Posted on 09/01/2006 5:44:24 AM PDT by ShadowDancer
That is absolutely tragic. Prayers up.
Democrats say:
"If it saves just one life ..."
"Do it for the children ..."
Democrats say that stuff, but they don't mean it. When I say "Bring back DDT", I mean it.
I had that when I was twelve and had to spend a week in the hospital. Prayers for the little dude.
There are plenty of conservatives that are against it, too. I'm with you. And now that I read this, my pool is getting covered NOW.
Special prayer ping!!!!!
It makes you wonder how many cases of this have occured in New England. A lot of these cases are sub clinical.
fyi
Very sad. I had EEE myself 15 years ago at age 46. I was in the hospital for two weeks, then on bed rest for almost two more weeks at home. It took me over a year to completely recover and to relearn some mathematics that disappeared.
It's a lot more common than people think. Most adults have mild cases with nothing more than a headache and some lethargy, but it can kill.
Sad ping.
Lack of DDT has killed MILLIONS of people every year. But then I think that was the design of the UN people fearing over population of the world.
The insecticide used is ineffective, and DDT use would have prevented this death?
Except for fevers that could be most Democrats any day of the week!
Rachael Carson strikes again!
We've had two deaths from EEE in the Mobile region this year, both were elderly.
"Just to be sure before we go bonkers for the wrong reason on this particular case,,,are we saying that, scientifically, that whatever they used instead of DDT in this case was the reason this boy got sick?"
I'm saying that DDT is a very effective tool to control mosquitoes and the diseases they carry. IMO, DDT was banned based upon false data. IF DDT were still in use its my opinion that the number of deaths caused by these diseases could be drastically reduced.
The insecticides presently in use throughout the world are not effective.
Right, but that doesn't mean it has anything to do with this case. I'll bet there are tools that will kill every single insect, not to mention all the other living things. Which sounds like an absurd comment, but it is made to illustrate a point. There is always a balance to be struck.
DDT was banned based upon false data.
Such as?
IF DDT were still in use its my opinion that the number of deaths caused by these diseases could be drastically reduced.
Opinions are nice, and we all have them, but scientific proof is needed. Just like the data you claim was false.
The insecticides presently in use throughout the world are not effective.
I'd like more than your opinion on that before I agree. Data would be nice.
I agree that millions of people died needlessly because of political BS and that the usage should have been changed after an equally effective alternative was found.
DDT is not the magic bullet all of us would like. It is a chemical that was developed a long time ago and in all likelihood, there are more effective things available today, but I don't claim to know if that is actually true.
I know this, every human live is more important than any bird, but if the ecology gets screwed up enough, and the food chain is interfered with sufficiently, in the long run, even worse consequences could be faced.
25 yrs ago, birds that have made a comeback and are once again common, were absent. Mankind would be well served to watch the signals nature gives off.
But my main point is that, this boy is tragically dead, and people want to blame someone, so if you are on this site, you blame the environuts, on other sites, they blame Bush for everything.
Let's just stay thoughtful, that's my point.
What they really mean is "if it saves just one government job"
So, DDT is better than the alternatives they are using now?
Any data on that?
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.