Thread: DDT or NO DDT?
View Single Post
  #8   Report Post  
Old 13-03-2006, 11:39 PM posted to rec.gardens.edible
Dusty Bleher
 
Posts: n/a
Default DDT or NO DDT?

Hello Penelope & all;

"Penelope Periwinkle" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 17:18:20 -0600, zxcvbob
wrote:

DDT would be great for eradicating malaria. IMHO, malaria is the
reason
Africa is a backwards continent that never will amount to much.


Well, that's just silly. AIDS is the biggest health problem in
Africa
today, but there are plenty of others, even when you just consider

Possibly true (I haven't checked the numbers, so I'll take your word
for it). But absent a "cure" the only preventative we have for AIDS
today, is abstinence. And, maybe it's just me...but that
'self-administered' preventative doesn't seem to be working real
well...

We have a "cure" for Malaria--and a preventative as well. While it
may offend the sensibilities of those ostensibly concerned with
critters, it's been shown to really, Really, REALLY help those that
can benefit from it--the children of sub-Saharan Africa come to
mind.

All of the factual, in-depth, long-term studies that I've seen on
DDT, have shown it to be no threat to us or our wildlife (except
those living in a chitin skin).

parasites. River blindness, leishmaniasis, trypanosomiasis, and
schistosomiasis are just a few I can think of off the top of my
head.

Yep. All bad. All need some attention. But I'd submit that it's
easier to deal with them when you're not swatting at ookinete
infested mosquitoes...

The political and social issues would take days to cover, but
they're
certainly germane to any discussion on the problems that most of
Africa third world.

Indeed they are.

....
I hate to sound like a stuck record, but everyone keeps glossing
over
the whole resistance factor. There were already some 20 or so
species
of mosquitoes that were resistant to DDT by the time the ban went
into
effect in the 70's. There were documented cases of species of
resistant house flies, too.

So you're saying that for the decade or two that it _might_ take for
some of those mosquitoes to become resistant, that it's okay to let
1.3 million people/year die?

If we went back to using DDT today, there would be lots of areas
in
Africa that it wouldn't work, and those areas would rapidly
increase;
so there's already a need to find other tools in the fight against
malaria.

Why is that? DDT was primarily used in this hemisphere in the
period after WWII until the eco-nutz got it banned in the '70's. It
pretty effectively eradicated that disease. It's probably just my
lack of mosquito entomology showing, but I'm pretty sure those
resistant ones living here can't make it all the way to Africa to
invest their resistant genes over there... In the mean time, 1.3
million folks (mostly children) die every year while the
"do-gooders" dither...

DDT is relatively non-toxic to humans, and it doesn't take much to
spray
the inside walls of houses to kill the mosquitoes.


Not all malarial mosquitoes rest on the inside wall of the house,
though, some go outside before resting. shrug It's not a simple
problem.

Certainly true. But then again, nothing comes with a 100%
guarantee...except the finality of death from malaria.

Developed countries that have already beaten malaria can get by
without
DDT. We tend to use way too much pesticides in general.

I can certainly agree with that.

As do I. But absent a comprehensive "mosquito-swatter" campaign,
I'm not sure what else we can use TODAY that can make a
difference...


L8r all,
DustyB
....