Skip to comments.BRING BACK DDT (Michelle Malkin showcases articles from four thoughtful advocates)
Posted on 01/08/2005 10:39:34 AM PST by Stoat
BRING BACK DDT
By Michelle Malkin · January 08, 2005 11:02 AM
Bravo for New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, who calls today for DDT to be sprayed in malaria-ravaged countries. Here's the intro:
If the U.S. wants to help people in tsunami-hit countries like Sri Lanka and Indonesia - not to mention other poor countries in Africa - there's one step that would cost us nothing and would save hundreds of thousands of lives.
Science journalist Mike Fumento, among many other rational, anti-junk science researchers on the opposite side of the aisle, has been arguing this for years. Fumento reported in a piece five days before Kristof's article was published:
Malaria and dengue fever, both carried by mosquitoes, are already endemic in many of the affected areas and disease levels could dramatically increase as they breed in the countless pools of stagnant water left behind by the waves. Mosquitoes that carry malaria come out at night, those that carry dengue by day. They thus kill around the clock.
Environmentalists have posed as saviors of the Earth and humanity. But behind their opposition to DDT lie darker motives. Dr. Walter Williams points out:
In Sri Lanka, in 1948, there were 2.8 million malaria cases and 7,300 malaria deaths. With widespread DDT use, malaria cases fell to 17 and no deaths in 1963. After DDT use was discontinued, Sri Lankan malaria cases rose to 2.5 million in the years 1968 and 1969, and the disease remains a killer in Sri Lanka today. More than 100,000 people died during malaria epidemics in Swaziland and Madagascar in the mid-1980s, following the suspension of DDT house spraying. After South Africa stopped using DDT in 1996, the number of malaria cases in KwaZulu-Natal province skyrocketed from 8,000 to 42,000. By 2000, there had been an approximate 400 percent increase in malaria deaths. Now that DDT is being used again, the number of deaths from malaria in the region has dropped from 340 in 2000 to none at the last reporting in February 2003.
Yes, one really does wonder.
Good source for details:
The Skeptical Environmentalist
State of Fear
The umpteenth reason why the term "enviromentalist whacko" is a good one!
Bravo Michelle, for exposing the population control agenda. My grandmother sprayed her garden with DDT for years. She lived to 94.
Is there anything to the conspiracy theory that NOT spraying with DDT is an effort to control population in the poorest areas of the world?
Idiot Hollywood actors helped rid the world of DDT, didn't they? They have the death of millions on their hands.
Oh, and the reason your air conditioner works like crap too is because of the ban on Flourocarbons. This one is even easier to figure out- the patent on the best refrigerant in the world was running out- which would have cost the company BILLIONS - so guess who makes the next best (and much more corrosive) substitute.
This topic is recently coming up more often, and she and Mr. Kristof are to be applauded for supporting this entirely sensible idea.
Michelle hits the nail on the head. Thus, it is doubtful DDT will be used in the forseeable future.
A proven theory...!
>Population control advocates blamed DDT for increasing third world population. In the 1960s, World Health Organization authorities believed there was no alternative to the overpopulation problem but to assure than up to 40 percent of the children in poor nations would die of malaria. As an official of the Agency for International Development stated, "Rather dead than alive and riotously reproducing."
[Desowitz, RS. 1992. Malaria Capers, W.W. Norton & Company]<
I'll take her over that emaciated beanpole Ann Coulter any day of the week.
A quick look at leftist policies and beliefs shows that it's always been about keeping "undesirables" away. From bribing them to sit at home in their ghettos to abortion and outright purges, it's NIMBYism and eugenics at its finest.
It would be to allow DDT in malaria-ravaged countries.
How does the US stop Sri Lanka and other countries from spraying DDT?
I appreciate all of the thoughtful commentary! :-)
I am guessing that the reintroduction of DDT will be a non-starter for reasons brought forth by others, as well as:
The banning of DDT was one of the major foundations of the modern environmentalist movement....their Holy Grail, if you will. The ban emboldened the Left with an enhanced sense of power, and any attempt to reintroduce it will be fought like a drowning man fights for air.
The region affected by the Tsunami includes areas notorious for containing militant Islamists. They will seize upon this as 'chemical warfare' being directed against them and will use it as license to unleash biotoxins against the West (although they don't exactly need any additional rationale for this, such a move would give them political cover among their less-radical constituency)
Millions will sicken and die needlessly as a result.
May God help us all....
[Desowitz, RS. 1992. Malaria Capers, W.W. Norton & Company]
A well received book, apparently:
Do these countries even have stockpiles of DDT, or even the means by which to disperse it on such a massive scale? Once again, only the US has the means to get such a meaningful thing done. Sadly, I believe that it will once again be thwarted due entirely to irrelevant political reasons rather than any sound scientific ones.
So confuse them by revealing the infidel plot to suppress DDT spraying.
After all, Muslims invented DDT.
ROTFL! Good plan :-)
I'll guess that the countries' own western-educated elites suppress its use.
Or foreign aid depends on banning DDT.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.