Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: secretagent
For another view, this sample:

The eradication program ended not because of any environmental concerns, but because it did not work. The mosquitoes had grown resistant to insecticides, and the microorganisms that cause malaria had become resistant to the drugs used against them. In many areas the numbers of cases of malaria greatly exceeded what it was before the effort was started. If events had been different, if DDT had not been used heavily in agriculture and there was no shortage of funds the outcome might have been different. Malaria might have joined smallpox as a disease that had been eliminated from the face of the earth. Unfortunately, such was not the case. As early as 1967 it was clear that the effort had failed, and in 1972 the official policy shifted from eradication to control of malaria.

http://info-pollution.com/ddtban.htm

22 posted on 01/08/2005 11:56:45 AM PST by secretagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: secretagent
I can't find a mechanism whereby mosquitoes became resistant to DDT to the extent that the authors you quote proclaimed (Chapin & Wasserstrom); beyond that I can't find support for their statements that spraying actually increased incidence of infection.

The easily found evidence for worldwide outbreaks post-spraying are widely available and the newer methods of "control" are ineffective wherever they are used.

Don't think I am speaking with the voice of compassion here but only to ask if you have more data you might like to share or are you just Googling?

25 posted on 01/08/2005 12:47:18 PM PST by Old Professer (When the fear of dying no longer obtains no act is unimaginable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson