West Nile virus: No call for DDT

October 8, 2007

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: , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Creationists: The film director who couldn’t shoot straight

September 21, 2007

Hilarity continues to roll out of Waco. The creationists can’t even shoot film straight.

Tim Woods, a reporter for the Waco Tribune-Herald tells the story well:

Baylor University’s recent controversy regarding a professor’s intelligent design-related Web site took a dramatic turn Thursday when a film crew went to President John Lilley’s office, hoping to speak to him about what they deem academic suppression.

But Lilley was out of town.

Mark Mathis, associate producer for the film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, and a film crew went to Lilley’s office about 10 a.m. When they learned Lilley was in Houston and unavailable Thursday, Mathis asked to speak with Baylor spokeswoman Lori Fogleman.

Not satisfied with the hoax e-mail attributed to President Lilly by Bill Dembski, the ID version of the Keystone Kops tried to ambush Lilly. I don’t endorse ambush journalism even when the journalists are honest and competent, but Mathis’s dishonesty and lack of manners in dealing with other stars of his films suggest Mathis is the last person on Earth who should be doing such stuff.

Mathis said Stein and the film’s producers believe Baylor’s removal of distinguished engineering professor Robert Marks’ Web site devoted to evolutionary informatics — a concept Marks’ collaborator, William Dembski, termed “friendly” to intelligent design — from its server is an example of academic suppression.

While Baylor officials have said the site was removed for procedural reasons, namely the absence of a disclaimer separating the university from involvement in Marks’ research, Mathis believes it was taken down because of its content.

“To us, it seems pretty obvious what’s going on with Professor Marks’ Web site. . . . To us, that’s academic persecution and suppression,” Mathis said. “What is the problem with tenured, distinguished university professors pursuing a scientific idea? What’s wrong with that? It’s especially interesting in the case of Baylor, in that this is happening at a Christian university.”

Baylor provost Randall O’Brien, who was in New York on Thursday, said Marks is free to conduct evolutionary informatics research and, like Fogleman, denied the site was removed because of its content.

“What we say is you have the freedom to formulate your own views and so forth, just make sure that you issue a disclaimer that your particular view does not necessarily express the view of Baylor University,” O’Brien said. “We fully endorse the right and responsibilities of academic freedom.”

While Mathis was at Baylor, he could have ambushed Prof. Marks, and challenged Marks to tell him what Marks’ research hopes to find, and asked Marks to show the lab for the world.

It would have been the first time that anyone has ever caught on film that elusive animal, the intelligence design research facility.

If the lab exists, it would be the first time ever caught on film. If it exists.

2 Comments | Hoaxes, Intelligent Design, Journalism, Junk science, Voodoo science | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

West Nile 2007: DDT not needed

September 21, 2007

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

DDT snake oil salesmen of the month: August 2007

September 17, 2007

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:

Snake Oil Salesmen of the Month

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

Using snake oil to lubricate jaws

September 15, 2007

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.

posted at 10:18 AM by Glenn Reynolds

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:

  1. Omission, failing to note history:  Reynolds fails to note that without the ban on broadcast use of DDT (like crop spraying, or spraying of swamps and rivers), DDT would by now be completely ineffective against mosquitoes.  The ban on crop spraying (broadcast use) has been instrumental in preserving the effectiveness of DDT against malaria.  The debate is over, Reynolds lost, and its time he quit denying it (speaking of denialism).  The ban on DDT spraying in the U.S., following similar bans in Europe, and with similar following bans in other nations, has been a key factor in our current victories against malaria — a key factor for the anti-malaria forces.
  2. Omission, not understanding the science:  Reynolds may not know that DDT was cast against other  pesticides that are known to have very low repellent characteristics.  There are other, much more effective and less toxic, and less expensive, ways to repel mosquitoes.
  3. Failure to state the whole case:  Reynolds, the DDT-advocate in the New York Times,  and the study cited, fail to note that DDT is inadequate to more than a very short-term, partial campaign against malaria-carrying mosquitoes.  Other studies recently published note powerful, long-term reduction in malaria infections by use of mosquito netting; these declines do not require multiple, expensive and logistically difficult sprayings of poison in homes every year.  Perhaps more critically, research now shows that mosquito nets produce malaria reductions in the absence of DDT spraying, and the reductions stick; DDT spraying alone cannot produce either a long-term reduction in malaria (say, longer than a year), nor will the reductions stick, nor will the reductions be as great.  Nets work without DDT; DDT does not work without nets.

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

How malaria is really treated

August 22, 2007

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.

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

Turkish creationists censor 1 million WordPress blogs

August 19, 2007

It’s an act worthy of Nicolae Ceauşescu, or Idi Amin — but the Turkish creationist Adnan Oktar has taken legal action that effectively blocks more than a million weblogs from access in Turkey — all the blogs on WordPress, the host of this blog.

Here’s the general announcement to WordPress clients. This site has the text of the threats from Oktar’s lawyers to WordPress.

Here’s a link to Matt’s blog, which has more discussion.

Adnan Oktar is the guy who pays people to write under the name Harun Yahya. Under that name he has published dozens of anti-evolution screeds. You may recall that, in the past year, he has financed the publication of an 800-page book, handsomely bound with scores of pictures (many of them plagiarized), claiming evolution could not account for features of living things. The scientifically vacuous book was delivered to schools and libraries across Europe in 2006, and then to thousands of U.S. scientists, teachers and libraries earlier in 2007.  (Here’s a good summary of creationism and Islam, from Taner Edis.)

I suggested in comments that protests should be made to the European Union. Turkey is working to gain admittance to the EU, and childish, totalitarian eruptions such as Oktar’s getting a court to censor a million blogs, significantly detract from Turkey’s chances and case. There is high irony here, too — Oktar is one of those who has willingly spread false claims that evolution was a cause of the Holocaust (when he’s not busy denying the Holocaust happened; consistency and accuracy are not among his strong points) — heck, just a few months ago he was claiming evolution is the cause of terrorism.

Do you have better ideas about what to do?

I hope the few of you who read this blog will spread this word far and fast.

Such disruptions of communication over an entire nation are the dreams of terrorists. Are we to understand that Adnan Oktar does this because Darwin convinced him? Or are his actions direct denial of his earlier claims?

I have been a journalist for a long time, having joined the Society of Professional Journalists in 1974. I spent many years in Washington, slugging it out against people who wished they had the power of censorship, and some who actually did have that power in other nations. I do not recall any similarly stupid activity outside of totalitarian governments, most of which are now gone.

Nuts.

50 Comments | Adnan Oktar, Censorship, Creationism, Evolution, Free press, Freedom - Political, Junk science, Religious Freedom, Totalitarianism, Voodoo history, Voodoo science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

DDT poisoning at the Wall Street Journal

August 17, 2007

The Wall Street Journal‘s editorial page continues to exhibit signs of hysteria that can only be described as DDT poisoning. DDT has poisoned their view of what to do about malaria. (The article is now available by paid subscription.)

Malaria is a nasty disease that kills more than a million people every year. It is particularly brutal in attacking infants and pregnant women.

Malaria continues to rage because western nations with the resources to fight the disease spent their money on other things in the past 40 years, because the nations most affected lack the governmental adequacy or financial resources and willpower to mount effective campaigns against the disease, but mostly because malaria is a tough disease to fight.

Malaria is spread by several different species of mosquito, some of which have habits or constitutions which make mosquito eradication programs much less effective. Human malaria is really four different parasites, some of which have acquired resistance to the drugs used to fight it. The HIV/AIDS epidemics in tropical nations have not helped matters: What used to be minor cases of malaria now kill thousands who have compromised immune systems because of HIV/AIDS.

Hospitals in far too many nations are overwhelmed with malaria patients, and unable to provide care for many who could be saved. Most of those who die every year could live, with better distribution of health care, and with better prevention.

A few people have been afflicted with what can only be described as a different problem: DDT poisoning. Their views of malaria and what we need to do to fight the disease are poisoned by their anti-science political views. For at least five years there has been a nasty, persistent campaign to impugn “environmentalists” and Rachel Carson, claiming that DDT is the answer to all the world’s malaria woes. Though DDT has been available to fight malaria since 1946, these people complain that bans on spraying crops have discouraged the use of DDT against malaria, fatally.

Below the fold I’ll fisk the short piece from yesterday’s WSJ. It’s difficult to keep ahead of hoaxers, though — today they’ve got another call for DDT use, this time to fight West Nile Virus. Ironically, West Nile is most deadly against several species of bird, some of which are acutely subject to death by DDT.

Read the rest of this entry »

5 Comments | DDT, Environmental protection, Junk science, Rachel Carson, Reason, Voodoo science | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Fisking “Junk Science’s” campaign for DDT: Point #6

August 9, 2007

Another in a continuing series, showing the errors in JunkScience.com’s list of “100 things you should know about DDT.” (No, these are not in order.)

Steven Milloy and the ghost of entomologist J. Gordon Edwards listed this as point six in their list of “100 things you should know about DDT “[did Edwards really have anything to do with the list before he died?]:

6. “To only a few chemicals does man owe as great a debt as to DDT… In little more than two decades, DDT has prevented 500 million human deaths, due to malaria, that otherwise would have been inevitable.”

[National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Research in the Life Sciences of the Committee on Science and Public Policy. 1970. The Life Sciences; Recent Progress and Application to Human Affairs; The World of Biological Research; Requirements for the Future.]

In contrast to their citation for the Sweeney hearing record, which leads one away from the actual hearing record, for this citation, the publication actually exists, though it is no longer available in print. It’s available on-line, in an easily searchable format. [I urge you to check these sources out for yourself; I won’t jive you, but you should see for yourself how the critics of Rachel Carson and WHO distort the data — I think you’ll be concerned, if not outraged.] The quote, though troubled by the tell-tale ellipses of the science liar, is accurately stated so far as it goes.

The problems? It’s only part of the story as told in that publication.  The National Academy of Science calls for DDT to be replaced in that book; NAS is NOT calling for a rollback of any ban, nor is NAS defending DDT against the claims of harm.  The book documents and agrees with the harms Rachel Carson wrote about eight years earlier.

Cover of the electronic version of Life Sciences, the 1970 book looking to future needs in biology and agriculture.

Cover of the electronic version of Life Sciences, the 1970 book looking to future needs in biology and agriculture.

Milloy (and Edwards, he claims), are trying to make a case that the National Academy of Sciences, one of the more reputable and authoritative groups of distinguished scientists in the world, thinks that DDT is just dandy, in contrast to the views of Rachel Carson and environmentalists (who are always cast as stupid and venal in Milloy’s accounts) who asked that DDT use be reduced to save eagles, robins and other songbirds, fish, and other wildlife, and to keep DDT useful against malaria.

First, there is no way that a ban on DDT could have been responsible for 500 million deaths due to malaria.  Calculate it yourself, the mathematics are simply impossible: At about 1 million deaths per year, if we assume DDT could have prevented all of the deaths (which is not so), and had we assumed usage started in 1939 instead of 1946 (a spot of 7 years and 7 million deaths), we would have 69 million deaths prevented by 2008. As best I can determine, the 500 million death figure is a misreading from an early WHO report that noted about 500 million people are annually exposed to malaria, I’m guessing a bit at that conclusion — that’s the nicest way to attribute it to simple error and not malicious lie. It was 500 million exposures to malaria, not 500 million deaths. It’s unfortunate that this erroneous figure found its way into a publication of the NAS — I suppose it’s the proof that anyone can err.

Read the rest of this entry »

16 Comments | Accuracy, Bogus history, Conservation, DDT, Environmental protection, History, Hoaxes, Junk science, Public health, Rachel Carson, Research, Voodoo history, Voodoo science, War on Science | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Accuracy: A good bias (DDT again)

August 4, 2007

Jay Ambrose retired from editing newspapers, and now writes commentary for the Scripps News chain of papers. Because of his experience in editing, I was suprised to see his commentary from last week which takes broad, inaccurate swipes at environmental groups (here from the Evansville, Indiana, Courier & Press).

Ambrose is victim of the “DDT and Rachel Carson bad” hoax.

His column addresses bias in reporting, bias against Christians, which he claims he sees in reporting on issues of stem cell research, and bias “in favor” of environmentalists, which has resulted in a foolish reduction in the use of DDT. I don’t comment here on the stem cell controversy, though Ambrose’s cartoonish presentation of how federally-funded research works invites someone to correct its errors.

Relevant excerpts of Ambrose’s column appear below the fold, with my reply (which I have posted to the Scripps News editorial section, and in an earlier version, to the on-line version of the Evansville paper).

Read the rest of this entry »

55 Comments | Accuracy, Africa, Conservation, DDT, Journalism, Junk science, Malaria, Public health, Rachel Carson, Science, Voodoo science, War on Science | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Collateral damage from magic bullets

July 22, 2007

In an earlier post I noted Norman Borlaug’s receiving the Congressional Gold Medal. In comments, Bernarda noted those who disagree with the claim that Borlaug’s Green Revolution was much of a benefit, or perhaps more accurately, those who note the problems that result from such advances — and there are many. Bernarda pointed to a BBC lecture from Vendana Shiva, detailing the problems that Punjab experienced as a result of governmental and society structures unable to deal with the changes required by high-yield crops: “Poverty and Globalisation.” It’s worth a read or a listen.
Similarly, in another BBC lecture in that series, Gro Harlem Bruntland details problems from “progress” that includes cutting the forests, in “Health and Population.” Relevant to other discussions here, she notes a rise in malaria due to deforestation, raising an issue that the junk science purveyors opposed to Rachel Carson’s honoring would like to ignore. Here is a small excerpt of her talk — note that deforestation is not a problem that more DDT can solve:

Gro Harlem Bruntland:  Recently, in Mozambique, I saw children with their eyes glazed with fever from a malaria that could have been prevented if their parents could afford bed nets. Deforestation had changed malaria from a nuisance to a curse in a matter of twenty years. 

Gro Harlem Brundtland, former Director General of the World Health Organization (WHO). Wikiquote image.

Gro Harlem Brundtland, former Director General of the World Health Organization (WHO). Wikiquote image.

More people are suffering from this killing and debilitating disease now than ever before, and deforestation, climate change and breakdowns in health services have caused the disease to spread to new areas and areas that have been malaria-free for decades, like in Europe.

In the Philippines, I have watched how beggars sit exhausted on the pavements convulsed with coughing. Tuberculosis, which we long believed had been brought under control by effective treatment, is on the rise again. Increasingly, we see forms of tuberculosis which are resistant to all but a very expensive cocktail of drugs.

I think that HIV/AIDS may be the most serious threat to face sub-Saharan Africa and other developing regions. space. Already, the AIDS epidemic is the leading cause of death in several African countries. AIDS has reversed the increases in life expectancy we have seen over the past thirty years. The social and economic devastation in countries that could lose a fifth of their productive populations is heart-rending.

I believe we are facing this alarming situation largely because of an outdated approach to development. Our theories have to catch up with what our ears and eyes are telling us – and fast.

There was a period in development thinking – not so long ago – when spending on public services, such as health and education, would have to wait. Good health was a luxury, only to be achieved when countries had developed a particular level of physical infrastructure and established a certain economic strength. The implicit assumption was that health was to do with consumption. Experience and research over the past few years have shown that such thinking was at best simplistic, and at worst plainly wrong.

I maintain that if people’s health improves, they make a real contribution to their nation’s prosperity. In my judgement, good health is not only an important concern for individuals, it plays a central role in achieving sustainable economic growth and an effective use of resources.

As in Europe at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century, we have seen that developing countries which invest relatively more, and well, on health are likely to achieve higher economic growth.

In other words, malaria prevention grows on trees, or malaria grows with the cutting of trees.

1 Comment | Citizenship, Conservation, Current History, DDT, Disasters, Economics, Environmental protection, Ethics, Geography - Economic, Geography - Physical, Geography - Political, Globalization, History, Junk science, Public health, Rachel Carson, Research, Science, Travel, War on Science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Sad warning on pesticide misuse

July 19, 2007

No, pesticides are not perfectly safe, especially when not used exactly as prescribed.  Poisons are poisons.  Be careful.  People can die.

3 Comments | Junk science, Science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Tripoli 6: Justice in a creationist world

July 18, 2007

We hope the Tripoli 6 are out of Tripoli, Libya, soon. Libyan courts commuted the death sentences delivered to the six health workers, but the commutation was to life sentences; late news indicates that Libya has agreed to extradite the six to Bulgaria in return for payments to the families of the 400+ children who were victimized by the hospital screw-ups for which the six are erroneously blamed.

Libya claims to have confessions from the health workers. Evidence suggests they were tortured to sign hoax confessions.

For rational people who care for justice, there is a powerful moral here. Forensic evidence shows that the HIV viruses that infected hundreds of children at a hospital, infected the children and evolved well before the five nurses and one doctor got to the hospital. In short, it is physically impossible in time for the accused workers to have been responsible for the infections. They are innocent.

But of course, this evidence is based on evolutionary paradigms, the same way that all DNA evidence is. The Libyan courts waved the evidence off, essentially, convicting the workers in a second trial after a team of international scientists completed a special research project showing, with the highest degree of assurance, the impossibility of liability to the accused.

Creationism is relativism with King James language: Facts are not facts, science is not science, what is true in the laboratory and in the wild, not true in a creationist court. The Libyan courts dismissed what would have been exonerating evidence in U.S. and most European courts.

And so another international team was assembled to raise the extortion demanded by Libya, and a settlement negotiated. U.S. scientists contributed time and expertise; the U.S. government appears to have deferred to European governments.

Sadly, the people who created the conditions for infecting 400 kids with HIV will go unpunished in this creationist court.

Effect Measure over at the Seed stable of science blogs has a much more complete explanation of the case, with links detailing the heroic work of scientists, and I encourage you to read that account and follow the links.

Justice, justice shalt thou pursue.

                                 – Deuteronomy 16:20

Tip of the old scrub brush to P. Z. Myers and Pharyngula.

Leave a Comment » | Creationism, Hoaxes, Junk science, Justice, Law, Science, Science and faith | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Update: War against science and Rachel Carson

July 11, 2007

Some links you should check out, in the continuing fight for reason against the bizarre campaign against the reputation of Rachel Carson, against the World Health Organization, and against fighting malaria, and for unwise use of DDT:

1.  Alan Dove, at Dove Docs, notes an entirely new way of thinking about immunity against malaria:  “A New Twist on Herd Immunity”

2.  Insight from Bug Girl:  “Scientists, media, and political activism;”  also check out her post on new research on mosquito bed nets.

3.   Deltoid posted several good pieces since last I linked; go here, and here.  Be ready:  Tinfoil hat brigade comes out in the comments to the first piece.

Leave a Comment » | Accuracy, Bogus history, DDT, History, Hoaxes, Junk science, Natural history, Public health, Rachel Carson, Rampant stupidity, Voodoo history, Voodoo science, War on Science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

DDT: The problems the WHO/Rachel Carson critics don’t want you to know

July 10, 2007

The merry bands of hoaxsters at “JunkScience.com” and the Competitive Enterprise Institute hope you think DDT is a well-targeted, perfect solution to get rid of malaria. They ignore the devastating effects DDT has on birds, bats and other mammals (including humans), beneficial insects and fish. They don’t care about the difficulties in treating malaria in hospitals, which would continue or grow worse were DDT to be sprayed willy-nilly across the malaria-endemic world.

Cover, War on Insects

Plus, CEI is well-funded and has been hammering away on spreading the hoaxes for several years. You may have to dig hard to find the facts, such as the fact that the inventors of DDT as insecticide warned against over-use exactly as did Rachel Carson, (see the Dove Docs archives), or that the death of beneficial insects and beneficial animals can cause disasters, too — or did CEI tell you that DDT can cause your roof to cave in, in Borneo, and that they had to parachute cats in to prevent an epidemic of typhus, caused by DDT?

Read the rest of this entry »

9 Comments | DDT, Geography - Economic, Hoaxes, Junk science, Lesson plans, Rachel Carson, Science, Voodoo science, War on Science | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »