4 ms·

While this dumping is horrific you also have to understand how beneficial DDT was: > Between 1945 and 1965, DDT saved millions-even tens of millions-of lives a

While this dumping is horrific you also have to understand how beneficial DDT was: > Between 1945 and 1965, DDT saved millions-even tens of millions-of lives around the world, perhaps more than any other man-made drug or chemical before or since. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/07/02/the-mosquito-killer https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/07/02/the-mosquito-k...

WhompingWindows 6y ago
Couldn't bug nets have achieved the same effect without poisoning the biosphere?
- stonogo 6y ago
  Not even almost. I've never gone to sleep in a netted bed without waking up with mosquitos on the inside of it, and I don't know anyone who has.
- staplers 6y ago
  Those nets would be made of plastic and likely end up in the ocean at some point. If we mass-distributed them, even worse.
- carapace 6y ago
  Yes, people distribute mosquito nets to reduce incidence of malaria. It's a thing. > The most effective means of preventing malaria is sleeping under a mosquito net, specifically a long-lasting insecticide treated net (LLIN). ~ https://www.againstmalaria.com/WhyNets.aspx https://www.againstmalaria.com/WhyNets.aspx
relativitypro 6y ago
1. Saving human lives may not be the best metric (given that even this metric is evolving in time, and I claim unknowable) 2. The green revolution benefits were several orders more significant, and will be seen as the spark that enabled climate change. Responsibly using technology is our biggest task.
- refurb 6y ago
  Measuring human lives saved might not be the best metric? Of course it knowable - we knew how many people died of malaria each year. Tens of millions of lives were saved.
alpha_squared 6y ago
And what is the cost, long-term, in human lives from the downstream effects of these actions? And how much longer will it keep costing us?
- x87678r 6y ago
  The article didn't really say much specific, I guess its really hard to know who is affected. Californians has one of the lowest cancer rates https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/cancer_mortality/cancer.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/cancer_mortality/c...

WhompingWindows 6y ago

Couldn't bug nets have achieved the same effect without poisoning the biosphere?

stonogo 6y ago
Not even almost. I've never gone to sleep in a netted bed without waking up with mosquitos on the inside of it, and I don't know anyone who has.
staplers 6y ago
Those nets would be made of plastic and likely end up in the ocean at some point. If we mass-distributed them, even worse.
carapace 6y ago
Yes, people distribute mosquito nets to reduce incidence of malaria. It's a thing. > The most effective means of preventing malaria is sleeping under a mosquito net, specifically a long-lasting insecticide treated net (LLIN). ~ https://www.againstmalaria.com/WhyNets.aspx https://www.againstmalaria.com/WhyNets.aspx

relativitypro 6y ago

1. Saving human lives may not be the best metric (given that even this metric is evolving in time, and I claim unknowable) 2. The green revolution benefits were several orders more significant, and will be seen as the spark that enabled climate change. Responsibly using technology is our biggest task.

refurb 6y ago
Measuring human lives saved might not be the best metric? Of course it knowable - we knew how many people died of malaria each year. Tens of millions of lives were saved.

alpha_squared 6y ago

And what is the cost, long-term, in human lives from the downstream effects of these actions? And how much longer will it keep costing us?

x87678r 6y ago
The article didn't really say much specific, I guess its really hard to know who is affected. Californians has one of the lowest cancer rates https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/cancer_mortality/cancer.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/cancer_mortality/c...