3 ms·

The reason Americans are currently able to cope with a DDT ban is mostly because the ban only went into effect after malaria had been effectively eradicated. B

• nate_meurer 15y ago
  You're using some pretty vague phrasing here. People still get "sick as hell" from West Nile, but I don't often hear that used as an excuse to start fogging the streets again. DDT was only one part of the U.S.'s efforts against malaria, and it is the other mitigations that have provided lasting relief; notice that DDT has now been restricted in the U.S. for over forty years, and malaria continues to be a non-issue in this country. The pyrethroids that we now use, which are both more effective as knock-down agents and less persistent in the the environment, were first developed in the 60s. If we had restricted DDT use in open air earlier, as we should have, smart money says that development of alternatives would have accelerated. The TVA would have continued with the main parts of the malaria program -- water management, urban planning, maybe even in-home spraying (which is where DDT is most effective anyway). The U.S would still be here, and you'd still not be getting sick as hell from malaria.
  • burgerbrain 15y ago
    By today, 2011, it is likely that malaria would still be largely eradicated. But had DDT been prematurely banned there undoubtedly would have been an uptick in malaria outbreaks. I suggest you spend some time researching the extent of a roll DDT actually played. All of this is silly anyway. Eagles have made a comeback, so who cares what happened in the past? Seems to me everything worked out pretty well.