Bring Back DDT!
It's time to spray DDT, says NYT columnist Nick Kristoff. Many more lives are lost each year to malaria than were taken by the tsunami disaster, but politics prevents the use of the most effective weapon against the disease carrying mosquito, DDT. The only problem with Kristoff's article is that he still wants it banned in the US because of its alleged eggshell-thinning properties, a bogus claim that was based on flawed scientific experiments.
3 Comments:
Most of the science I've seen has gone the other way about DDT. Generally, the work confirms how dangerous it is to the ecosystem. I could be convinced it's not, but I would have to see some heavy-duty counterresponses first.
By the way, I was at an antique store in Huntsville today with my parents, and I picked you up a silver Mercury dime, made in 1942. I don't know the story there but I'm sure you do; it's yours if you want it.
Mack
DDT
My understanding on the science goes like this: malaria isn't a problem in the U.S.A. anyway, because we have good anti-malarial drugs, though other countries may or may not be able to afford them. I'm not sure. However, DDT mutates animals in the food chain (I've seen pictures), and we have to eat these animals. Moreover, mutating parts of the ecosystem eventually leads to wiping out vital links, and that's something to avoid. The benefits of DDT in the United States became no longer worth the cost to our food supply, given that we created better drugs and pesticides. Maybe DDT is the most efficicient alternative in other countries, but I would be skeptical even then. I've actually looked at some of the science behind DDT's effects, though it's been a while.
Mack
See the following links for info on DDT. Even if your concerns are valid, they probably only apply to the massive DDT use that the US employed when using it as an agricultural pesticide. Malaria control requires far less DDT, which is much less likely to have a negative effect on the environment. It is sprayed inside houses instead of blanketing fields of crops. Also, few if any of the "better" pesticides are actually better. Most are far more toxic to humans, while being less effective than DDT. I am still skeptical that DDT harms any animals, as I have read reports that the egg-shell thinning observed in experiments was due to the birds being fed a calcium deficient diet. And I think the comeback of species like the bald eagle has more to do with habitat protection and stiff penalties for illegal hunting than with DDT.
Also, the US has few malaria problems not because of drugs, but because of climate and good sanitation. There are few anti-malaria drugs that work well, and no complete cure.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,55843,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,128165,00.html
http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-513es.html
Post a Comment
<< Home