- Joined
- Aug 26, 2007
- Messages
- 50,241
- Reaction score
- 19,243
- Location
- San Antonio Texas
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
DDT ARTICLE HEREThis is a story of triumph and tragedy. The triumph occurred in the middle part of the 20th century, when the larger part of mankind finally succeeded in overcoming the ravages of malaria, the deadly infectious disease that had afflicted the human race since the dawn of time (and which, by one estimate, had killed approximately half the people who had ever lived on earth). But within three decades, the triumph would give way to tragedy when leftist ideologues, professing concern for the integrity of the natural environment, collaborated to ban the use of the pesticide best known by the acronym DDT—the very substance that had made it possible to vanquish malaria from vast portions of the globe. By means of that ban, environmentalists effectively ensured that, over the course of the ensuing 30+ years, more than 50 million people would die needlessly of a disease that was entirely preventable.
DDT use reached its zenith in 1962, when a total of 80 million kilograms of the pesticide were used around the world. The National Academy of Sciences summarized the efficacy of DDT as follows:“To only a few chemicals does man owe as great a debt as to DDT. It is estimated that, in little more than two decades DDT has prevented 500 million human deaths, due to malaria, that would otherwise have been inevitable.”Unfortunately, tropical Africa was, for the most part, unable to share in the great benefits of DDT because: (a) with only a few exceptions, the nations of that region did not possess infrastructures capable of disseminating the pesticide in an effective and comprehensive manner; and (b) Africa’sAnopheles mosquitoes and malaria parasites differed slightly from their counterparts on other continents and thus were more resistant to eradication campaigns. But the scientific community was working—and with promising signs of progress—to overcome those obstacles. For example, in a 1959-1960 pilot project in the Kigezi district of Uganda, DDT was sprayed twice per year and it virtually eliminated malaria from the region. Indeed, there was good reason to be confident that before long, DDT would successfully drive malaria from every part of the globe, including Africa.
I don't buy much into conspiracy theories, but the environmentalist have long implied we were exceeding earth's carrying capacity.DDT ARTICLE HERE
What an excellent read. DDT, it should be brought back, it was taken out by **** science, and millions, MILLIONS suffer and die needlessly. Rachel Carson should burn in hell for her deceit.
I don't buy much into conspiracy theories, but the environmentalist have long implied we were exceeding earth's carrying capacity.
Perhaps banning DDT was just an idea to slow down the population bomb?
I don't buy much into conspiracy theories, but the environmentalist have long implied we were exceeding earth's carrying capacity.
Perhaps banning DDT was just an idea to slow down the population bomb?
DDT ARTICLE HERE
What an excellent read. DDT, it should be brought back, it was taken out by **** science, and millions, MILLIONS suffer and die needlessly. Rachel Carson should burn in hell for her deceit.
> There was no international ban on DDT until at least the late 1990s
> International measures (and most if not all national measures) to regulate DDT have explicitly included exceptions for the purpose of malaria control
> Widespread agricultural use of DDT could and sometimes have impeded efforts to control malaria, by unnecessarily increasing mosquito populations' resistance to the pesticide
> To this very day the WHO and the US EPA both continue to recommend DDT as one of the options for combating malaria, "citing that benefits of the pesticide outweigh the health and environmental risks"
https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/ddt-brief-history-and-status
No-one can be blamed for being fooled by hyper-partisan propaganda sources. Starting a thread declaring that someone should "burn in hell" before even bothering to cross-check against more obvious, reliable and easily-accessible sources is a little unkind, however.
> There was no international ban on DDT until at least the late 1990s
> International measures (and most if not all national measures) to regulate DDT have explicitly included exceptions for the purpose of malaria control
> Widespread agricultural use of DDT could and sometimes have impeded efforts to control malaria, by unnecessarily increasing mosquito populations' resistance to the pesticide
> To this very day the WHO and the US EPA both continue to recommend DDT as one of the options for combating malaria, "citing that benefits of the pesticide outweigh the health and environmental risks"
https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/ddt-brief-history-and-status
No-one can be blamed for being fooled by hyper-partisan propaganda sources. Starting a thread declaring that someone should "burn in hell" before even bothering to cross-check against more obvious, reliable and easily-accessible sources is a little unkind, however.
Nope, she's a terrible person, and DDT banning was and is a crime against humanity.> There was no international ban on DDT until at least the late 1990s
> International measures (and most if not all national measures) to regulate DDT have explicitly included exceptions for the purpose of malaria control
> Widespread agricultural use of DDT could and sometimes have impeded efforts to control malaria, by unnecessarily increasing mosquito populations' resistance to the pesticide
> To this very day the WHO and the US EPA both continue to recommend DDT as one of the options for combating malaria, "citing that benefits of the pesticide outweigh the health and environmental risks"
https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/ddt-brief-history-and-status
No-one can be blamed for being fooled by hyper-partisan propaganda sources. Starting a thread declaring that someone should "burn in hell" before even bothering to cross-check against more obvious, reliable and easily-accessible sources is a little unkind, however.
Aaaaaaaaaaaaand that's a rap.
Only for the scientifically illiterate. Oh look... I guess you're done here. :2wave:
Yep.
It's all part of the "Group Think" conspiracy :ninja:
Nope, she's a terrible person, and DDT banning was and is a crime against humanity.
One which never happened, of course :roll:
You seem to be advocating for the unregulated free-for-all usage of a known persistent toxic and carcinogenic substance, which in addition to its other effects could even impede its use for malaria control. That's pretty terrible in itself. I've never read nor cared to read Silent Spring, but even if it did (unsuccessfully) advocate for a complete ban on all DDT use, it would be no worse than your apparent viewpoint.
The intelligent approach would be to restrict its use to specific malaria-prevention measures, which is exactly what the international approach has been.
As well as the 50 million who died from malaria as a result of the simplistic bad science of the green movement we are killing 10 million plus each year today by using food as fuel.
That's 10 million per year for at least the last 20 years.
I hope that at some point there is a crimes against humanity trial of these bastards.
Using good agricultural land to feed cars instead of people is certainly an appalling example of political expediency in response to known climate science.
But if memory serves you have never answered whether you feel the same way about feeding cows/pigs etc. instead of people - an inefficiency which wastes many times as much agricultural land as feeding cars has.
Maybe this time around you'll muster up the courage to answer?
Maybe you will then be able to tell us how you would propose to counterbalance these so-far inevitable consequences of rich people's and countries' purchasing power?
Please point out the actual Scientific evidence against DDT!"I'm not a conspiracy theorist but have you tried this tinfoil hat?"
I don't have a problem with people eating meat. I have teeth designed for cutting meet and enzimes in my gut to digest the stuff.
I do have a problem with totally artificial manipulation of food prices to extract massive amounts of money from the poorest people in the world and give it to rich farmers in the West.
You say that many times as much land is used to feed animals as cars. Maybe, but I think you have not considered just how much of our cerial crop is used in this way. Lots of animals are raised on land that is unsuitable for cerials.
I think it was hysteria empowered bs. DDT saves lives.
As well as the 50 million who died from malaria as a result of the simplistic bad science of the green movement we are killing 10 million plus each year today by using food as fuel.
That's 10 million per year for at least the last 20 years.
I hope that at some point there is a crimes against humanity trial of these bastards.
For those unfamiliar, Tim the Plumber here is declaring that every single person who has ever starved to death over the last 20 years did so because of biofuels.
Please point out the actual Scientific evidence against DDT!
Nope, she's a terrible person, and DDT banning was and is a crime against humanity.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?