I understand the need for eradicating diseases like that, but there are other pesticides and methods for accomplishing that without using a chemical like that. The problem with ddt is that it travels up the foodchain and becomes more concentrated. So sure, you get rid of the malaria but then infant mortality increases as do physical mutations in those who are born and survive. you're damned if you do and damned if you don't when it comes to ddt.
"...from a medical point of view, there's nothing better, safer, or cheaper than indoor spraying. It's highly effective and the toxic effects on the human population and the environment are minimal and far outweighed by the benefits of reduced infection." (p.2)
Now I wish I could back that up with some scientific information, but I don't have it. I'm sure it's out there somewhere. But I believe it. If you think about it, DDT is being used very differently here than for agricultural use. With agriculture, you're sparying it everywhere, into the dirt, into the ground water, and onto the plants. But indoor spraying will see none of that, and, like the guy said, with the minimal effects greatly outweighed by the benefits.
It's the lesser of two evils, yes, bet lesser all the same.
Are you kidding me? All right. I’m going to discuss this with a more scientific approach than a tree hugger’s heart. But I have to let you know- you’re lucky you aren’t in the same room as me because I could wring your throat right now
( ... )
The key word in that quote is, "CHEAPER." That’s what people care about and will tell the public anything so long as its the cheapest way. DDT is a far cheaper answer to the world’s disease problems than vaccinating people who are at risk of infection. They aren’t looking at the long run where in 50 years everyone who’s sprayed DDT will be affected by some form of cancer or other tragedy
( ... )
Comments 7
The problem with ddt is that it travels up the foodchain and becomes more concentrated. So sure, you get rid of the malaria but then infant mortality increases as do physical mutations in those who are born and survive.
you're damned if you do and damned if you don't when it comes to ddt.
Reply
"...from a medical point of view, there's nothing better, safer, or cheaper than indoor spraying. It's highly effective and the toxic effects on the human population and the environment are minimal and far outweighed by the benefits of reduced infection." (p.2)
Now I wish I could back that up with some scientific information, but I don't have it. I'm sure it's out there somewhere. But I believe it. If you think about it, DDT is being used very differently here than for agricultural use. With agriculture, you're sparying it everywhere, into the dirt, into the ground water, and onto the plants. But indoor spraying will see none of that, and, like the guy said, with the minimal effects greatly outweighed by the benefits.
It's the lesser of two evils, yes, bet lesser all the same.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment