Posted on 08/27/2006 6:44:50 AM PDT by mathprof
Swazi officials say the proof of DDT's efficacy is in the numbers: Clinical malaria cases dropped from 45,000 in 2000 to 5,000 in 2004. Hospital admissions fell; malaria-related deaths dropped below 10. Most cases involve people from neighboring Mozambique.
At least people will have been kept alive for the years before the mosquitoes developed resistance. Maybe they'll be alive long enough for the Gates foundation to find a vaccine or more cost-effective treatment.
"The results of such spraying were famously depicted in Rachel Carson's landmark 1962 book Silent Spring, which launched the modern environmental movement."
I notice that they do no depict Carson's book for the fraud that it was. There was very little truth in it.
This is why we have West Nile virus and bird-flu. Bring back DDT - immediately.
Had an interesting conversation with an extreme radical environmentalist the other day at a restaurant.
She said, and I quote, "wouldn't the world be a much better place if the human race was extinct"?
I asked if she was jesting. Turned out she was completely serious.
She followed up with, and again I quote, "It would be no great loss to me if all the humans in the world died tomorrow".
That is so irrational, even attempting to argue an apposing position is futile at best.
I suspect that you're correct here.With the skilled use of DDT,Third World people are likely to suffer less (perhaps much less) from malaria than they do now.If resistance develops at some point I assume that they'll be no worse off than they are at this time.
Maybe they'll be alive long enough for the Gates foundation to find a vaccine or more cost-effective treatment.
I'm no infectious disease specialist,but it seems to me that medical science has a noticeably imperfect record with preventing or curing malaria up until now.It seems to me that killing the mosquitoes is the best strategy in preventing malaria and the other diseases they cause.
Like the bumper sticker says:
When all the gas is gone burn an environmentalist!
Did you miss the chance to suggest that she be the first to start the movement?
Rachel was the Margret Mead of environmentalism.
Use her logic....lecture her that she obviously isn't a committed enviromentalist......she should immediately kill herself as an example for others....
To save the environment of course :^)
Well then, we go back to right where we've been for some years.
Watching people die.
I just excused myself and quietly left.
"Rachel was the Margret Mead of environmentalism."
Was going through the university bookstore the other day with my daughter, looking at textbooks for classes she was thinking of taking.
One book actually bragged on the cover that the author was the recipient of the Margaret Mead Award.
I'd never heard of it, but I'd eat a bucket of nails before I'd let my name be associated with hers.
Tell her since a TRUE environmentalist would realize protection of the environment is accomplished by small, incremental steps,
she can do her part and go first.
Funny thing is, (well not so funny in my book – I gave her a huge tip and wry smile as I left along with making sure she knew why I was leaving) these folks were extremely rude and crass to the waitress as well.
I was already extricating myself from the group even before those above remarks.
All of them are highly educated, very well paid, one has a Lexus with a huge house for example; however, I have zero respect for them.
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.