Is DDT dangerous, or was it a fake scare?

[hectorberlioz]

I've heard both sides of this issue: and it would seem that DDT might not be dangerous at all.

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...osquitoes.html

Any thoughts on this?

[inked]

DDT was definitely dangerous to mosquitos.

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by inked

DDT was definitely dangerous to mosquitos.

Could it be that folks mistook mosquitos for birds, and decided to push for a ban?

[GrayMouser]

Well, if you get your info from lunatic fringe groups sponsored by Lyndon LaRouche, I suppose there might be a question.

From Wiki:

21st Century Science and Technology is a quarterly magazine covering scientific topics from the perspective of Lyndon LaRouche and his movement. The magazine was established in 1988 following the federal government's closing down of its predecessor Fusion Magazine (1977 to 1987).

Statement of purpose:

21st Century Science & Technology magazine challenges the assumptions of modern scientific dogma, including quantum mechanics, relativity theory, biological reductionism, and the formalization and separation of mathematics from physics. We demand a science based on constructible (intelligible) representation of concepts, but shun the simple empiricist or sense-certainty methods associated with the Newton-Galileo paradigm.

21st Century Science and Technology deals with an eclectic variety of issues, including criticism of claims of global warming, promotion of the use of DDT [1] and support for an alternative to the standard atomic theory, based on the "Moon model" of Robert J. Moon.[2]

The last hard copy issue of the magazine published was the Winter 2005-2006 issue. Subsequent issues are available in electronic .pdf format only.

[Earniel]

I'm sorry, but are you serious, hector? It's hard to tell on a messageboard.

You really ARE thinking DDT isn't harmful or are you just trying to generate some response by saying something so silly?

[GrayMouser]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

I'm sorry, but are you serious, hector? It's hard to tell on a messageboard.

You really ARE thinking DDT isn't harmful or are you just trying to generate some response by saying something so silly?

Don't jump on hector; there is a whole industry out there of astroturf right-wing think tanks funded by the chemical and petroleum industries who generate countless scientific-looking articles from an anti-environmentalist viewpoint. These sites often look very impressive and have qualified scientists who promote positions that are rejected by the vast majority of their colleagues; they call themselves things like the "Association of Concerned Scientists" or "Citizens for a Responsible Environmental Policy" and it's only when you look closer that you realize there's nothing there but a website, an office, and a big pile of money from Exxon or Monsanto.

The case of DDT is in fact not as black and white as some people think. The UN and other international health organizations now recommend its use in a controlled low-dose manner i.e, sprayed on inside walls or used on mosquito nets.

The right-wing front groups have jumped on this to push the totally specious idea that the environmental movement has caused the death of millions of people in the Third World, and hence should not be listened when they now complain about things like global warming or GM foods.

In fact, the ban on DDT was mainly directed at widespread high-dosage aerial spraying for agricultural purposes, which, given the economics of the methods, meant largely for the benefit of wealthy landowners and agribusiness.

The problem with those methods is that they rapidly led to mosquitoes developing resistance to DDT- evolution works - which meant more money for the chemical industry in developing substitutes.

Still, there was definitely an overreaction in totally banning the use of DDT, and the current policy is a welcome corrective.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

You really ARE thinking DDT isn't harmful or are you just trying to generate some response by saying something so silly?

Seems to me he's trying to start a good, old-fashioned pro vs. con debate.

This article outlines many of the pros and the cons of DDT. One of the cons is that mosquitos do build up a resistence to it. One of the pros however, is that it was used effectively to combat malaria. (Though if the resistence is widespread, its efficacy would lessen. I think the effect of various insecticides on mosquitos over time should be studied more.)

I agree with Inked that a wider variety of insecticides should be used to help reduce malaria-carrying mosquito populations. However, we should test these insecticides intensively, so that we're not introducing another health hazard that's just as bad as malaria.

Just for fun, here's a list of reasons to like DDT.