The Millard Fillmore soap-on-a-rope* started spinning in the shower this morning. I knew some mischief was afoot.
Sure enough, as soon as we turned the gas on to the computer and the screen warmed up, what should pop up but a group claiming to be opposed to junk science and arrogant ignorance, but arrogantly spreading the ignorance of junk science: Climate Change Fraud, “The Crichtonian Green.”
I caught the site with a news reader that looks for idiocy about DDT. This is the line the automoton caught:
“DDT is not a carcinogen…the DDT ban has caused the deaths of tens of millions of poor people…”
We’ve washed out the dirt from Crichton’s claims before in the Bathtub, in “Michael Crichton hysterical for DDT.” Go read his errors there (there’s a YouTube video of his assaulting innocent school children with his hysteric errors, too, in case you think I’m joking).
Among the anti-science crowds, this stuff is holy writ. Dogma insists that scientists are craven political creatures driven to silly programs that waste money and hurt poor people. Never mind the facts. They believe it religiously — and they treat efforts to educate them as assaults on their faith.
DDT is a well-established carcinogen in animals, including mammals, and every cancer-fighting agency on Earth lists DDT as a probable human carcinogen. The various “bans” on DDT all allow DDT to be used to protect poor people against disease, but DDT’s overuse by its advocates led to rapid evolution of resistance and immunity in insects targeted by DDT — DDT use was stopped when it stopped being effective. Inaction on the part of DDT advocates, and their unwillingness to use other methods to fight malaria, have been culprits in the too-slow program to reduce malaria among poor people. Spraying DDT advocates with DDT will do absolutely nothing to get them off their butts to act.
(Go to the search feature on this blog, search for “DDT.” The truth is out there.)
Oy. This is how the week starts?
__________
Millard Fillmore's Bathtub 
I’ve been gadding about and haven’t checked in for quite a while.
It strikes me that there are situations analogous to unwise use of DDT in a many areas.
One new one is the proliferation of germicidal wipes. You can’t sanitize in a contaminated environment. Trying leads to MSRA’s through ‘The Law of Unintended Consequences” : you end up culturing germicide resistant organisms.
Spreading toxins around must be good fun though.
People ignore the cautions about using them in well-ventilated areas when using ‘household chemicals’ : which are usually merely diluted solutions.
Then there are these fan-driven scented plugins filled with substances ‘ not proven harmful ‘.
Search for the cure to cancer ! How about not asking for it !
LikeLike
Chuck, the wool was ripped from your eyes early.
LikeLike
You have to love the fact that the anti-science wingnuts don’t think twice about partaking in all the technological wonders we have today. I guess in their small, closed minds they can justify it by dismissing the link between science and technology. “Big Science is wrong about this and that and this and that… but I love my new iPhone and it sure is nice that Mom’s cancer is in remission…”
LikeLike
Heydave, if you know someone who manufactures soap-on-a-rope and would be willing to make a few thousand Millard Fillmores for me, let me know.
LikeLike
WHO’s policy has been, since 1965, that DDT is best applied in an integrated pest management program, where DDT is used in “indoor residual spraying” (IRS). That is what their policy announcement was in late 2005 — but it changed no policy. WHO has never favored a ban on DDT. DDT has never been banned because of carcinogenicity, but instead was banned from agricultural use because such use killed far more non-target and beneficial species than the pests it killed.
More, the agricultural use of DDT spurred the development of resistance and immunity to DDT in mosquitoes. WHO abandoned its program to rapidly extirpate malaria by suppressing mosquitoes for six or more months with DDT in the middle 1960s, because mosquitoes had become resistant already in the few African nations where DDT was used, but also because most of Africa did not have the political structures necessary to carry out any anti-malaria program.
DDT use in Africa was never banned, has never been banned, and has a special exemption from the Persistent Organic Pesticides Treaty (POPs) enacted in 2001.
How many people died from DDT? None from acute DDT poisoning. However, studies in Africa indicate that the latent cancers from DDT could kill twice as many as the deaths DDT could prevent. As I noted in the post, every cancer fighting organization lists DDT as a probable human carcinogen — do you think all of them are liars? For what motivation?
My mind is indeed bigoted, against nonsense, and against ill-informed campaigns against science. At the height of DDT use, malaria deaths may have dropped below a million a year, about the same number of deaths we have annually today. On what basis do you claim anyone’s life was lost due to a lack of DDT?
Global warming is a fact. Human causation can be contested, but the evidence keeps mounting that humans play a significant role in warming.
Here, check out the facts:
Deserved praise for Rachel Carson (see especially the links)
News from Uganda
Mosquitoes eat DDT, and here’s how
John Stossel: Wrong again, on DDT
There are many other posts on this blog, and at Deltoid, and Bug Girl. Feel free to check ’em all out.
LikeLike
I understand that the WHO has approved the use of DDT in third-world countries, because there has been no study linking cancer to DDT definitively. 40 Million people have died of malaria since DDT was banned. Most were in Africa. So I guess that doesn’t count in your bigoted mind. How many people have died from DDT exposure when it was in use: Zero. The facts will set you free. And global warming is a hoax. It IS the soap on the rope.
LikeLike
Oy, this is what I get for coming late to the party: everyone else is already in on the joke, and I’m wearing the clown shoes.
It’s nice to be here anyway.
LikeLike
I think Cafe Press would love to hear your ideas about Millard Fillmore Soap on a Rope!
And I would buy!
LikeLike