WHO’s former malaria expert, John Litsios, notes that controlling malaria requires integrated programs, especially including overhaul of local health care delivery systems.
Copyrighted article from Resources for the future. “Chapter 17: Malaria Control and the Future of International Public Health,” in The Contextual Determinants of Malaria (Washington DC: Resources for the Future), Elizabeth Casman and Hadi Dowlatabadi, editors
Leave a Comment » | 
DDT, Malaria, Public education, Public health | Tagged: John Litsios, malaria control, Public health, WHO | 
Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
DDT-obsessed politicos look for any opportunity to slam scientists and policy makers who urge caution about using the chemical. Sen. Tom Coburn’s (R-Okla) unholy campaign against the memory of Rachel Carson, author of Silent Spring, is only Exhibit A in how the obsession skews public policy now.
In earlier posts I’ve warned that there will be calls for more DDT use, with reports of West Nile virus spreading this season. Winter is coming slowly to the American Midwest, so mosquitoes still crop up carrying the virus. Voodoo science and junk science advocates look for such opportunities to claim that we need to “bring back” DDT, ‘since the claims of harm have been found to be false.’
No public health official, no mosquito abatement official, has asked for DDT to fight West Nile virus, even as the virus infects humans across the nation. Nor has any harm of DDT been refuted (quite the opposite — we now know of more dangers).
One reason, of course, is that DDT is not the pesticide of choice to use against West Nile vector mosquitoes. Mosquito abatement efforts aim at the larvae, where DDT use would be stupid.
A survey of the nation, in places where West Nile is a problem provides a good view of how West Nile virus is fought by public health and mosquito abatement officials. DDT is used in no case.
While you’re at it, take a look at what LeisureGuy has to say about DDT and scaria. Then wander over to Townhall.com, and see what scaria really looks like, in a shameless column from Paul Driessen, the author of the anti-environmentalist screed Eco-Imperialism: Green Power, Black Death. According to Driessen, it appears that environmentalists have been biting Africans to spread malaria, not mosquitoes. He may exaggerate some.
West Nile virus is a great problem for people in the United States. No health official, mosquito abatement official, or anyone else in a position of responsibility, has called for DDT.
7 Comments | DDT, History, Junk science, Malaria, Public health, Rachel Carson, Voodoo science | Tagged: DDT, Voodoo science, West Nile virus | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Information on DDT is scattered clouds of information, lately. Some of these really should get more comment — but time is quite short for me right now.
Here’s the news:
One more study on DDT and breast cancer. Stop the presses on this one. It’s a good study, and it shows a link. Effect Measure at the Seed Stables has a good post on it. One of the key differences here is that this study looked for childhood exposure. Exposure of children to DDT seems to be more damaging than exposure to adults. This should be especially worrying considering DDT’s daughter products and their ability to mimic estrogen in the wild.
Bill Moyers’ program on PBS looked at the recent campaign against Rachel Carson, and found the campaign ethically challenged. Moyers takes a more in-depth and gentle view of Carson, from a perspective from the arts. Solid information, interesting view.
All Africa.com had a news report on the current anti-malaria campaign in Malawi: “Rescuing children from malaria.” Real news — it doesn’t call for broadcast spraying of DDT. (Surprised?) In fact, it attacks the colleagues of the Rachel Carson critics, the tobacco companies.
A recent think piece out of the always-informative Christian Science Monitor: “Bring back DDT? Think again.”
Perhaps a minor blip: Plaintiffs ask damages against chemical companies and others because the DDT dumped next door has decreased the value of their properties. An Alabama appeals court ruled that plaintiffs may call in experts to testify that DDT dumping decreases property value. (Maybe Roger Bate would like to buy the property at market value? All that DDT would mean no mosquitoes forever, right?)
And from the lost-but-now-found archives, a story that demonstrates subtly the bias that Rachel Carson critics have — Roger Bate defending tobacco companies in a 1996 Wall Street Journal opinion piece. Perhaps one should not be surprised that people who defend tobacco against health regulators and health care education could turn around and argue for DDT and against Rachel Carson.
4 Comments | DDT, Environmental protection, History, Malaria, Politics, Public health, Rachel Carson, Science, War on Science | Tagged: DDT, Environmental protection, Junk science, Malaria | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
The Alien Next Door describes some of the problems of endocrine disruptors released in the wild — like DDT.
Rachel Carson was right. Was she Catholic? Can she be canonized?
Leave a Comment » | DDT, Environmental protection, Rachel Carson | Tagged: DDT, endocrine disruptors, pollution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Little Miss Attila explains the politics of DDT, how the hysteria is driven by a lobbying group.
Good history, if you’re new to the issue.
Leave a Comment » | DDT, Politics, War on Science | Tagged: DDT, environment, Politics | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Despite DDT’s being affiliated with reduced cognitive ability in infants after intrauterine exposure, and despite indications that DDT may retard fetal development, a team of Spanish researchers urges mothers to breastfeed anyway. Their study shows that breastfed kids develop better despite after birth even when exposed to DDT in utero, despite any dangers of exposure to DDT and other chemicals in breast milk.
No, the study does not say DDT is harmless.
Beneficial Effects of Breastfeeding on Cognition Regardless of DDT Concentrations at Birth
Núria Ribas-Fitó1, Jordi Júlvez1, Maties Torrent2, Joan O. Grimalt3 and Jordi Sunyer1,4 1 Centre de Recerca en Epidemiologia Ambiental, Institut Municipal Investigació Mèdica, Barcelona, Spain
2 Àrea de Salut de Menorca, Servei de Salut de les Illes Balears, Menorca, Spain
3 Departament de Química Ambiental, Institut d’Investigacions Químiques i Ambientals de Barcelona–Centre Superior d’Investigacions Científiques, Barcelona, Spain
4 Departament de Ciències Experimentals i de la Salut, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, SpainCorrespondence to Dr. Núria Ribas-Fitó, Centre de Recerca en Epidemiologia Ambiental, Institut Municipal Investigació Mèdica, C. Doctor Aiguader 88, 08003 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain (e-mail: nribas@imim.es)
Received for publication March 19, 2007. Accepted for publication June 13, 2007.
The authors previously reported that intrauterine exposure to background concentrations of p,p’-dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) reduces cognitive performance among preschoolers. Breastfeeding has been associated with both increased exposure to certain pollutants during infancy and better performance on cognitive tests. Thus, the authors examined the role of breastfeeding in cognitive function among preschoolers, taking prenatal DDT exposure into account. Two birth cohorts in Spain (Ribera d’Ebre and Menorca) were recruited between 1997 and 1999 (n = 391). Infants were assessed at age 4 years using the McCarthy Scales of Children’s Abilities. Levels of organochlorine compounds were measured in umbilical cord serum. Information on type and duration of breastfeeding was obtained by questionnaire when the children were 1 year of age. Children who were breastfed for more than 20 weeks had better cognitive performance regardless of their in utero exposure to DDT. A linear dose response between breastfeeding and cognition was observed in all DDT groups (for children highly exposed to DDT, adjusted ß = 0.30 (standard error, 0.12) per week breastfed). Despite the possibility of harm from environmental contaminants in breast milk, breastfeeding for long periods should still be recommended as the best infant feeding method.
breast feeding; child; child development; child, preschool; cognition; DDT; infant; intelligence
Abbreviations: DDE, p,p’-dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene; DDT, p,p’-dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane; IQ, intelligence quotient
Some of the members of this research team have also tied DDT’s daughter product, DDE, to increased asthma in children, in research published in Environmental Health Perspectives in December 2005.
Leave a Comment » | DDT, Health care, Public health, Research, Science and faith | Tagged: breast feeding, cognitive performance, DDT, environmental contamination | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Kern County, California, is ground zero for West Nile virus trouble in 2007. It’s a still-partly rural area, with many farms, around Bakersfield. California so far this year has more than 200 cases of human infection from West Nile reported, and 115 of those cases are in Kern County. Eight people died from the infections, all of them elderly.
So, were DDT the answer to West Nile virus problems, Kern County would be the first place from which we would expect to hear a plea for DDT.
Not so.
Kern County officials hope they’ve turned a corner. There were only eight new cases reported last week, and officials think that their spraying program may have contributed a lot.
Yes, you read that correctly: The spraying program in Kern County is credited with reducing West Nile virus infections in humans.
Occasional readers of this outlet might well ask: What are they spraying with, if not DDT?
Despite the Snake-oil Salesmen™ claim that the U.S. needs to poison itself with DDT in order to fight West Nile, officials in public health use other substances to fight mosquitoes directly, when there is an outbreak of West Nile virus-related disease in humans, or sometimes just in birds.
[Notice: Original reporting ahead]
The Kern County Department of Public Health Services actively fights West Nile, with public education, help to medical care professionals, and information to decision makers on what steps need to be taken. People at the agency were anxious to talk about their work against West Nile.
What do they use to spray for mosquitoes? Not DDT.
I checked with two other mosquito abatement groups, including Dallas County’s. They were anxious to talk about their work, though not for attribution without approval of their PR managers, who have so far not returned calls (public relations is impossible when you don’t relate to the public, guys).
Those who do the spraying emphasize that spraying is rather a last resort, and done only after significant research shows it is necessary. Spraying kills more than the mosquitoes, including a lot of creatures that would normally eat the mosquitoes and keep them in check. So spraying is done only when the mosquitoes seem to have an unnatural tipping of the balance in their favor.
Public health departments set traps for mosquitoes. These traps are checked regularly, and the mosquitoes are sorted by species. This is vitally important, because West Nile virus is carried only by certain species of mosquito, and different species require different abatement plans, and different insecticides.
Once sorted by species, the mosquitoes are sampled to see which are carrying pathogens, if any. In addition, most public health agencies also monitor birds, by reports of bird carcasses (almost always a sign of disease or poisoning), and by captive populations of chickens, whose blood is sampled to see whether viruses are present.
After the species are identified, the viruses are identified, and it is determined that there is virus activity, a decision is made on whether to spray.
For West Nile, the chief vector is a species of Culex. Culex mosquitoes are generally controlled by larvacides, not spraying for adults. If spraying for adults is determined necessary, most health departments are using synthetic pyrethroids, synthetic versions of insecticides plants manufacture. While they are not as environmentally friendly as natural pyrethrins, they are much less dangerous than DDT.
The sprayers I spoke with also made this point: The old model of DDT spraying of entire neighborhoods is outdated. “It is not a good use of the product,” as one gently put it.
For West Nile virus control, here’s what you need to tell Henry I. Miller, up in the ivory towers at the Hoover Institute promoting voodoo science:
1. No one thinks West Nile virus is out of control (but it’s a problem).
2. Health official thinks current, non-DDT methods of mosquito control are adequate to control for West Nile virus.
3. Even when spraying is required, DDT is the wrong stuff to use — Culex is generally controlled with a larvacide, and DDT spraying would be much less effective, and much more destructive.
I asked the abatement people if they were concerned about killing birds with spraying, or killing other things that eat mosquitoes. Basically, they said it’s not their job, but the chemicals they use are much gentler on birds and other mosquito predators than DDT is. One fellow said about collateral bird deaths: “I have bigger finch to fry.”
5 Comments | DDT, Environmental protection, Junk science, Rachel Carson, Science, Voodoo science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
A columnist for The Christian Science Monitor argues that DDT damages plants, too — more reasons not to release it into the wild.
DDT stunts food crops? Plants? Is that accurate?
For the past several years, Jennifer E. Fox at the University of Oregon in Eugene has used test tube experiments to study the subtle way pesticides impede this nitrogen-fixing process. Last June she joined several colleagues to report research with real plants. Their paper, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, shows that the pesticides block the bacteria recruitment “signal” that legumes emit. “In essence,” Dr. Fox says, “the agrichemicals are cutting the lines of communication between the host plants and symbiotic bacteria.”
This has serious implications for farmers. Heavy use of commercial nitrogen fertilizers is showing diminishing returns in terms of crop yields, while fertilizer runoff contaminates streams, lakes, and even coastal ocean areas. If legumes can’t do their natural fertilizing job, even more artificial fertilizer will be required.
1 Comment | Accuracy, DDT, Environmental protection, Natural history, Natural resources, Rachel Carson, Science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Since my post noting DDT being sold as snake oil, good for any and all ailments, readers have called to my attention to already-existing calls to use DDT to fight West Nile virus, a use that no public health official has asked for, and a use that would be particularly ironic since broadcast spraying of DDT also kills the chief victims of West Nile: Song birds.
So, here’s our list for August 2007:
Milloy’s winning contribution is particularly brilliant. He notes that there are other pesticides that are effective, but, because they do not continue killing for years uncontrollably, he calls for DDT. It’s a column Dave Barry could not dream up for parody:
West Nile virus has killed seven people in Louisiana this year, two in Mississippi and at least 145 people in six states have been infected. A 12-year-old Wisconsin boy died last week of mosquito-borne encephalitis.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says West Nile virus is in the U.S. to stay. The virus may now be found in 37 states, including every state from Texas to the Atlantic.
CDC Director Julie Gerberding called West Nile virus an “emerging, infectious disease epidemic” that could be spread all the way to the Pacific Coast by birds and mosquitoes.
Louisiana has been monitoring the virus since 2000 and has one of the most active mosquito-control programs in the country — and yet it is the state with the highest death toll.
It’s time to bring back the insecticide DDT.
Currently used pesticides, such as malathion, resmethrin and sumithrin, can be effective in killing mosquitoes but are significantly limited since they don’t persist in the environment after spraying.
This award has to be retroactive — Milloy wrote this in August 2002. Since then, it is still true that no public health official has asked for DDT, and it is also true that the West Nile outbreaks continue to plague birds more than humans. (I regret I did not find this article earlier, to use as an example of the craziness of the advocates.) Tiger mosquitoes don’t change their stripes, Milloy’s piece should remind us.
Miller’s winning entry is notable for the way it completely ignores contrary data, and rather overlooks 35 years of tough work to ameliorate damage from DDT.
In the absence of a vaccine, eliminating the carrier — the mosquito — should be the key to preventing an epidemic. But in 1972, on the basis of data on toxicity to fish and migrating birds (but not to humans), the Environmental Protection Agency banned virtually all uses of DDT, an inexpensive and effective pesticide once widely deployed in the U.S. to kill disease-carrying insects. The effectiveness and relative safety of DDT was underplayed, as was the distinction between the large-scale use of the chemical in agriculture and more limited application for controlling carriers of human disease. There is a world of difference between applying large amounts of it in the environment — as American farmers did before it was banned — and using it carefully and sparingly to fight mosquitoes and other disease-carrying insects. A basic principle of toxicology is that the dose makes the poison.
Miller fails to note that there is not a world of difference between applying large amounts of DDT on crops and applying large amounts of DDT on swamps, which is what he appears to be advocating.
To control mosquitoes that carry West Nile virus, the pesticide would need to be used extensively — and it should be. DDT should be made available, immediately, for both indoor and outdoor mosquito control in the U.S.; and the government should oppose international strictures on the pesticide.
Miller doesn’t mention that the deadliest, most uncontrollable actions of DDT were in waterways, especially when applied to kill mosquitoes in the past. The poison bio-accumulates as it rises through the food-chain, so that the dose a raptor like a bald eagle, osprey, or brown pelican gets from spraying for mosquitoes is a dose 10 million times more potent than was originally received by the mosquito.
Miller’s piece is highly ironic in its timing, coming about six weeks after the bald eagle was removed from the endangered species list. America has worked for 35 years to get rid of the effects of DDT, whose spraying ended prior to 1972, and we are just now seeing good results that merit celebration — Miller urges that we poison the birds all over again.
I predict West Nile virus will be the chief selling point for the DDT snake oil salesmen during the month of September. With the West Nile season winding down, however, one wonders what disease will crop up next for which the DDT snake oil will be touted as a cure: Rocky Mountain spotted fever? Lyme disease? Diabetes? Heart disease?
Stay tuned.
5 Comments | DDT, Environmental protection, Junk science, Rachel Carson, Voodoo science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Editor’s note: Dr. Vincent Resh of the University of California at Berkeley addressed the distinguished, long-lived Commonwealth Club of San Francisco on August 22, 2007. Below is a column by Resh which appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle a few days before the speech, covering much of the same material.
Resh tells the story of a public health victory in Africa against a disease called river blindness. People victimized are made blind by a parasitic worm which lives in the victim’s eyes. I relate it here because Resh tells how the victory is achieved without resorting to the use of destructive DDT, which had been proposed. Note carefully what Resh says about DDT. This is one more chunk of evidence against the broadcast use of DDT, a story in support of the ban on DDT imposed in the U.S. since 1972. Rachel Carson was right.
_____________________
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Insect-transmitted diseases typically come to our attention through local news reports of the threat of West Nile virus or of dengue fever in our neighborhoods. The works of the Gates Foundation have made us more aware of malaria, the mosquito-transmitted disease that kills well more than a million people each year. But there are scores of insect-transmitted diseases that affect humans, and the insects responsible for many of them live in water.
Click on thumbnail image for a chart showing the life cycle of river blindness — from the Carter Center, by Alberto Cuadra
DDT and its descendents were initially effective in controlling the water-dwelling vectors of human diseases. However, the effects of these insecticides on environmental health also had significant, indirect effects on human health. The fish in rivers, which are the main protein source for humans in most developing countries, were drastically reduced by these poisons.
Leave a Comment » | DDT, Geography - Physical, Government, Public health, Rachel Carson | Tagged: Blackfly, DDT, geography, Government, ivermectin, Onchocerciasis, Rachel Carson, River Blindness, Vincent H. Resh | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Oooh, I missed this one; Instapundit said:
August 20, 2007
SOME KIND WORDS FOR DDT — in the New York Times, no less. “Today, indoor DDT spraying to control malaria in Africa is supported by the World Health Organization; the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria; and the United States Agency for International Development. . . . Even those mosquitoes already resistant to poisoning by DDT are repelled by it.”
The debate over DDT is over. There’s scientific consensus. Anyone who disagrees is a DDT denialist and a mouthpiece for Big Mosquito.
The debate should be over. There is scientific consensus that DDT is dangerous and the ban on broadcast use was wise, fair, and still necessary. Reynolds is one of the denialist brigade who keeps trying to paint environmentalists wrong for working for the ban.
Reynolds claim is deceptive in at least three ways:
Other than that, Reynolds is right: The debate is over. Reynolds’ “spray DDT on everything — it works better than snake-oil” argument lost. It’s time Reynolds stops denying the facts.
1 Comment | Accuracy, DDT, Environmental protection, Health care, Junk science, Malaria, Public health, Rachel Carson, Science, War on Science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
My first year in college, we spent Saturday nights watching “Emergency!” I don’t recall now whether it was on NBC or ABC, but after we saw it once, we were all hooked, Al, Ben and me.
No, it wasn’t great drama. An hour-long drama about paramedics in Los Angeles probably has a lot of potential — this wasn’t that drama. Jack Webb, of “Dragnet” fame, directed. It had a cast amazing for its “how-did-HE- get-there” quality: Bobby Troup, the jazz pianist and composer of “Route 66″ (” . . . get your kicks on . . .”) played a doctor; his wife, jazz vocalist Julie London, played a nurse. Loved Julie London. Beautiful, but she had all the acting chops of David Janssen (“the man of a thousand faces” of “The Fugitive” fame). Martin Milner was there, too — he actually starred earlier in NBC’s “Route 66” which featured Corvettes, but not Bobby Troupe’s hit song (go figure) — and so was Kevin Tighe and Randolph Mantooth. And Robert Fuller, and Kent McCord. Whew!
For undergraduate college students, the show was a riot. We noticed early on that the script writers were defibrillator happy. Every time the paramedic truck showed up, the first thing off was the defibrillator. Heart attacks seemed to be a big problem in LA at the time — maybe Jack Webb’s own mortality subconsciously sneaking into the scripts — so the defib unit got a lot of use.
But it also came out at all the wrong times. Drowning victim? Defibrillator first, THEN artificial respiration. Poison victim? Defib. Auto accident? Defibrillate the victim, THEN worry about the spurting, arterial bleeding (if it’s spurting, is the defib necessary?). Classic kitten in the tree? Defib the tree, THAT will get that kitten down. Read the rest of this entry »
10 Comments | Accuracy, DDT, Environmental protection, History, Public health, Rachel Carson, Reason, Science | Tagged: Bobby Troup, classic television, DDT, difibrillator, Emergency!, History, Julie London, Rachel Carson | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Some are Boojums is back — that’s good news for truth seekers, science error debunkers and historians who care about accuracy.
Masthead photo for Jim Easter’s blog, Some Are Boojums
Some are Boojums author Jim Easter guts the anti-Rachel Carson case in his relaunch post.
Pay particular attention to what Jim writes in conclusion:
That’s right. The 1972 DDT ban did nothing to restrict the chemical’s use against malaria, but had the effect of eliminating the single most intense source of selection pressure for insecticide resistance in mosquitoes. As the rest of the world followed suit in restricting agricultural use of DDT, the spread of resistance was slowed dramatically or stopped. By this single action, William Ruckelshaus — and, credit where it’s due, Rachel Carson — may well have saved millions of lives.
Steven Milloy is invited to add that to the DDT FAQ any time it’s convenient.
Particularly notable is Jim’s work to make available the much miscited administrative law ruling by Judge Edmund M. Sweeney. It is now available on-line, so the critics can now provide accurate citations to the decision, if their intent were to inform the public, instead of maligning the truth and misleading the public.
Mr. Easter’s applied history work in this effort is notable. The internet misses much of near-recent history, especially from the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. Much of today’s political discussion could benefit from information that would be available in libraries, had libraries not suffered from great budget and priorities cuts in the last 20 years. Jim Easter’s contribution to making a more complete record of the history of DDT and the history of the EPA deserves applause.
4 Comments | Accuracy, Biology, Bogus history, Conservation, DDT, Environmental protection, Historic documents, Rachel Carson, Science, Voodoo history, Voodoo science, War on Science | Tagged: Bogus history, DBQ, DDT, EPA, Historic documents, Jim Easter, Judge Edmund Sweeney, Rachel Carson, Some Are Boojums | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
DDT follows the same path as PCBs in the environment, both persistent organic pollutants. This illustration from World Ocean Review: Bioaccumulation of toxins in the marine food chain has long been recognized as a problem. The process illustrated here relates to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), a typical environmental toxin.
Instapundit is happy to promote the use of poison:
SOME KIND WORDS FOR DDT — in the New York Times, no less. “Today, indoor DDT spraying to control malaria in Africa is supported by the World Health Organization; the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria; and the United States Agency for International Development. . . . Even those mosquitoes already resistant to poisoning by DDT are repelled by it.”
The debate over DDT is over. There’s scientific consensus. Anyone who disagrees is a DDT denialist and a mouthpiece for Big Mosquito.
No, Glenn, the debate is not over so long as people continue to deny the harmful effects of DDT and act as mouthpieces for Big Poison, Big Garbage, Big Cancer, Big Pollution, voodoo science and Big Stupid.
There is a scientific consensus, but Reynolds misstates it. Scientists agree that DDT kills birds, bats, reptiles and beneficial insects that prey on malaria-bearing mosquitoes, making control of malaria more difficult (among many other harms). Consequently, DDT use under the rules laid down by the U.S. EPA in 1972 make a lot of sense. Those rules are the same as agreed to in the Persistent Organic Pollutants Treaty (POPs) — no DDT use in broadcast spraying, especially on crops; DDT use is allowed when necessary to fight disease; alternatives to DDT must be researched and created. The POPs Treaty lists DDT as one of the “Dirty Dozen” persistent pollutants.
POPs are a set of chemicals that are toxic, persist in the environment for long periods of time, and biomagnify as they move up through the food chain. POPs have been linked to adverse effects on human health and animals, such as cancer, damage to the nervous system, reproductive disorders, and disruption of the immune system. Because they circulate globally via the atmosphere, oceans, and other pathways, POPs released in one part of the world can travel to regions far from their source of origin.
Reynolds appears not to have read the treaty, nor even the article he cites, by Donald Roberts, from the odd, industry-funded Africa Fighting Malaria; even the most optimistic DDT fanatics generally nod in the direction of the dangers. Roberts wrote:
It would be a mistake to think we could rely on DDT alone to fight mosquitoes in Africa. Fortunately, research aimed at developing new and better insecticides continues — thanks especially to the work of the international Innovative Vector Control Consortium. Until a suitable alternative is found, however, DDT remains the cheapest and most effective long-term malaria fighter we have.
Africa Fighting Malaria is apoplectically happy to have one study that shows some repellent effects of DDT. As Bug Girl and Deltoid note, AFM urged unreasonable responses from many of us (I got their request, too). The study is encouraging, but it fails to make DDT the panacea Roberts paints it, and the study completely ignores the dangers of DDT, which have not changed a whit.
The best solutions to fighting malaria do not require DDT. Other new studies show that simple mosquito netting is amazingly effective — in Kenya, a switch in policy to give the nets out for free reduced malaria incidence by 44%. Under policies urged by U.S. conservatives, Kenyans had been required to pay for the nets previously. Reducing the cost of the nets left them beyond the means of many poor Kenyans.
Where is Glenn Reynolds’ promotion of non-poisonous and non-polluting, effective means to fight malaria. Why does he only go for the damaging solutions?
Perhaps Glenn Reynolds and Donald Roberts could make a showing of good faith in this case. Since this one study did tend to break their way, perhaps they could show their gratitude by calling on Sen. Tom Coburn to stop acting like a brat throwing a tantrum and remove his holds on the bill that would name a post office in Pennsylvania for Rachel Carson, honoring her work against pollution. (Coburn cites junk science and voodoo science as his justification — and he’s an M.D.!)
Or, would making a statement against pollution be contrary to their politics?
To the chronically science challenged, DDT is an answer to more ills than you can imagine. We face new infestations of bed bugs — how long before AFM’s editorial ghosts have people urging DDT spraying wholesale to fight bed bugs? West Nile virus continues to plague the U.S., and already articles have appeared calling for broadcast spraying of towns and marshes to fight it, though that would probably be exactly the wrong thing to do.
The fight against ignorance goes on, but some wear ignorance like a badge of honor.
3 Comments | Accuracy, DDT, Environmental protection, Malaria, Politics, Public health, Rachel Carson, Science, Voodoo science | Tagged: Accuracy, DDT, Instapundit, Malaria, Rachel Carson, Science, Voodoo science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
If we step away from the faux hysteria generated by JunkScience.com and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, we can get a glimpse of how people seriously concerned about preventing and treating malaria go about doing exactly that.
Here’s a post from a guy named Angus, describing practical steps people traveling to malaria zones should take, and also discussing the one-two punch needed to really squelch malaria: Good medicines for treating people who have malaria, and mosquito control projects (in this case, without DDT).
Note well this paragraph of Angus’s story:
Back in 1982 a WHO-sponsored initiative attempted to eradicate the malaria vector, Anopheles mosquitoes, using the notorious insecticide DDT. Although the incidence of malaria decreased, it also resulted in the death of much poultry and livestock. The campaign was “imposed”, was not integrated, was resented, was not sustained and malaria made a comeback with a vengeance.
Note that DDT obviously was NOT out of use, and therefore we might understand as not banned in Africa, in 1982, contrary to claims from junk science and bogus history purveyors. Note also that the side-effects of the DDT-based program were disastrous enough to make Africans (in Sao Tome e Principe?) wary of future DDT-based programs.
More:
From the U.S. National Institutes of Health: Monthly trends of malaria morbidity and slide positivity rate (SPR) and malaria cases on the island of São Tomé 2003-2009. “Bottom Line: Regular implementation of an island-wide IRS programme was carried out yearly in 2004-2007, and enhanced throughout the island in 2009.Only 50% of asymptomatic carriers were cured with ACT treatment, while 90% of the symptomatic patients were cured by ACT treatment as confirmed with a follow up study.In addition, both daily reports and a regular active surveillance to prevent malaria outbreaks should be established permanently, so that a fast response to epidemics can be effectively made when necessary.”
Leave a Comment » | DDT, Junk science, Malaria, Voodoo science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
You are currently browsing the archives for the DDT category.
Ed Darrell on Texas's Colorado River
Come on in, the water's fine. Come often: Cleanliness is next to godliness.
Millard Fillmore's Bathtub 