Silent Spring

[amethystmoon]

So I finally started reading Silent Spring, by Rachel Carson, last weekend. It's basically the original environmentalist book. It was written in 1962, and it's all about the government pesticide spraying programs, and the rise in pesticide use, radiation, and the creation of non-natural chemicals. It may touch on other things later, I'm only

Comments

[ellf]

For what it's worth, there is significant criticism of Carson, much of it related to the effects of not using pesticides. Remember that we use these chemicals to control and kill populations of insects that limit our ability to grow crops, or that spread diseases such as malaria that wipe out large numbers of humans

[amethystmoon]

Remember that we use these chemicals to control and kill populations of insects that limit our ability to grow crops, or that spread diseases such as malaria that wipe out large numbers of humans.

"Carson didn't seem to take into account the vital role (DDT) played in controlling the transmission of malariaOn the contrary, she does consider these points, and cites studies and facts which bring into question this alleged effectiveness. In many situations, the mass chemical spraying that occurred 1) was a "solution" to something that research has shown was not really a problem (ex: fire ants in the southern US); 2) was done against the advisement of branches of the government tasked with researching the effects of this (ex: Fish and Wildlife departments, I believe the FDA, etc.); 3) was later proven to be a temporary fix, where the targeted population surged again a few years later, often with their natural predators or control factors replenishing at a reduced rate (having also been affected by the chemical), thus exacerbating the

[anonymous]

I don't know if there is really a single "original environmentalist book," but this one:
http://www.aldoleopold.org/about/almanac.htm
also has to be considered one of them.

Terry F.

[lucky_otter]

No, we won't adapt. Adaptation takes place over the course of many, many generations, for such a weak force as that one.

[lucky_otter]

Where by "many, many" I mean "hundreds".

[amethystmoon]

Evolution clearly takes hundreds of generations, but I was under the impression that, when presented with new environmental pressures, small spontaneous adaptations have been known to happen, or an increased tolerance for toxic substances. But maybe that's just in the case of organisms that reproduce much faster than humans? (bacterias, for example, have demonstrated the ability to become resistant to antibiotics)

[lucky_otter]

Generations in bacteria are measured in minutes. Also, there are about 10^15 (1 quadrillion) bacteria living in you - 10^6 times more in one person than there are humans on Earth. Of course, that's divided amongst hundreds or even thousands of species, but that's still 10^3 times more of any given type