0
   

The Ultimate Mass Murderer

 
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 10:20 pm
I HAVE commented on the problem of immunity. It arose from trying to use DDT as an area pesticide on crops; it would never happen if DDT were being used to protect humans from mosquitos and other disease vectors which is all anybody is asking for now and the lack of which has killed the 90 million people I'd mentioned. Aside from that, there was always a question as to whether mosquitos were becoming immune to the stuff or were simply avoiding it. Avoidance of course serves the purpose of keeping humans and mosquitos apart.
0 Replies
 
Adrian
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 10:23 pm
Quote:
it would never happen


Gunga, real slow. It _ has _ already _ happened.
0 Replies
 
Steppenwolf
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 10:43 pm
Edit: I deleted the first part of my post because several beers caused me to argue against someone agreeing with me. The result: total incoherence from Steppenwolf. Funny that... Very Happy

gungasnake wrote:
I HAVE commented on the problem of immunity. It arose from trying to use DDT as an area pesticide on crops; it would never happen if DDT were being used to protect humans from mosquitos and other disease vectors which is all anybody is asking for now and the lack of which has killed the 90 million people I'd mentioned. Aside from that, there was always a question as to whether mosquitos were becoming immune to the stuff or were simply avoiding it. Avoidance of course serves the purpose of keeping humans and mosquitos apart.


As far as "avoidance" is concerned, mosquitoes don't have the intellect to intentionally avoid DDT - an avoidance theory would requires some pretty fancy logical footwork. Furthermore, if by avoidance you mean instinctual avoidance, then this isn't functionally different than resistance. It's simply behavioral resistance, which would have the same effect on policy as biochemical resistance. Regarding the "pesticide use on crops" argument, you might be correct that the rate of immunity would change due to overuse, but there wouldn't be a categorical difference in results between the two uses.
0 Replies
 
primergray
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Nov, 2004 01:35 pm
I once discussed the malaria problem with a distinguished researcher. He believed that vector control was not the answer; the only way to really manage the disease was with a vaccine.

So, Gunga, since you care so much about the problem, I suggest you go back to school and work on creating a vaccine. Surely the immunology community could benefit from your acute intelligence.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Nov, 2004 04:56 pm
primergray wrote:
I once discussed the malaria problem with a distinguished researcher. He believed that vector control was not the answer; the only way to really manage the disease was with a vaccine.


Tell that to the 13 billion who've had malaria since DDT was banned or the families of the 90 million who have died.
0 Replies
 
primergray
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Nov, 2004 08:25 pm
Am I callous to suggest that DDT alone would not have worked?

And what about my challenge to you... The search for a vaccine is a worthy endeavour, is it not?
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Nov, 2004 08:39 pm
gungasnake wrote:
InfraBlue wrote:
My dad's told me stories about DDT and German Cockroaches in Chicago in the 50's.

He'd be able to drench cockroaches in high percentage solutions of DDT, and the cockroaches would still live.

He'd try dunking them in the solution, but they'd die of drowning instead of poisoning.


Only one thing kills cockroaches, and that's boric acid.


but nothing, absolutely nothing seems to kill keith richard.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Nov, 2004 09:00 pm
i don't pretend to know what much of this means. seems like some here have more scientific background than i do, maybe they get it.

but when something is labeled by dot as "keep away from food", it sounds like a good idea to do just that to me.

from the national safety council;

DDT Chemical Backgrounder


Description:

DDT [1,1,1-trichloro-2, 2-bis-(p-chlorophenyl)ethane] was (C.A.S. 50-29-3) one of the most widely used chemicals for the control of insects on agricultural crops and insects which carry diseases such as malaria and typhus. Technical DDT is primarily composed of three forms (p,p'-DDT, o,p'-DDT, and o,o'-DDT) which are white, crystalline, tasteless, and almost odorless solids.

DDE [1,1-dichloro-2, 2-bis(p-chlorophenyl)ethylene] and DDD [1,1-dichloro-2, 2-bis(p-chlorophenyl)ethane] are found in small amounts as contaminants in technical DDT. DDD was also used as a pesticide; one form of DDD was used medically in the treatment of cancer of the adrenal gland.

DDT does not occur naturally in the environment. The presence of DDT in the environment is generally a result of contamination due to its past production and use, and its subsequent movement from sites of application to land, water, and air.

DDT, DDE, DDD, and other persistent organochlorine pesticides are responsible for the great decrease in the reproductive capabilities and consequently in the populations of fish-eating birds, such as the bald eagle, brown pelican, and osprey. They have also been shown to decrease the populations of numerous other species of water birds, raptors, and passerines, and are also highly toxic to aquatic organisms.

Because of DDT's effects on birds, the chemical has not been used in the United States since 1972, and can no longer be used except in cases of public health emergency. It is still used in several other areas of the world. Use of DDD as a pesticide is also banned.

Though DDT is no longer produced in this country, quantities ranging from small containers to stockpiles, produced more than 20 years ago, are occasionally still found because of its widespread use until the early 1970s.

Chemical properties:
Synonyms for DDT are 1,1'-(2,2,2-trichloroethylidene) Bis (4-chlorobenzene); 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl) ethane; 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-di (4-chlorophenyl) ethane; 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-di(p-chlorophenyl) ethane; 1,1-bis(4-chlorophenyl)-2,2,2-trichlorethane; 1,1-bis(p-chlorophenyl)-2,2,2-trichlorethane; 2,2,2-trichloro-1,1-bis (4-chlorophenyl) ehtane; 2,2-bix(p-chlorophenyl)-1,1,1-trichloroethane; 4,4'-DDT; 4,4'-dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane; aavero-extra; agritan; alpha, alpha-bis (p-chlorophenyl)-beta,beta,beta-trichlorethan; anofex; arkotine; azotox; azotox m 33; benzochloryl; bosan supra; bovidermol; chlorophenothane; chlorophenotoxum; chlorphenothan; chlorphenotoxum; citox; clofenotan; clofenotane; DDT (DOT French); DDT (DOT Spanish); dedelo; deoval; detox; detoxan; dibovan; dichlorodiphenyltrichlorethane (DDT) (DOT French); dichlorodipheyltrichloroethane; dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT)dichlorodifeniltrichloroethano (DDT) (DOT Spanish); dicophane; didigam; didimac; diphenyltrichloroethane; dodat; dykol; ent 1,506; ent-1506; estonate;ethane, 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-bis(4-chlorophenyl)-; ethane, 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl)-; genitox; gesafid; gesapon; gesarex; gesarol; guesapon; guesarol; gyron; havero-extra; hildit; ivoran; ixodex; kopsol; micro DDT 75; mutoxan; mutoxin; na 2761; nci-c00464; neocid; neocidol (solid); oms 16; p,p'- DDT; p,p'-dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane; p,p'- Dichlorodiphenyltrichloromethylmethane; parachlorocidum; peb1; pentachlorin; pentech; penticidum; ppzeidan; r50; RCRA waste number U061; Rukseam; Santobane; Tafidex; Tech DDT; Trichlorobis (4'-chlorophenyl) ethane; Trichlorobis (4-chlorophenyl) ethane; Zeidane; and Zerdane.

Synonyms for DDE are DDT dihydrochloride; p,p'-DDE; dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene; and 1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis(p- chlorophenyl)ethylene.

Synonyms for DDD are 1,1-bis(4-chlorophenyl)-2,2-dichloroethane; 4,4'-DDD; 1,1- dichloro-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl)ethane; and TDE.

DDT is insoluble in water, but very soluble in ethyl ether, acetone, benzene, and other organic solvents. DDE is slightly soluble in water, lipids, and most organic solvents. DDD is insoluble in water.

DDT can dehydrochlorinate at temperatures above its melting point, and in organic solvents in the presence of alkalies or organic bases. It is stable in strong acids and can withstand acid permanganate oxidation.

Identification:

Chemical Name: DDT
Regulatory Name: DDT
Formula: C14H9C15
DOT Label: KEEP AWAY FROM FOOD
CAS: 50-29-3
CHRIS: DDT
UN Number: 2761

Health effects:

Although DDT has not been used in this country since 1972, under certain conditions, small amounts of DDT and DDE can remain in soil for a long time and may be transferred to crops grown on this soil. In addition, imported foods may have been directly exposed to DDT.

DDT is listed in the National Toxicology Program's Fifth Annual Report on Carcinogens as a "substance which may reasonably be anticipated to be carcinogen." The EPA categorizes DDT, DDE, and DDD as probable human carcinogens.

Individuals involved in the formulation of DDT have contracted rashes or irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat. Acute exposure at high doses primarily affects the nervous system. Longer term exposure to DDT may also affect the liver. In low doses, DDT may increase the ability of the liver to metabolize some compounds, while at higher doses, it may cause unusual growths or tumors or death of whole groups of cells (necrosis).

Children who are breast-fed are at special risk of exposure to DDT, because DDT is ubiquitous and is found in human milk in higher concentrations than those in cow's milk or other food. People more susceptible to the toxic effects of DDT are individuals with diseases of the nervous system, liver, or blood.

Exposure Values:
IDLH: 500 mg/m3; Not applicable for DDT, a potential human carcinogen. NIOSH)
TLV TWA: 1 mg/m3 (ACGIH, 1999)
NIOSH REL: Ca TWA 0.5 mg/m3
OSHA PEL: TWA 1 mg/m3 [skin]

Economics:
U.S. manufacturer of DDT is Lobel Chemical Corporation, New York, NY.
There has been no DDT imported into the United States since 1972.

Regulation:

EPA offices overseeing regulations and guidelines applicable to DDT, DDE, and DDD are Drinking Water, Emergency and Remedial Response, Solid Waste, and Toxic Substances. EPA cancelled most DDT use under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.

The Federal Drug Administration regulates the amount of DDT residues on tomatoes and dried tomato pumace for use in dog and cat food. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has established permissible exposure limits for DDT.

Under Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986, releases of more than one pound of DDT, DDE and DDD into the air, water, or land must be reported annually and entered into the National Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) data base.

Notations:

The NIOSH recommended exposure limits (RELs) are time-weighted average (TWA) concentrations for up to a 10-hour workday during a 40-hour workweek. A short-term exposure limit (STEL) is designated by "ST" preceding the value; unless noted otherwise, the STEL is a 15-minute TWA exposure that should not be exceeded at any time during a workday. A ceiling REL is designated by "C" preceding the value. Any substance that NIOSH considers to be a potential occupational carcinogen is designated by the notation "Ca."

The OSHA permissible exposure limits (PEL) are found in Tables Z-1, Z-2, and Z-3 of the OSHA General Industry Air Contaminants Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000). Unless noted otherwise, PEL are TWA concentrations that must not be exceeded during any 8-hour workshift of a 40-hour workweek. A STEL is designated by "ST" preceding the value and is measured over a 15-minute period unless noted otherwise. OSHA ceiling concentrations (designated by "C" preceding the value) must not be exceeded during any part of the workday; if instantaneous monitoring is not feasible, the ceiling must be assessed as a 15-minute TWA exposure. In addition, there are a number of substances from Table Z-2 (e.g., beryllium, ethylene dibromide, etc.) that have PEL ceiling values that must not be exceeded except for specified excursions. For example, a "5-minute maximum peak in any 2 hours" means that a 5-minute exposure above the ceiling value, but never above the maximum peak, is allowed in any 2 hours during an 8-hour workday.

Information Sources:

CAMEO®, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, www.epa.gov/ceppo.

Chemical Manufacturers Association, 1300 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22209: (703) 741-5000 or Chemical Referral Library, (800) 262-8200.

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Clearinghouse on Environmental Health Effects, 100 Capitola Drive, #108, Durham, NC 27713; (800) 643-4794; fax (919) 361-9408.

TOXNET, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health; www.toxnet.nlm.nih.gov

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW, Washington, DC 20460; Right to Know Hotline (800) 535-0202.

U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Health and Safety Administration, Washington, DC, www.osha.gov

OSHA PEL: Z-1 Table: www.osha-slc.gov/OshStd_data/1910_1000_TABLE_Z-1.html

OSHA PEL: Z-2 Table: www.osha-slc.gov/OshStd_data/1910_1000_TABLE_Z-2.html
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Nov, 2004 09:29 pm
gungasnake wrote:
primergray wrote:
I once discussed the malaria problem with a distinguished researcher. He believed that vector control was not the answer; the only way to really manage the disease was with a vaccine.


Tell that to the 13 billion who've had malaria since DDT was banned or the families of the 90 million who have died.


13 billion? Everyone on the planet has been infected TWICE?
0 Replies
 
Steppenwolf
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Nov, 2004 09:32 pm
MerlinsGodson wrote:
gungasnake wrote:
primergray wrote:
I once discussed the malaria problem with a distinguished researcher. He believed that vector control was not the answer; the only way to really manage the disease was with a vaccine.


Tell that to the 13 billion who've had malaria since DDT was banned or the families of the 90 million who have died.


13 billion? Everyone on the planet has been infected TWICE?


My, oh my. Laughing
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Nov, 2004 10:15 pm
MerlinsGodson wrote:
gungasnake wrote:
primergray wrote:
I once discussed the malaria problem with a distinguished researcher. He believed that vector control was not the answer; the only way to really manage the disease was with a vaccine.


Tell that to the 13 billion who've had malaria since DDT was banned or the families of the 90 million who have died.


13 billion? Everyone on the planet has been infected TWICE?



http://www.junkscience.com/malaria_clock.htm

It ain't the kinda thing anybody could make up.
0 Replies
 
Steppenwolf
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Nov, 2004 10:30 pm
Gunga, giving the benefit of the doubt to your article (and I have no reason to do so), that malaria figure implies 13 billion cases, not 13 billion people. In other words, you can't tell it to the "13 billion who've had malaria," because not that many have been infected. I can only assume that the reported cases include a hefty amount of multiple infections. I also doubt its veracity, but that's only speculation.

How many people have been alive since the banning of DDT (in the U.S.), anyway?
0 Replies
 
Adrian
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Nov, 2004 10:41 pm
The main problem with the figures is that the "cases per year" and "deaths per year" are based on CURRENT estimates, but those estimates are being used all the way through from the start point in 1972.

There weren't 300-500 million cases of malaria or 2.7 million deaths back in 1972.....
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Nov, 2004 10:47 pm
gungasnake wrote:
MerlinsGodson wrote:
gungasnake wrote:
primergray wrote:
I once discussed the malaria problem with a distinguished researcher. He believed that vector control was not the answer; the only way to really manage the disease was with a vaccine.


Tell that to the 13 billion who've had malaria since DDT was banned or the families of the 90 million who have died.


13 billion? Everyone on the planet has been infected TWICE?



http://www.junkscience.com/malaria_clock.htm

It ain't the kinda thing anybody could make up.


Well, 13 billion cases ain't quite the same as 13 billion people with malaria.

I also like the fine print:
Quote:
***** Note that some of these cases would have occurred irrespective of DDT use. Note also that, while enormously influential, the US ban did not immediately terminate global DDT use and that developing world malaria mortality increased over time rather than instantly leaping to the estimated value of 2,700,000 deaths per year. However, certain in the knowledge that even one human sacrificed on the altar of green misanthropy is infinitely too many, I let stand the linear extrapolation of numbers from an instant start on the 1st of the month following this murderous ban. -- Ed.


I am unable to verify the 2.7 million/year number they cite from The Intolerable Burden of Malaria: A New Look at the Numbers (here).

In fact, the paper seems to be concerned with treating malaria medically.

From a radio Netherlands program:

Quote:
Viet Nam - "The Vietnamese had a major problem - not only with malaria but drug resistant malaria. What they decided essentially - and this decision was made at a very high political level - was that malaria must be controlled. And they were aware of the Artemisinin class of drugs which had been shown in China to be highly effective against multi-drug resistant malaria. So they grew their own Artemisinin plants, extracted their own Artemisnin, they made the derivatives themselves and artemisinin became one of the major drugs against Malaria...
They didn't just do that; they targetted the people with bed-nets - and then in very epidemic situations, they used insecticides - although the use of bed-nets reduced the vast amount of insecticides that were used. And as a result of this, they've so far reduced the incidence of malaria by about 60% - and their deaths in this decade by about 75%... I mean it is impressive!



Are you sure that "junk science" isn't supposed to apply to their own work?
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Nov, 2004 11:02 pm
MerlinsGodson wrote:
gungasnake wrote:
primergray wrote:
I once discussed the malaria problem with a distinguished researcher. He believed that vector control was not the answer; the only way to really manage the disease was with a vaccine.


Tell that to the 13 billion who've had malaria since DDT was banned or the families of the 90 million who have died.


13 billion? Everyone on the planet has been infected TWICE?


That's a hilarious way to show how nonsensical gunga's figures are!

But - you are quite wrong.

Only PART of the planet lives in malaria prone areas.

Many must have been infected much more than twice.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Nov, 2004 07:02 am
http://www.nrbookservice.com/BookPage.asp?prod_cd=c6562

http://www.nrbookservice.com/bookimages/62/c6562_full.jpg

How liberals can believe things that are so, well, stupid
Printer Friendly Version

Why do well-educated antiwar activists argue that the U.S. government orchestrated the September 11 attacks, and is on the way to replicating the horrors of Nazi Germany? How can Al Gore really believe that cars pose "a mortal threat to the security of every nations"? How can Yale professor Lamont Cole assert with a straight face that "to feed a starving child is to exacerbate the world population problem"? Why does the Princeton professor known as the father of the animal rights movement object to humans eating animals but not to humans having sex with them -- and why does PETA defend that position?

It is startling how many Americans -- and particularly how many among the Leftist media, academic, and political elites -- fall for cockamamie ideas that a child can see through. The trouble is, their lies become institutionalized as truth, and we all suffer as a result. Why are liberals such easy prey for stupid ideas? Daniel J. Flynn reveals the answer in Intellectual Morons.

Flynn, author of Why the Left Hates America, shows how people (mostly Leftists, but also a few on the Right) can be so blinded to reality by the causes they serve that they espouse bizarre, sometimes ridiculous, and often dangerous positions. Even the most influential social movements have spawned ideologues who don't care whether an idea is good or bad, true or false -- but only whether it can serve their cause.

In Intellectual Morons, Flynn catalogues an amazing number of jaw-dropping lapses in common sense from even our most celebrated liberal opinion leaders. This book is a welcome reality check for the glaring excesses of what passes today for intellectual analysis among Leftists.

Stupid ideas put forth by liars, hypocrites, and perverts -- and their harmful consequences:

* How abortion rights activists ignore (or cover up) the fact that their matron saint advocated eugenics and concentration camps

* The university professor who claims that Beethoven's music perpetuates rape

* The environmental movement: spawned by a "scientist" whose doomsday predictions are almost always wrong

* How the hero of the animal rights crowd is a crank who promotes infanticide and euthanasia

* The respected animal rights activist and professor who actually compared barnyard conditions for animals to concentration camps for humans

* The sexual revolution: launched by Alfred Kinsey, a scientific fraud -- and pervert

* How the banning of DDT has led to the deaths of millions (plus other disastrous effects of kowtowing to environmentalist fearmongering)

* How historians and journalists have airbrushed history to turn a racial separatist into a civil rights icon

* How the founder of Planned Parenthood actually condemned abortion repeatedly in public forums -- while privately helping to provide it

* How the Kinsey Reports contains clear evidence that children were molested in order to provide data for their findings

* The history textbook, vastly popular among American liberals, that pushes watered-down Marxism and smears the Founding Fathers as motivated by greed

* W. E. B. Du Bois: the unsavory truth about this civil rights hero's involvement with Communist ideologues who actually opposed his stated principles

* The fifty-year delusion: why liberals continue to believe, against a growing mountain of evidence, that Alger Hiss was not in fact a Communist spy

* Gore Vidal's paranoid fantasies and evidence-free "analyses" of how U.S. officials were involved in 9/11 and the Oklahoma City bombing in order to increase government power

* How rabid anti-Americans today simply parrot the delusional claims of a few whacked-out Leftist gurus

* The "uncontrollable hysteria and physical violence" that marked the behavior of a revered feminist icon

* How Alfred Kinsey used child molesters, including a former member of the Nazi SS, to gather the data about sex he used to help break down society's mores

* The bizarre private and public life of intellectual cult figure Ayn Rand

* The icon of the Left who praised Hitler's Germany as a prosperous, orderly, efficient, and peaceful place

* Betty Friedan: how she distorted and covered up inconvenient facts about her personal life when writing The Feminine Mystique

* Noam Chomsky: apologist for the Khmer Rouge, champion of Fidel, predictor of American-led genocide in Afghanistan -- and still the world's most cited scholar

* The state-funded Massachusetts conference that instructed high school students how to engage in a variety of sexual perversions

* Leo Strauss: his bizarre numerological "key" for understanding philosophy - and his baneful influence in high places

* How the picture of Alfred Kinsey that has been passed on by college texts and popular historians is the polar opposite of the truth

* Kinsey: how he sought out homosexuals and other sexual deviants for his studies of sex, both to confirm his predrawn conclusions and to provide himself with sexual liaisons

* The respected animal rights theorist who declared: "Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs" -- and the Greenpeace founder who believes that "earthworms are far more valuable than people"

* Eight absurd and erroneous predictions made by Paul Ehrlich, the author of The Population Bomb (which didn't stop the book from having enormous influence over liberal policymakers)

* The entire philosophical school, beloved and revered by liberals, that glorifies inconsistency and incoherence

* The New York college that actually boasts an Alger Hiss Professor of Social Studies
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Nov, 2004 07:31 am
Keep going Gunga - if you keep on at it, we will all believe your distorted stats.

It is a pity that you demean a very real issue with your exaggerations.
0 Replies
 
Steppenwolf
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Nov, 2004 07:40 am
A bullet point from some random book is proof? That's a conclusion, not an argument. Keep digging.
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Nov, 2004 07:42 am
dlowan wrote:
Keep going Gunga - if you keep on at it, we will all believe your distorted stats.

It is a pity that you demean a very real issue with your exaggerations.


Nice one. Nijntje ex machina. Our Dutch friends will understand.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Nov, 2004 07:48 am
I wouldnae compare the headcracking killer bunny with dear Nijntje ...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/28/2022 at 07:04:43