"Save the World" Enviros Are Killing Millions of African Kids

[rlg94086]

realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/com-12_14_05_JS.html

Should the law promote human life, or should it sacrifice human beings and their quality of life on the altar of Gaia?

DDT was banned in America after we started celebrating Earth Day. Environmentalists made a lot of claims then – I have an amusing clip of an environmentalist exclaiming, “You are breathing probably the last of the oxygen!” Soon after that the environmentalists mounted their campaign against DDT. The result? A huge resurgence of malaria, more than 50 million dead, mostly children.

“If it’s a chemical, it must be bad,” said scientist Amir Attaran. “If it’s DDT, it must be awful. And that’s fine if you’re a rich, white environmentalist. It’s not so fine if you’re a poor black kid who is about to lose his life from malaria.”

 

[Joe_Kelley]

It does seeem that many environmentalists believe the world would be better off without humans.

Did you read Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six?

 

[WanderAimlessly]

Joe Kelley:

It does seeem that many environmentalists believe the world would be better off without humans.

I believe there are a couple groups advocating that.

PF

 

[rlg94086]

Joe Kelley:

Did you read Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six?

Haven’t had a chance…is that the MO of the antagonist?

 

[Joe_Kelley]

rlg94086:

Haven’t had a chance…is that the MO of the antagonist?

A group try to wipe out most of the world’s population so that they can enjoy it in its natural state.

 

[koda]

This is pretty erroneus. The original intent was well meant because DDT has been shown to cause massive birth defects.

Below is an excerpt (3 paragraphs) from Scientific American:

*Just to be clear, we are endorsing the use of DDT in a limited, prudent way: indoors, and in measured quantities. We are not opposed to outdoor spraying for reasons that invariably get mocked as Bierkenstocks-and-granola, tree-hugging environmentalism. We are against it because outdoor spraying of DDT does not work well against malaria. As has been repeatedly documented, mosquitos rapidly evolve DDT resistance, so after a short decline, malaria rates rebound.

Moreover–and space did not allow us to get into this level of detail in the sidebar–DDT is not some magical solution even when restricted to indoor use. For example, in Sri Lanka, DDT resistance is strong enough in the mosquito population that it would do little good there. Even when used only indoors, as it has in India for decades, resistance can still become a problem. DDT should be considered as just one more insecticide that could be used in appropriate situations.

It also probably cannot be repeated often or loudly enough that environmentalists have not banned DDT for use against malaria. DDT has always been exempt from restrictions where its use is a matter of human public health. If DDT is not being used in some situations where it should, it is because some Western aid and funding agencies are being overzealous in their avoidance of the chemical.*

for more go to:

blog.sciam.com/index.php?title=ddt_and_malaria&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

 

[rlg94086]

koda:

This is pretty erroneus. The original intent was well meant because DDT has been shown to cause massive birth defects.

Below is an excerpt (3 paragraphs) from Scientific American:

Just to be clear, we are endorsing the use of DDT in a limited, prudent way: indoors, and in measured quantities. We are not opposed to outdoor spraying for reasons that invariably get mocked as Bierkenstocks-and-granola, tree-hugging environmentalism. We are against it because outdoor spraying of DDT does not work well against malaria. As has been repeatedly documented, mosquitos rapidly evolve DDT resistance, so after a short decline, malaria rates rebound.

Moreover–and space did not allow us to get into this level of detail in the sidebar–DDT is not some magical solution even when restricted to indoor use. For example, in Sri Lanka, DDT resistance is strong enough in the mosquito population that it would do little good there. Even when used only indoors, as it has in India for decades, resistance can still become a problem. DDT should be considered as just one more insecticide that could be used in appropriate situations.

It also probably cannot be repeated often or loudly enough that environmentalists have not banned DDT for use against malaria. DDT has always been exempt from restrictions where its use is a matter of human public health. If DDT is not being used in some situations where it should, it is because some Western aid and funding agencies are being overzealous in their avoidance of the chemical.

for more go to:

blog.sciam.com/index.php?title=ddt_and_malaria&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

Thanks koda…there’s always a contrary view, and in these cases where scientists are on both sides arguing about the same data, I throw up my hands and say - “Spray or don’t spray…it’s up to you.”