4 ms·

The pull back from DDT has had all kinds of devastating effects. For instance, bedbugs are an actual fear now, for the first time in ages. But there has been o

The pull back from DDT has had all kinds of devastating effects. For instance, bedbugs are an actual fear now, for the first time in ages. But there has been outrage about the effects of wealthy nations that drew the benefits of DDT before banning it (like, getting rid of malaria) and now putting pressure on poorer nations to _not_ use DDT, and suffer the consequences. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2004/04/11/magazine/what-the-world-needs-now-is-ddt.html http://mobile.nytimes.com/2004/04/11/magazine/what-the-world...

lostlogin 10y ago
Did you read that link? DDT doesn't work and it's toxic, making it a terrible choice.
- ghshephard 10y ago
  WHO suggests DDT is safe and effective to use indoors to combat malaria: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr50/en/ http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr50/en/ "Indoor residual spraying is useful to quickly reduce the number of infections caused by malaria-carrying mosquitoes. IRS has proven to be just as cost effective as other malaria prevention measures, and DDT presents no health risk when used properly.” What people consistently fail to take note - Malaria is an absolutely terrible disease, killing over 1 million people/year, so even if DDT was toxic (which it's not) and only marginally helpful (Also which it's not, very helpful indoors) - it would still be worth using if it could reduce the fatality rate by even 1%. That's 10,000 human lives saved. And that doesn't even include the 200 million plus people who suffer from Malaria. But given that DDT is neither toxic, nor ineffective, it should be used wherever appropriate.
  - lostlogin 10y ago
    Not toxic and not ineffective? Did you read the WHO link or see what lead to them not using DDT in Sri Lanka? There is no shortage of evidence that DDT is bad for human, that's hardly debatable (and read what you posted, it doesn't say it's safe). What is debatable is the cost benefit ratio. How many pre terms births, cancers, sterile males etc are worth it for the reduction in malaria. Edit: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(01)05329-6/abstract http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1241918/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1241918/ http://press.endocrine.org/doi/10.1210/jc.2015-1841 http://press.endocrine.org/doi/10.1210/jc.2015-1841
    - ghshephard 10y ago
      Not sure what I can do help you see this differently. I thought, DDT presents no health risk when used properly. was pretty straightforward. There are a lot of important things in the world, that are absolutely essential to human health, such as DEET, which has warnings like, Ingestions of DEET have been associated with nausea, vomiting, hypotension, encephalopathy, seizure, coma, and ataxia., Ingestion of 50 mL of 100% DEET by a 33 year-old woman resulted in hyptotension, coma, seizures and death. Ingestion of 25 mL of 50% DEET by a one-year-old child resulted in coma and seizures. - but nobody in their right mind would suggest we not use DEET just because it can have negative impact on human health. It's pretty much the key to reducing mosquito bites. Widespread outdoor spraying of DDT has some pretty significant negative effects on the environment. But there is much less debate about the cost/effectiveness of indoor residual spraying and such to reduce malaria carrying mosquitoes. This is the best reference I can recommend to understand all of the details: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/69945/1/WHO_HTM_GMP_2011_eng.pdf http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/69945/1/WHO_HTM_GMP...

lostlogin 10y ago

Did you read that link? DDT doesn't work and it's toxic, making it a terrible choice.

ghshephard 10y ago
WHO suggests DDT is safe and effective to use indoors to combat malaria: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr50/en/ http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr50/en/ "Indoor residual spraying is useful to quickly reduce the number of infections caused by malaria-carrying mosquitoes. IRS has proven to be just as cost effective as other malaria prevention measures, and DDT presents no health risk when used properly.” What people consistently fail to take note - Malaria is an absolutely terrible disease, killing over 1 million people/year, so even if DDT was toxic (which it's not) and only marginally helpful (Also which it's not, very helpful indoors) - it would still be worth using if it could reduce the fatality rate by even 1%. That's 10,000 human lives saved. And that doesn't even include the 200 million plus people who suffer from Malaria. But given that DDT is neither toxic, nor ineffective, it should be used wherever appropriate.
- lostlogin 10y ago
  Not toxic and not ineffective? Did you read the WHO link or see what lead to them not using DDT in Sri Lanka? There is no shortage of evidence that DDT is bad for human, that's hardly debatable (and read what you posted, it doesn't say it's safe). What is debatable is the cost benefit ratio. How many pre terms births, cancers, sterile males etc are worth it for the reduction in malaria. Edit: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(01)05329-6/abstract http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1241918/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1241918/ http://press.endocrine.org/doi/10.1210/jc.2015-1841 http://press.endocrine.org/doi/10.1210/jc.2015-1841
  - ghshephard 10y ago
    Not sure what I can do help you see this differently. I thought, DDT presents no health risk when used properly. was pretty straightforward. There are a lot of important things in the world, that are absolutely essential to human health, such as DEET, which has warnings like, Ingestions of DEET have been associated with nausea, vomiting, hypotension, encephalopathy, seizure, coma, and ataxia., Ingestion of 50 mL of 100% DEET by a 33 year-old woman resulted in hyptotension, coma, seizures and death. Ingestion of 25 mL of 50% DEET by a one-year-old child resulted in coma and seizures. - but nobody in their right mind would suggest we not use DEET just because it can have negative impact on human health. It's pretty much the key to reducing mosquito bites. Widespread outdoor spraying of DDT has some pretty significant negative effects on the environment. But there is much less debate about the cost/effectiveness of indoor residual spraying and such to reduce malaria carrying mosquitoes. This is the best reference I can recommend to understand all of the details: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/69945/1/WHO_HTM_GMP_2011_eng.pdf http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/69945/1/WHO_HTM_GMP...