Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 09:03 am
A buddy of mine took an ornithology course under Dr. Heinz Meng, America's greatest expert on birds of prey and the man who first bred peregrines in captivity. Asked about DDT and birds in the classroom, Dr. Meng's answer floored everybody in the room. He replied that DDT had no effect on birds or birds eggs and that pretty much everything students had ever heard about DDT was a bunch of bullshit.

That also says that Rachel Carson is probably the #1 mass murderer in the entire history of the world since there have been over 100 million needless human deaths from malaria alone since DDT was banned throughout the world. Hitler and Genghis Khan never came close to those kinds of numbers. Watch what Jon Stoessel and Richard Tren have to say on the subject.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHwqandRTSQ

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHwqandRTSQ[/tiyryve]
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,633 • Replies: 62
No top replies

 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 09:23 am
This is more like it
gungasnake
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 09:30 am
Friend of mine's poor dog is dying of heartworms, yet another mosquito-borne horror which nobody worried about in the age of DDT.
gungasnake
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 09:34 am
@edgarblythe,
Bullshit. There were guys who fell into vats of the stuff in the fifties who were still walking around decades later with no ill effects; there was a guy who used to eat the stuff with a spoon on television, no ill effects...

Everybody who survived those Nazi death camps in WW-II was doused with the stuff to kill lice, again no ill effects, and several typhus epidemics were stopped cold as if they'd run into an iron wall in 46 - 47 and the list of saved lives went on and on. There was certainly no down side to using the stuff to protect human habitats.
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 09:43 am
@gungasnake,
You obviously fail to understand that the network of life has to be allowed to work. To bring down huge swaths of varying life forms with poison has a domino effect and brings down more and more swaths of life forms.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 10:10 am
@gungasnake,
so youthink that heartworms just showed up after DDT was banned??? I hve a bridge for you to buy.
What gunga fails to note is that, yes DDT is a moerate toxicity acute tox chemical, but DDE and DDD (secondary congeners) are arcinogens responsible for a 5X increase in Brest cancers in girls who were exposed (pre puberty) to DDT (very common in the African "DDT or nothing" way of spraying for malaria). DDE is also a known estrogen enhancer and carcinogen associated with liver and pqncreatic cancer occurence (one of the probable reasons for a bump in pancreatic cancers on WWII vets who were "dusted")

Many of these associated tests and studies were done in animals but stat results taken in rtrospective studies from human populations seems to confirm the cancer linkage)

Sorta like Arsenic that is quietly being removed from our food supplies by more environmentally responsible and helth conscious flavor and fragrance and food additive companies.

We know chemical "hlf lives " and response doses to breakdowns and the data dont look good for DDT (I dont know why we have these idiots in charge of agencies that are afraid to pass on the news).

While Eu has slowly been banning substances that have clear toxic effects, like brominated veggie oils or nicotenoid bug sprays and Arsenic in chicken feed, we let the chem companies just feed us poisons and give the farmers little direction for proper depuration means to get all that **** out of their cattle and chickens.
We dont buy any chickens from anyone but an organic butcher who provides a rundown of all his feeds and additives he uses.
gungasnake
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 01:54 pm
@edgarblythe,
Quote:
You obviously fail to understand that the network of life has to be allowed to work.


You specialize in bullshit, don't you? Upwards of half the animal species which have ever walked the Earth are now extinct and that had nothing to do with DDT. If the "network of life(TM)" were working, your ass would be being chased by carnosaurs and terror birds.
gungasnake
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 01:58 pm
@farmerman,
100 Million+ human malaria deaths since they banned DDT and for every person who dies from malaria some number of others go on leading stunted and wrecked lives from it. There may or may not have ever been a down side to using DDT as an area pesticide for crops but there is no possible downside to using it to protect human habitats, which is all anybody is talking about now.

My buddy's poor dog wouldn't be dying of heart worms.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 02:51 pm
@gungasnake,
WHO's numbers are quite a bit less than yours. BUT, I see that WHo has been pushing for making mosquito ntting with pyrthrum and wall spras with DDT available to African countries and India and the Stans.
There are about 10 or so countries that use it. BUT, the growth in resistance in second generation mosquitoes makes it decreasing in effectiveness.
the disfiguring diseases are the Leishmania, not malaria. I saw some kids with it when I was in NIgeria, breaks your heart with kids with half thir faces gone.

Your hate for Ms Carson is kinda dum. She was a pretty damn goo ecologist and she was pretty much dead right.
(I know weve had this discussion so damn many times before butyou dont seem to take on and read some of what she wrote and what actually happened.

Dr Mueller, who created the DDT molecule as a pesticide substitution for lead arsenate (which I think everyone recognizes is a badass), won a NOBEL prize in 1948. (Shows us how much we know at any given time)

0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 02:54 pm
@gungasnake,
Quote:
Upwards of half the animal species which have ever walked the Earth are now extinct and that had nothing to do with DDT
You sound like doofus Plump. So its ok that we become agents of etinction?? Is that what you mean??
And besides its 99.9999% of all species that ever lived are extinct. We already had our hands in the extinction of several dozen or more.

So I guess that makes it all right by you?
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 04:10 pm
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:

Quote:
You obviously fail to understand that the network of life has to be allowed to work.


You specialize in bullshit, don't you? Upwards of half the animal species which have ever walked the Earth are now extinct and that had nothing to do with DDT. If the "network of life(TM)" were working, your ass would be being chased by carnosaurs and terror birds.

You dont have any manners do you? At any rate, accelerating the extinctions with poisons makes your argument more wrong, not more right.
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 04:12 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

gungasnake wrote:

Quote:
You obviously fail to understand that the network of life has to be allowed to work.


You specialize in bullshit, don't you? Upwards of half the animal species which have ever walked the Earth are now extinct and that had nothing to do with DDT. If the "network of life(TM)" were working, your ass would be being chased by carnosaurs and terror birds.

You dont have any manners do you? At any rate, accelerating the extinctions with poisons makes your argument more wrong, not more
right.

Tip of the hat to farmerman. I did not see your post.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 08:50 pm
Educate yourselves...

http://junksciencearchive.com/ddtfaq.html
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 08:51 pm
Quote:
Some mosquitoes became "resistant" to DDT. "There is persuasive evidence that antimalarial operations did not produce mosquito resistance to DDT. That crime, and in a very real sense it was a crime, can be laid to the intemperate and inappropriate use of DDT by farmers, espeially cotton growers. They used the insecticide at levels that would accelerate, if not actually induce, the selection of a resistant population of mosquitoes."

[Desowitz, RS. 1992. Malaria Capers, W.W. Norton & Company]
"Resistance" may be a misleading term when discussing DDT and mosquitoes. While some mosquitoes develop biochemical/physiological mechanisms of resistance to the chemical, DDT also can provoke strong avoidance behavior in some mosquitoes so they spend less time in areas where DDT has been applied -- this still reduces mosquito-human contact. "This avoidance behavior, exhibited when malaria vectors avoid insecticides by not entering or by rapidly exiting sprayed houses, should raise serious questions about the overall value of current physiological and biochemical resistance tests. The continued efficacy of DDT in Africa, India, Brazil, and Mexico, where 69% of all reported cases of malaria occur and where vectors are physiologically resistant to DDT (excluding Brazil), serves as one indicator that repellency is very important in preventing indoor transmission of malaria."
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 08:58 pm
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/31369277_10214231182072409_1375037652735184361_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=29cac0ca89da79d3612c1ca11dad8fde&oe=5B9C5CC3
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2018 09:08 pm
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:

https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/31369277_10214231182072409_1375037652735184361_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=29cac0ca89da79d3612c1ca11dad8fde&oe=5B9C5CC3

Trump, Hitler and Margaret Thatcher
gungasnake
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2018 02:42 am
@edgarblythe,
Genghis Khan, Hitler, and Rachel Carson but the picture is a little bit misleading i.e. Hitler and Genghis Khan were basically amateurs compared to Carson. Neither of them ever came close to having brought about 100,000,000 human deaths. I mean, picture somebody telling Genghis Khan that he could kill 100,000,000 people by simply publishing a perverted greentard book, and that all of his cavalry expertise and those decades of war and massacre were totally unnecessary.....
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2018 04:25 am
@gungasnake,
and youre obviouly still a denier, so you havent learned anything.

Heres something from2014 Science News (35 years later) where theyve isolated the STR that renders DDT non toxic to mosquitoes

Quote:
A single genetic mutation causes resistance to DDT and pyrethroids (an insecticide class used in mosquito nets), new research concludes. With the continuing rise of resistance, the research is key as scientists say that this knowledge could help improve malaria control strategies. The researchers used a wide range of methods to narrow down how the resistance works, finding a single mutation in the GSTe2 gene, which makes insects break down DDT so it's no longer toxic. They have also shown that this gene makes insects resistant to pyrethroids raising the concern that GSTe2 gene could protect mosquitoes against the major insecticides used in public health.


farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2018 04:44 am
@farmerman,
Hres a little more from "Innovations Report". The Uni of Bath in UK has been doing a series of studies to help in developing multi phase controls for malarial mosquitoes.

Quote:
Insects that can withstand the powerful pesticide DDT that was banned in the 1970s have a genetic advantage over their rivals that has helped them spread across the globe ever since, according to research published in Current Biology tomorrow (9 August 2005).



This discovery overturns current theories that resistance to pesticides burdens insects with a genetic disadvantage that would stop them from competing with non-resistant insects once farmers stop using that pesticide.

Instead, researchers now believe that fruit flies that develop resistance to DDT gain a two-fold advantage: not only can they survive being sprayed with pesticide, which other insects cannot, but in doing so they develop a genetic advantage that makes them and their offspring more likely to thrive even when spraying is abandoned.



Researchers warn that the same process may be going on when doctors across the world prescribe antibiotics to cure infections.

Antibiotic resistance may potentially confer the same kind of genetic advantage to ‘superbug’ bacteria, and measures such as preventing certain antibiotics from being prescribed may not halt the spread of antibiotic resistance in bacteria.

“We found that DDT resistance in fruit flies not only carries no cost but in fact confers an advantage when inherited through the female,” said Richard ffrench-Constant (sic), from the University of Bath, who led the study.

“This suggests that by becoming DDT resistant the female flies are passing on some unknown advantage to their progeny, presumably associated with the single metabolic enzyme (cytochrome P450) that they over express.’’

“These results are important for the use of any drug, pesticide or antibiotic as they suggest that resistance will not always go away when we do not spray or prescribe antibiotics.”

Scientists had previously believed that the genetic ‘cost’ of resistance would mean that DDT resistance would dwindle once the pesticide taken out of use and DDT-susceptible insects would regain dominance.

“Although this assumption is widespread, data to support this contention is actually thin,” said Professor ffrench-Constant. He believes previous work may not have looked at genetically related strains and that ‘costs’ may therefore be associated with the differing genetic backgrounds of insects examined, and not the resistance genes themselves.

“Experimenters looking at genetic fitness in resistant insects often only look at single character traits such as number of eggs laid, and often compare resistant and susceptible lines that are genetically unrelated.

“Differences in fitness therefore often correspond to differences in genetic background rather and are not due to the resistance gene itself.”

Using DDT-resistant fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster) in state-of-the-art controlled temperature rooms provided by the Wolfson Trust, Caroline McCart, a PhD student in the Department of Biology and Biochemistry at the University, went to great lengths to make sure that DDT resistant and susceptible strains differed only by the resistance gene itself.

Using antibiotics they also ‘cured’ the flies of the microbes that are known to affect their ability to reproduce and could affect the results.

In order to assess the genetic fitness of both the resistant and susceptible strains, the researchers monitored the survival and development rate of all life stages of their offspring.

They found that DDT resistance in fruit flies not only carries no cost but in fact confers an advantage when inherited through the female.

This discovery comes at a time when a number of developing nations, including South Africa, are considering re-introducing (or continuing the use of) DDT in an attempt to reduce the major health problems caused by malaria.

Use of DDT (Dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane) increased enormously on a worldwide basis after World War II, primarily because of its effectiveness against the mosquito that spreads malaria and lice that carry typhus.

DDT-resistant mosquitoes were first detected in India in 1959, and they have increased so rapidly that when a local spray program is begun now, most mosquitoes become resistant in a matter of months rather than years.

Worryingly, some resistant strains also show ‘cross-resistance’ to a number of different compounds, so spraying with one insecticide can unexpectedly increase resistance to newer compounds subsequently introduced to try and overcome resistance.

The World Health Organization estimates that during the period of DDT use, approximately 25 million human lives have been saved. Today pyrethroids are most commonly used in mosquito control but they act on the same target in the nervous system as DDT and ironically spraying with DDT may therefore have pre-selected for resistance to the newer pyrethroids.

The University of Bath is one of the UK’s leading universities, with an international reputation for quality research and teaching. In 16 subject areas the University of Bath is rated in the top ten in the country.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2018 04:58 am
@farmerman,
With the understanding about the genetics of acquired resistance (several USDA ag research Universities including Texas A&M an Penn State)), theyve been doing"red Queen" evolution stoking by screwing with target genes and epigenes to see whether these adaptations can be de-engineered or to create stronger Bacillus thuringensis .
(All that sounds like an evolutionary "treadmill" to me, where we wind up with superbugs and supermicrobes at the same time.)

Mueller started something that is like the "Sorcerer's Apprentice". Weve created a genetic monster and it may be out of the bottle
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
  1. Forums
  2. » DDT
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/16/2018 at 07:40:39