks. Therefore, education cannot merely teach students how to collect, remember and reproduce information. It must teach them how to question, verify, analyse and interpret it. A student who can write the correct answer in an examination may be academically successful. But a student who knows how to ask the right question is better prepared for life. The classroom of the future must therefore produce not merely informed students, but thinking citizens. They must learn that forwarding a message is also a form of responsibility. Sharing a post is not an innocent act when it can affect someone's reputation, create public fear or influence social behaviour. The challenge becomes even greater in the age of Artificial Intelligence. AI can generate information, images, audio and video with extraordinary speed and sophistication. The distinction between what is real and what merely appears real may become increasingly difficult. In such a world, human judgment becomes more valuable, not less. Technology can produce an answer in seconds. It cannot automatically tell us whether that answer deserves our trust. Some answers require experience. Some require context. Many require the ability to think independently. We have more information, more technology and more connectivity than any previous generation. Yet our real challenge is to preserve something technology cannot manufacture for us: the capacity to think for ourselves. The ocean of information will only become larger. The question will no longer be, “How much information do we have?” The more important questions will be: What should we accept? What should we question? What should we verify? And what should we reject? No technology can completely answer these questions for us. No number of likes can substitute for evidence. No viral trend can replace judgment. No majority can turn misinformation into truth. That responsibility belongs to human beings. Information can tell us what happened. Discernment helps us understand what it means, why it happened, what may be missing from the story and how we should respond. Perhaps, therefore, the greatest educational challenge of our time is not to teach people how to find more information. They already know how to do that. The greater challenge is to teach them how to pause-to pause before believing, to pause before reacting, to pause before forwarding and to pause before joining the crowd. Because sometimes the most intelligent response to information is not an immediate reaction, but a moment of reflection. The ocean is already around us. It is growing deeper every day. What we need now is not more information to swim through it-but the wisdom to know which direction to take. (The writer is the Principal of Podar International School, Ausa, Latur. Views personal.)

From Microwaves to Autoclaves: How Hospitals Manage Biomedical Waste

Writer: Dr. Sanjay Joshi
Dr. Sanjay Joshi
Sep 6, 2025
3 min read

Hospitals and healthcare facilities generate vast amounts of biomedical waste every day — from contaminated bandages and syringes to plastic disposables and pathological materials. If not treated properly, such waste can spread infections, harm the environment, and endanger public health. Over the years, different technologies have been developed to disinfect and reduce biomedical waste safely and sustainably. Among them, microwave systems, hydroclaves, and autoclaves are three widely recognised methods, each with its own working principles, benefits, and limitations.


Microwave: A microwave oven is a familiar appliance in most households. However, the version used for treating biomedical waste works differently. It is essentially a steam-based process, where disinfection occurs through the action of moist heat and steam generated by microwave energy. Microwaves are very short microwave systems, hydroclaves, and autoclaves waves in the electromagnetic spectrum, and the same property that makes them effective for cooking also makes them suitable for disinfection.


The intense vibrations produced by microwave energy create friction, which generates heat and turns water into steam. This heat denatures proteins within microbial cells, thereby inactivating pathogens. In this way, microwaves act as a quick and efficient disinfection system.


Many microwave machines are equipped with an internal shredder. Once waste is loaded, it is broken down in the hopper by a rotating feed arm and ground into smaller pieces. These shredded particles are then moved through a rotating conveyor screw, where they are exposed to steam and heated to between 95° and 100°C by four or six microwave generators.


The treated waste is discharged directly into a bin or roll-off container, which is then sent to the landfill. This technology is approved as an alternative method of biomedical waste treatment in many countries. The internal shredder reduces waste volume by up to 80 per cent. However, the high cost of microwave systems makes them unaffordable for most hospitals and operators.


Hydroclave: The hydroclave is a double-jacketed vessel fitted with fragmenting paddles inside. It is capable of processing a wide range of waste, including bagged waste, sharps containers, liquid containers, cardboard boxes, metal objects, and even pathological material.


Once the waste is loaded, the door is sealed, and high-temperature steam is introduced into the outer jacket. Heat is transferred through the inner surface of the vessel, so the steam never comes into direct contact with the waste. This system allows part of the steam to be reclaimed and returned to the boiler, improving efficiency over multiple cycles.


However, one drawback of the hydroclave is its high initial energy demand. Large amounts of steam are needed at the start to heat the vessel through conduction, making it expensive to operate. For this reason, hydroclaves are rarely used by operators in India.


Autoclave: This is a very commonly used appliance in most hospitals for the sterilisation of surgical equipment, cotton bandages, gauges, etc. However, it has become a very important appliance for treating the infectious solid waste, like plastics stored in the red bags and metallic objects from the hospital waste. It consists of a metal chamber sealed by a charging door and surrounded by a steam jacket.


Steam is introduced into both the outside jacket and the inside chamber, which is designed to withstand elevated pressures. Steam is introduced into the autoclave at a temperature of 121°C for a minimum of 30 minutes under at least 15 psi pressure. Supplementary air is poured automatically to maintain the temperature for the desired time. After the desired time, the waste is allowed to cool and then unloaded. The plastic articles are now shredded using a mechanical shredder and sent for recycling.


Biomedical waste management is a critical part of the healthcare infrastructure. Microwaves, hydroclaves, and autoclaves all play a role in ensuring infectious waste is treated safely before disposal. While advanced systems like microwaves and hydroclaves remain costly for most hospitals in India, the autoclave continues to be the most practical and accessible solution. As technology evolves, the challenge will be to balance affordability with efficiency, ensuring safe healthcare waste disposal across the board.


I will continue with this next week. Have a nice weekend!


(The author is an environmentalist.)

Comments

bottom of page