0
   

DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival

 
 
Reply Mon 29 May, 2006 09:40 pm
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,194332,00.html


DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival

Thursday , May 04, 2006

By Steven Milloy

The U.S. Government has finally begun to reverse policy on the insecticide DDT. Let's hope that this policy shift represents the beginning of the end of what can only be called a crime against humanity: the decades-old withholding of the world's most effective anti-malarial weapon from billions of adults and children at risk of dying from the disease.

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) told the Washington Times this week (May 3) that it endorses and will fund the indoor spraying of DDT in sub-Saharan Africa. Malaria kills more than one million Africans annually, mostly children under five and pregnant women.

Malaria accounts for 10 percent of Africa's disease burden and causes $12 billion yearly in lost productivity.

USAID reportedly will use about 20 percent of its $99 billion budget to fund indoor spraying with DDT, according to the Times. "Between 1 million and 1.5 million people will be protected," a USAID official told the Times.

There are, of course, many more millions of Africans that need protection from the mosquitoes that transmit the parasite that causes malaria, but USAID's announcement represents a ray of hope compared to its previous policy which - as characterized by Robert S. Desowitz's book entitled, Malaria Capers (Norton, 1992) - appeared to be that people in Third World malarial regions were "better dead than alive and riotously reproducing."

The policy change is timely given a recent commentary published in the prestigious medical journal The Lancet (April 25) in which a number of researchers accuse the World Bank of deception and medical malpractice in the struggle against malaria.

The researchers charge that the World Bank reneged on its promise to spend $300 million to $500 million for malaria control in Africa; concealed the actual amount of its expenditures; reduced its staff of malaria experts from seven to zero shortly after promising to do more to fight the disease; published false epidemiological studies to exaggerate the performance of its projects; and funded clinically obsolete treatments, against the World Health Organization's advice, for malaria in India.

Given that the World Bank's defense amounted to "we are committed to learning from our shortcomings," it seems clear that Africans would be better off with an effective anti-malarial tool like DDT, rather than the efforts of pathetically ineffective bureaucrats.

Roadblocks to the lifesaving use of DDT remain - mostly in the form of the modern environmental movement and its governmental subsidiary known as the European Union.

"Environmentalists are calling for the elimination of the toxic chemical, DDT, which is still used in large parts of Africa to combat malaria," the Voice of America reported this week.

The EU recently put this policy into practice, for example, by threatening to impose a ban on agricultural exports from Uganda if that nation proceeded with its plan for indoor spraying of DDT, according to Paul Driessen, senior fellow at the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE).

"If the strict controls that should be put in place when DDT is used are not fully adhered to, and there is a risk of contamination of the food chain, [it] would not automatically lead to a ban of food products, but it will mean that that particular consignment cannot be sent to Europe," said Tom Vens, an EU official in Uganda.

The Ugandans countered by maintaining that "DDT is not harmful to humans and if used for indoor-insecticide spraying, it's the most effective and cheapest way to fight malaria," according to Driessen.

The Ugandans have it right.

There never was any scientific evidence that DDT posed a risk to humans or wildlife. An EPA administrative law judge said as much after seven months and 9,000 pages of testimony about DDT in 1972. DDT wasn't responsible for the decline in bald eagle populations, didn't cause bird egg shell-thinning and didn't cause cancer in humans, the judge determined.

DDT was nonethless banned in the U.S. when then-EPA administrator William Ruckleshaus reversed without explanation the decision of the judge who actually heard all the DDT testimony - Ruckleshaus heard none of it and never read any of the transcript. As it was later revealed, Ruckleshaus was a member of the Audubon Society and raised money for the Environmental Defense Fund - the two activist groups that led the charge for the DDT ban.

The fix was in for DDT, as environmental activists subsequently exported the ban to the rest of the world - with horrific consequences, including tens of millions killed and billions made ill by malaria over time.

It's time for the malaria tragedy to end. A documentary by producer D. Rutledge Taylor, MD entitled, "3 Billion and Counting" - which will take "an in-depth look at the disease that has killed more people than any disease ever known" - is in the works and will be released later this year.

Let's forget the myths about DDT - it's time to stop malaria now.

Steven Milloy publishes JunkScience.com, CSRWatch.com. He is a junk science expert, an advocate of free enterprise and an adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute .
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 5,534 • Replies: 24
No top replies

 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 May, 2006 09:41 pm
http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/13/499982

DDT use starts in July
Monday, 22nd May, 2006
E-mail article E-mail article Print article Print article

By Alfred Wasike

UGANDA is set to start spraying homes countrywide with DDT (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane) against malaria in July, the Government has announced.

In preparation for the DDT anti-malarial strategy, the US has given Uganda US$10m to fight malaria.

The US President George Bush anti-malarial initiative has chosen three African countries; uganda, Tanzania and Angola, former health minister Jim Muhwezi said.

Uganda loses over US$700m per year to malaria (more money than Uganda gets from donors to balance its budget), while between 100,000 and 120,000 people are killed by malaria annually, the Government says.

Muhwezi said the spraying was being coordinated at continental level by an organisation called WHO-AFRO.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 May, 2006 09:42 pm
The Ultimate Mass Murderer...

http://able2know.com/forums/about39091.html&highlight=

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/05/images/0419_carson.jpg
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 May, 2006 08:20 am
1. you will never erradicate mosquitoes, no matter how much toxins you enter into the environment.
2. malaria can be cured in 95% of the cases.
3. ddt stores and builds in the fatty tissues of food animals.
4. ddt exposure cause a higher likelihood of pre-mature birth. From the GOV.
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 May, 2006 08:26 am
It took 60 years for bald eagles to return to VT after the population had been dessimated by exposure to ddt.

Quote:
Bald eagles disappeared in the state in the decades after World War II because of the use of the pesticide DDT.

Efforts began in the early 1970s to restore bald eagles across the country, but those efforts didn't begin in Vermont until recently.

The eagles started building the nest along the river last year and then returned this spring to lay eggs. ESPN
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 May, 2006 02:18 pm
littlek wrote:
1. you will never erradicate mosquitoes, no matter how much toxins you enter into the environment.
2. malaria can be cured in 95% of the cases.
3. ddt stores and builds in the fatty tissues of food animals.
4. ddt exposure cause a higher likelihood of pre-mature birth. From the GOV.


There were guys who fell into vats of DDT in the 50s who are still walking around.

Every single one of the survivors of the nazi death camps were sprayed with DDT to kill lice. Most would have died of typhus otherwise. None died of DDT exposure.

At least one true expert (Heinz Meng) is on record to the effect that DDT had nothing to do with the decline in raptor populations. Farmers SHOOTING raptors with shotguns had everything to do with it; once they outlawed that, the raptors came back.

Quote:

2. malaria can be cured in 95% of the cases.


Neat theory. Where I come from, the guy who proposes a theory like that gets to be the guinea pig....
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 May, 2006 02:21 pm
One other thing I should mention, is that the entire stock of raptors on the planet is not worth 90 million human lives, which is what banning DDT has cost.
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 May, 2006 05:26 pm
I said nothing about ddt being fatal to humans.

Ok, so, you kill off 80% of mosquitoes, 20% survive (just geussing at the numbers). You kill off all the major raptors. Rats, mice, etc become rampant and old odd diseases like the plague does too, not to mention the decimation of an already troubled agriculture by the boom in the rabbit populations.......
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 May, 2006 05:29 pm
The problem with DDT was its being used everywhere as an area pesticide for crops. That should stay stopped. Using it to protect human habitats is harmless. At least, it's way the hell MORE harmless than allowing mosquitos to breed and run rampant in human habitats.

They pretty much had things like polio and malaria wiped off the planet in 1957 and that was too good for the fricking idiots.
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 May, 2006 05:31 pm
Gunga, I'm not saying it shouldn't be used. I'm saying that it's use needs to be thought out very carefully and with the long-term results in mind.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 May, 2006 05:52 pm
junkscience.com.

Great name for the junk science it promotes.

I love the spreadsheet he produced that shows the costs of malaria. No basis for any of the numbers. Just pulls them out of where he normally keeps his head it seems.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 May, 2006 07:30 pm
In post war Italy cholera was fought by dusting everybody with DDT. The program was successful but short lived. Within a year DDT resistant lice were coming back with avengeance. So by 1951 mosquitoes and a host of insects were fully resistant to DDt and a number of other organochlorines and organosphosphates.

from 1947 to 1952, DDT was used to eradicate malaria in the US. At this time , malaria was already on a decline because of physical controls (drainage, construction of moving water dikes, etc). Early successes in the US were transferred to other parts of the mid latitudes. Production went up to over 3MM pounds per month, and according to Harvard researchers, this led to one of natures biggest victories over our technology -evolution trumped malaria control by DDT.
Chloroquinines and DDT were a double whammy against the plasmodium vivax and, at first DDT and the chloroquinines appeared quite effective. (The same technology of spraying interiro walls was used in the subsahara) Its amazing that weve not learned a damn thing from history and we have these yahoos like gunga who really believe that theres a global conspiracy against its use.
Steve Palumbi wrote:
in 1958, the attack on malaria began worldwide, under a UN Global Malaria Eradication Program, which was backed by almost 1/2 billion dollars earmarked by our Congress.
The funds were slated for a 5 year program, at which time, we were sure that malaria would be gone like the world's last car payment. WHO spread 400000TONS of DDT around the world and was credited with saving over 15 million lives initially. But the weapon began to quickly falter and fail all because of developed resisstance in both the mosquitoes and the plasmodium parasites.
Environmentally DDT was a disaster because of its persistance and accumulation and magnification in larger animals. Nevertheless DDT was initially successful and malaria declined steeply in places that were dosed. In Sri LAnka, with 1 million cases of malari in 1955, there were less than 20 in 1961.
The five year program ran out without a victory, ... because the programs architects were racing evolution, and they thought if the eradication program continued , it would be too slowly, then"resistance ws almost certain to appear and eradication would be economically and practically impossible".
By 1972 WHO had spent over a Billion $ to that point and then , just as quickly admitted that the program was dead.
The developed world then turned its back on the third world, leaving the developing nations with an exacerbated health problem. After partial successes in eradication , the fact of resistance arose quickly, leaving the people of these countries poorer in immunity to malaria than before. They were plagued by new strains and new mosquitoes that were very hard to kill"


The fact that gunga keeps singing this song is like a bunch of kids who find some dynamite and , after blowing one of them up they want to know howcome nobody told em about this before.

Gunga, your naive reliance upon your own brand of "truth" shows a very PA Dutch stubborn streak. While its ok to be stubborn, just try to make sure that youre right.

If they go ahead with this program, Itll be with a typical "brain dead" science advisory board that Bush needs to underpin his millenial mind. Weve trod this landsacpe before and to reuse a chemical that has actually exacerbated the malaria problem by evolving "super skeeters" shows how totally dense are our leaders.
I guess well have to learn again whats that line from Santayana?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 May, 2006 07:55 pm
gunga
Quote:
(Heinz Meng) is on record to the effect that DDT had nothing to do with the decline in raptor populations. Farmers SHOOTING raptors with shotguns had everything to do with it; once they outlawed that, the raptors came back.
There are a whole bunch of "real ornithologiss" who think that Meng was incorrect in his causitive element. The facts are that even after shooting was declared illegal the populations of raptors crashed . The recovery and hacking programs didnt "take" until well after DDT was banned and depurated in the environment.

IPM or integrated pest management , using a number of pesticides and organic means like Bt has been shown to have effects. But a fact is , that in the early 1900s, we lost less than 10% of our crops to insect damage, according to USDA , today , after all the stuff in our chemical arsenal, our crop damages are over 15%. Why, because we plant entire counties of just one crop and dust the crap out of them . Millions of bugs with millions of gene loci can develop pesticide immunity in less than 5 generations

USDA has also

published some interesting data for herbicides. The first date is the date the chemical was introduced, the second date was when significant resistance was developed in the target weeds
2,4D--1945--1954
Dalapon--1953--1962
Atrazine--1958--1968
picloram--1963--1988
Triflurlin--1963--1988
Triallate--1964--1987
Diclofop--1980--1987
ALS inhibitors--1982--1987
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 May, 2006 08:03 pm
Hello boys!
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 May, 2006 08:40 pm
The good news is, that apparently the powers that be are no longer listening to the pinko envirowhacks on this particular topic:

Quote:

DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival

Thursday , May 04, 2006

By Steven Milloy

The U.S. Government has finally begun to reverse policy on the insecticide DDT. Let's hope that this policy shift represents the beginning of the end of what can only be called a crime against humanity: the decades-old withholding of the world's most effective anti-malarial weapon from billions of adults and children at risk of dying from the disease.

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) told the Washington Times this week (May 3) that it endorses and will fund the indoor spraying of DDT in sub-Saharan Africa. Malaria kills more than one million Africans annually, mostly children under five and pregnant women.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 May, 2006 10:20 pm
The mass reintroduction of DDT use sure would be good for business, though. Ain't that right, gunga?

Do you own stock in any of the petrochemical corporations that would stand to make a pretty penny off of this venture?
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 May, 2006 03:08 am
Quote:


By 1972 WHO had spent over a Billion $ to that point and then , just as quickly admitted that the program was dead.
The developed world then turned its back on the third world, leaving the developing nations with an exacerbated health problem. After partial successes in eradication , the fact of resistance arose quickly, leaving the people of these countries poorer in immunity to malaria than before. They were plagued by new strains and new mosquitoes that were very hard to kill"


I'm going to have to call bullshit on this one.

The only context in which mosquitos would develop immunity to DDT would be that in which it was being used as an area pesticide for crops.

Nobody is talkiing about doing that any more; all they're talking about is protecting human habitats from mosquitos. There is no evidence of mosquitos developing immunity to the stuff when it is used that way. The stuff lingers, and insects AVOID it. They LEAVE, and stay gone.

For the purpose of keeping humans from dying of malaria and other mosquito plagues, that works.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 May, 2006 03:13 am
junkscience.com:

Quote:

Since February 16, 2005, the Kyoto Protocol has cost US$ 192,794,532,011 while potentially saving an undetectable 0.001999351 °C by the year 2050.

Malaria cost US$ 168,915,579,659 in lost GDP and 3,470,301 lives over the same period.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 May, 2006 03:21 am
100+ things you should know about DDT:

http://junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 May, 2006 03:22 am
Who's getting rich on DDT you ask?

Tee shirts

http://store.junkscience.com/ddtee.html

http://junkscience.com/images/DDTee_front-back.gif
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Evolution 101 - Discussion by gungasnake
Typing Equations on a PC - Discussion by Brandon9000
The Future of Artificial Intelligence - Discussion by Brandon9000
The well known Mind vs Brain. - Discussion by crayon851
Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter' - Discussion by oralloy
Blue Saturn - Discussion by oralloy
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/18/2019 at 09:38:08