DDT and the world

[Modeps]

While listening to the remake of "Big Yellow Taxi" I heard a line in it that says "Farmer, Farmer... put away your DDT. I dont care about spots on my apples, leave me the birds and the bees, please." Now, I never really knew much about DDT except it was banned because it supposedly caused bird populations to fall. So I decided to look into a bit more and found a very interesting article: http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm

If you're too lazy to read the whole thing, because it's super long and wordy, skim and read the bolded lines... they're brief summaries of each section. All in all it says that DDT was great, there was never any real proof to any of the claims made by the EPA in regards to harming any living thing other than what it was intended to harm, that the EPA strongarmed it out.

Any of you oldtimers here remember the controversy and know anything first hand?

 

[FoBoT]

i remember my dad using DDT on our farm when i was a kid, it killed bugs quite nicely

 

[Eli]

Bullsh!t.

The fact that DDT causes thinning of birds egg shells is well known and documented.

It almost caused the Peregrine Falcon to become extict.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

It's not about science. It's about helping nature maintain a balence!

If you want a laugh, check out the whole MTBE issue.

 

[UlricT]

Haven't read the article, but I thought that DDT was considered bad coz it stuck around in the environment... meaning that it eventually spread to humans through food.

I think the analogy they used in school was mercury concentrations in the higher level predators of the sea. Just like mercury increases the further up the food chain the fish is (Tuna, Shark etc.), so does DDT... and we ARE the top of the food chain...

Also, wasn't there something about it weaking eggshells for birds? Meaning less hatchlings in the nest?

 

[Eli]

Edumacate yourself.

 

[Modeps]

Originally posted by: Eli
Bullsh!t.

The fact that DDT causes thinning of birds egg shells is well known and documented.

It almost caused the Peregrine Falcon to become extict.

Hey, Sir Eli! check it: http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm#ref8 <- info on the Peregrine Falcon issue

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: Modeps

Originally posted by: Eli
Bullsh!t.

The fact that DDT causes thinning of birds egg shells is well known and documented.

It almost caused the Peregrine Falcon to become extict.

Hey, Sir Eli! check it: http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm#ref8 <- info on the Peregrine Falcon issue

http://www2.ucsc.edu/scpbrg/Student/ddt.htm

Because raptors and especially peregrine falcons exist at the top of food chains, regular surveys of their population status can reveal threats to environmental health before they become hazards to human beings.

 

[Amused]

The banning of DDT has cost tens of millions of lives.

http://www.junkscience.com/malaria_clock.htm

http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: Amused
The banning of DDT has cost tens of millions of lives.

http://www.junkscience.com/malaria_clock.htm

http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm

It is banned world wide?

Who enforces it in 3rd world countries?

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: Amused
The banning of DDT has cost tens of millions of lives.

http://www.junkscience.com/malaria_clock.htm

http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm

It is banned world wide?

Who enforces it in 3rd world countries?

The UN uses heavy presure to stop third world countries from using it. Plus, the main supply came from first world countries.

85 million deaths. The banning of DDT has killed more than Hitler and Stalin combined. I hope the enviro-nuts are proud.

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: Amused
The banning of DDT has cost tens of millions of lives.

http://www.junkscience.com/malaria_clock.htm

http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm

It is banned world wide?

Who enforces it in 3rd world countries?

The UN uses heavy presure to stop third world countries from using it. Plus, the main supply came from first world countries.

85 million deaths. The banning of DDT has killed more than Hitler and Stalin combined. I hope the enviro-nuts are proud.

Let's kill all the animals so they can't kill people anymore. Then we can reinstitute slavery so white people don't suffer. After that, let's ban SUVs and smoking. Then no one will die!!


More than Hitler and Stalin huh? I don't see you complaining about how many people die due to cancer caused by pollution, ozone depletion, and pesticides or the people who suffer because they can't use a beneficial drug that is demonized. What are those numbers?

And don't even try to think about the future harmful effects on humans if DDT wasn't banned. Might strain your narrow mind. Not to mention the entire insect populations. These things are not minor problems.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

I've come to take what environmentalists say with a grain of salt. Too many corelations are made to be as cause and effect. Third world countries are almost always exempted from strict treaties. The "Kyoto treaty" exempted China and India. Nice. 50% of the worlds population in a pair of very dense countries get exempted. If we banned cars entirely in the US, the amount of difference it would make world wide is negligable. Has anyone tried comparing how much pollution LA traffic caused in comparison to the forest fires they had last year? I haven't seen any studies. What about the pollution caused by volcanos? Nothing? The effects of pidgeon droppings? Nope. Global warming? Sure, considering that there's evidence of glaciation in California from the last ice age... but that was so long ago. Earth's stable now, and any changes are man made. Environmentalists wanted MTBE in gas to clean up the air. This cost everyone money. It was found to pollute the water, they wanted it out. This cost more money. Smooth.

I'm not out to pollute and cause havoc. I just want people to think, consider the BEST solution, consider all the effects of the solutions, do complete testing, and consider the effectiveness of the solutions. Would you pay $1000/year to reduce CO2 by 0.01%? I wouldn't. I'd pay $100 at Lowes and pick up a few shade trees.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: Amused
The banning of DDT has cost tens of millions of lives.

http://www.junkscience.com/malaria_clock.htm

http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm

It is banned world wide?

Who enforces it in 3rd world countries?

The UN uses heavy presure to stop third world countries from using it. Plus, the main supply came from first world countries.

85 million deaths. The banning of DDT has killed more than Hitler and Stalin combined. I hope the enviro-nuts are proud.

Let's kill all the animals so they can't kill people anymore. Then we can reinstitute slavery so white people don't suffer. After that, let's ban SUVs and smoking. Then no one will die!!


More than Hitler and Stalin huh? I don't see you complaining about how many people die due to cancer caused by pollution, ozone depletion, and pesticides or the people who suffer because they can't use a beneficial drug that is demonized. What are those numbers?

And don't even try to think about the future harmful effects on humans if DDT wasn't banned. Might strain your narrow mind. Not to mention the entire insect populations. These things are not minor problems.

Try thinking for yourself, huh?

Read the DDT FAQ I posted and address the lack of any evidence of "eggshell thinning." Also address the posit that HOME treatment rather than field treatment is the issue, here. While you're at it, also address the fact that even those who make claims of eggshell thinning have not been able to make any connection between HOME USE (what would have saved those 85 million lives you seem to care nothing about) and supposed harm to birds.

Maleria has a KNOWN cause and is easily preventable with the control of mosquitos. The only way to effectively do that is with the use of DDT.

There is no denying the fact that 85 million people have needlessly suffered and died due to the banning of DDT, and the eco-imperialism imposed by the UN and other agencies.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: Eli
Bullsh!t.

The fact that DDT causes thinning of birds egg shells is well known and documented.

It almost caused the Peregrine Falcon to become extict.

Exactly.
Try reading "Silent Spring" by Rachael Carson < I think that's her name.
ooops say in the EPA website it was banned in 1972

 

[FoBoT]

dilution is the solution

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: AlienCraft

Originally posted by: Eli
Bullsh!t.

The fact that DDT causes thinning of birds egg shells is well known and documented.

It almost caused the Peregrine Falcon to become extict.

Exactly.
Try reading "Silent Spring" by Rachael Carson < I think that's her name.
The EPA wasn't around then, iirc. I believe it was the Food and Drug Administration that made the first move.

Her book was a fraud and completely misrepresented the science and studies.

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
I've come to take what environmentalists say with a grain of salt. Too many corelations are made to be as cause and effect. Third world countries are almost always exempted from strict treaties. The "Kyoto treaty" exempted China and India. Nice. 50% of the worlds population in a pair of very dense countries get exempted. If we banned cars entirely in the US, the amount of difference it would make world wide is negligable. Has anyone tried comparing how much pollution LA traffic caused in comparison to the forest fires they had last year? I haven't seen any studies. What about the pollution caused by volcanos? Nothing? The effects of pidgeon droppings? Nope. Global warming? Sure, considering that there's evidence of glaciation in California from the last ice age... but that was so long ago. Earth's stable now, and any changes are man made. Environmentalists wanted MTBE in gas to clean up the air. This cost everyone money. It was found to pollute the water, they wanted it out. This cost more money. Smooth.

I'm not out to pollute and cause havoc. I just want people to think, consider the BEST solution, consider all the effects of the solutions, do complete testing, and consider the effectiveness of the solutions. Would you pay $1000/year to reduce CO2 by 0.01%? I wouldn't. I'd pay $100 at Lowes and pick up a few shade trees.

You don't really know what you are talking about. Yes, Kyoto exempted India and China. They also don't all drive cars in India and China. I don't know the #, but the USA produces the most pollution per person in the developed world. This is comparing to the whole of Western Europe, etc. All nations don't produce the same amount of pollution per capita.

You also assume too much. It is well known that forest fires create pollution. There are certainly studies. We watched a video in my Parks &amp; Protected Areas class. There was a controlled burn experiment done in Alaska, and alot of carbon was released. And you know what? Today's forest fires are not natural. They are man made. We wouldn't have these massive fires if natural fire was allowed throughout this century, but the logging industry lobbyists would not allow natural thinning by small fires.

Volcanoes.. Do you want the government to regulate volcanoes?

Do you really beliebe that global warming is natural, just because the earth goes through its cycle? The cycle exist for astronomical reasons, and the pattern is known with great detail from studies of carbon dioxide dissolution in polar ice and modeling of the earth's orbit. Global Warming is not natural. If the temperature permanently rose 10 degrees in one day, would you say "Oh well it's just spring"?? I assume you would since you seem to believe that change over any period of time is the same.

I don't know where you are getting numbers like reducing C02 by .01%. Maybe you should get some real numbers, and real numbers over the next 100 years, then you can talk about whether an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure or not.

 

[Kenazo]

they put a couple peregrine falcon's on the roof of my school back in the day. (probably 88 or 89).

Those were the days, we still had "Indian day" at school then... everyone made outfits out of brown paper bag (yeah, it was leather), we put feathers on and pretended to be native americans for a day. That would so not go over anymore.

 

[AlienCraft]

From the San Diego Times.... There is not a World Wide Ban in effect, Simply a lot of controls....
Wildlife Fund wants world DDT ban
You thought that DDT was a thing of the past? Think again.
by George Mwangi, Associated Press Writer

ufficient scientific evidence exists of DDT's danger to humans and animals to justify a global ban on the insecticide, according to a recent World Wildlife Fund report. The report was released to coincide with a week-long gathering in Nairobi of delegates from more than 100 nations to negotiate a treaty banning 12 toxic substances, including DDT.

"The report illustrates the persistence and pervasiveness of chemicals such as DDT which can be sprayed in a village in Africa and end up in the fat of polar bears in the Arctic,'' the Washington, D.C.-based organization said.

The report summarizes current research on DDT and its most popular alternative, synthetic pyrethroids. The treaty would ban the so-called "dirty dozen" toxic chemicals, called persistent organic pollutants, which include DDT, dioxin and PCBs. The highly toxic chemicals break down extremely slowly.

"DDT is such a potent chemical that as long as it is used anywhere in the world, nobody is safe,'' Clifton Curtis, director of WWF's Global Toxic Initiative, told reporters at the headquarters of the U.N. Environment Program outside Nairobi.

Even though DDT is banned in 34 countries and severely restricted in 34 others, it is still endorsed by World Health Organization for use in the control of malaria-carrying mosquitoes.

"There is no longer a question about whether to DDT should be banned, only how soon it can happen while still ensuring developing countries access to safe, affordable alternative malaria control'' Curtis said.

The report said although WHO recommends the use of DDT indoors, as much as 82 percent of DDT applied indoors escapes outdoors, where it has the potential to damage human health and the environment.

Curtis said recent WWF findings show that malaria-bearing mosquitoes have developed resistance to DDT.

Environmentalists and the chemical industry are at odds over whether to place a total ban on the 12 chemicals. The conference is the second of five scheduled by the United Nations. The first negotiating session in Montreal in 1998 was primarily organizational.

 

[Modeps]

Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis

I don't know where you are getting numbers like reducing C02 by .01%. Maybe you should get some real numbers, and real numbers over the next 100 years, then you can talk about whether an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure or not.

Hey wink I gotta ask, where are the numbers from the past 100 years of studies that say all this is our fault?

 

[Modeps]

Originally posted by: AlienCraft
The report said although WHO recommends the use of DDT indoors, as much as 82 percent of DDT applied indoors escapes outdoors, where it has the potential to damage human health and the environment.

I just dropped a deuce outside, that has the potential to damage human health and the environment too.

 

[AlienCraft]

No thanks, I'll pass. You can have mine....
From epa.gov....
DDT
What is DDT?
Prior to 1972 when its use was banned, DDT was a commonly used pesticide. Although it is no longer used or produced in the United States, we continue to find DDT in our environment. Other parts of the world continue to use DDT in agricultural practices and in disease-control programs. Therefore, atmospheric deposition is the current source of new DDT contamination in our Great Lakes. DDT, and its break-down products DDE and DDD, are persistent, bioacculumative, and toxic (PBT) pollutants target by EPA.

Why Are We Concerned About DDT?
Even though DDT has been banned since 1972, it can take more than 15 years to break down in our environment. Fish consumption advisories are in effect for DDT in many waterways including the Great Lakes ecosystem.

What harmful effects can DDT have on us?
Probable human carcinogen
Damages the liver
Temporarily damages the nervous system
Reduces reproductive success
Can cause liver cancer
Damages reproductive system
How are we exposed to DDT?
By eating contaminated fish and shellfish
Infants may be exposed through breast milk
By eating imported food directly exposed to DDT
By eating crops grown in contaminated soil
Where can DDT be found?
Potential Sources to our Environment:

DDT in soil can be absorbed by some growing plants and by the animals or people who eat those plants
DDT in water is absorbed by fish and shellfish in those waterways
Atmospheric deposition
Soil and sediment runoff
Improper use and disposal

 

[ShotgunSteven]

DDT is still manufactured in the U.S., and used in places like Mexico.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: AlienCraft

Originally posted by: Eli
Bullsh!t.

The fact that DDT causes thinning of birds egg shells is well known and documented.

It almost caused the Peregrine Falcon to become extict.

Exactly.
Try reading "Silent Spring" by Rachael Carson < I think that's her name.
The EPA wasn't around then, iirc. I believe it was the Food and Drug Administration that made the first move.

Her book was a fraud and completely misrepresented the science and studies.

Could you please back up your assertion with some facts / or links? Or is this simply anti -environmental protection rhetoric?