Africa, Malaria, and DDT

  • Thread starter Thread starter GregoryPalamas
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

GregoryPalamas

Guest
Apparently the use of DDT is the most effective deterent to malaria that has ever been found. Unfortunately, Western environmentalists along with the WHO have banned its use despite the fact that apparently no test has ever shown it to be dangerous to humans.

Take a look at this website:

fightingmalaria.org/article.php

Do we have any scientists or medical personel on this board who might confirm this?

Dan L
 
Any links? I wonder what if any scientific evidence was used to ban it in the first place. If there was any why are they going to lift the ban now. If there wasn’t, why did they ban it?

Dan L
 
I think that the use of DDT in Western was a huge mistake, using for everything is a mistake, but for fighting against sickness like malaria is necessary and because we have to remember that men are more important that the environment.
 
Paul Dreisson is a specialist on this subject. I have read his books and seen him interviewed several times. I’ll try to find the link. There is NOTHING that can help the malaria situation like DDT. The testing that supposedly ended its use in this country was like most of these tests, an overdose that no one would be subjected to. Spraying ponds in Africa hardly has the same effect as drinking a gallon of the stuff.

FWIW I grew up in forest country and when DDT was banned the tussock moths went nuts, killed all the trees and they burned down. So much for wildlife habitat.

Lisa N
 
Remember that banning DDT was THE cause of the radical environmentalists, dating back to Rachel Carson’s “The Silent Spring.” Getting it unbanned will be a real fight.
 
When I took organic chemistry years ago, every day the professor would choose a “molecule of the day”. One day he said the molecule of the day had saved more lives than any other new chemical of the 20th century - more than penicillin or antibiotics or other wonder drugs. That molecule was dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane, or DDT.

Now I don’t know if there’s any reference for that statistic. It does sound to me like some of the alarm about the stuff from the '60s was kind of bogus. But the stuff does stick around in the environment for a really long time. It’s also the type of thing that will accumulate in fatty tissues, and never be broken down or leave your body. But it sounds like it is really a lot less acutely toxic to both humans and wildlife than a lot of the newer pesticides. So I think it’s worth a closer look.
 
40.png
Franze:
I think that the use of DDT in Western was a huge mistake, using for everything is a mistake, but for fighting against sickness like malaria is necessary and because we have to remember that men are more important that the environment.
Click to expand...
Men can´t survive without the invironment…

Emmy
 
vern humphrey:
Remember that banning DDT was THE cause of the radical environmentalists, dating back to Rachel Carson’s “The Silent Spring.” Getting it unbanned will be a real fight.
Click to expand...
Yes, I remember when the book first came out, Rachel Carson was a celebrity for awhile, and quite sincere. Unfortunately, the success of the book and her cause resulted in a lot of unnecessary deaths in Africa. After the DDT ban, mosquitoes and malaria blosssomed. I wonder if she ever realized the amount of death she caused.
 
40.png
Emmy:
Men can´t survive without the invironment…

Emmy
Click to expand...
I agree. And I think here the end does not justify the means. DDT brought one of the earth’s most wonderful creatures, the sea eagle, in the UK to the brink of extinction. They ate the sea birds whose tissues were soaked with the residue, the residue prevented the sea eagles’ eggs from hatching. Okay, sea eagles aren’t as important as people. But we are not here to wipe out species. There are other means of controlling malaria. DDT seems to be one of the most harmful things our poor battered environment (God’s creation) has ever had to put up with. Please do not work to have this horrible chemical back working its poison on the creatures we are here to steward!
 
My dh and were just talking about this (he’s a biology prof). Apparently DDT is safe for humans, but has a cumulative effect in the environment. What needs to be done is finding a level of use that helps people and doesn’t damage other living things (except mosquitos, of course, no one cares about the lowly mosquito! lol). With a ban, that will never occur, which is sad since DDT could save so many lives. There are always trade offs.
Jennifer
 
vern humphrey:
Remember that banning DDT was THE cause of the radical environmentalists, dating back to Rachel Carson’s “The Silent Spring.” Getting it unbanned will be a real fight.
Click to expand...
So, the environmentalists would allow embryonic stem cell research but perhaps not allow the use of DDTto help those with malaria. killing unborn children. This is another case of animals over people- not right!
 
40.png
GregoryPalamas:
Apparently the use of DDT is the most effective deterent to malaria that has ever been found. Unfortunately, Western environmentalists along with the WHO have banned its use despite the fact that apparently no test has ever shown it to be dangerous to humans.

Take a look at this website:

fightingmalaria.org/article.php

Do we have any scientists or medical personel on this board who might confirm this?

Dan L
Click to expand...
My uncle is an entomologist and has been studying mosquitos in an effort to combat malaria for over 30 years. He has been living in Zambia for 3 years and it is my understanding that DDT is used in* that* country. I’ll see if I can dig up his e-mail and find out more.
 
I’d like to see some actual facts on DDT posted on this discussion. Arguments from ideology may feel good, but they’re not very helpful in figuring out what should be done.

I think (I hope) we can all agree that responsible stewardship of the environment is a Christian duty. The question then comes down to a) does DDT signficantly harm the environment and b)if it does, are there other ways of addressing the threat of malaria that preserve human life while reducing the damage to the environment, which by the way also affects human life?

Let’s see some fact-based work on these question before we start bashing wacko environmentalists or heartless corporate interests.
 
40.png
GregoryPalamas:
Here are three links. It seems that all of the studies done demonstrate that the initial fears were politically motivated. It also shows that DDT rather than being a curse is one of the major blessings of the twentieth century.

tysknews.com/Depts/Environment/ddt_100.htm

web.idrc.ca/en/ev-5593-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html

junkscience.com/foxnews/fn120100.htm

I’m not a scientist but I don’t like to be hoodwinked. If DDT can saves lives I think it deserves another look.

Dan L
Click to expand...
Having seen the effects of banning DDT I am all for reconsidering it on a cost/benefit ratio. In Africa in the wide open spaces it is not as much an issue as it would be sprayed around someone’s house. There was a time when it may have been carelessly used but it IS very effective. More people die of Malaria than AIDS and when there is such an effective and inexpensive preventative measure it annoys me to no end that a bunch of self satisfied American or Europeon environmentalists would subject the African continent to such unnecessary carnage
Lisa N
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top