Posted on 12/14/2005 6:46:10 AM PST by RWR8189
They've been at it again. In Montreal, a bunch of politicians and activists just finished another round of negotiations among themselves about just how much of our freedom to take away in pursuit of a greener planet. That's "green," as in "envious" -- of the people who were able to invent, build industries and develop economies in generations past, before the environmentalists convinced world "leaders" that products that improve human life, and the factories that make those products, must be limited in the name of the Earth. Meanwhile, in Ntinda, Uganda, that country's vice president was calling on world leaders to help save human lives -- by supporting Uganda's use of a chemical the fear of which galvanized the environmental movement decades ago. On the surface, these are two different environmental stories: one about chemicals that supposedly might raise temperatures, and one about a chemical that can damage eggshells. But the underlying issue is the same: Should the law promote human life, or should it sacrifice human beings and their quality of life on the altar of Gaia? Two to three million people die of malaria every year, Uganda's health minister has said, because the U.S. government is afraid of a chemical called DDT. The United States does spend your tax dollars trying to fight malaria in Africa, but it won't fund DDT. The money goes for things like mosquito netting over beds (even though not everyone in Africa even has a bed). The office that dispenses those funds, the Agency for International Development, acknowledges DDT is safe, but it will not spend a penny on it. Why? Fifty years ago, Americans sprayed tons of DDT everywhere. Farmers used it to repel bugs, and health officials to fight mosquitoes that carry malaria. Nobody worried much about chemicals then. People really did just sit there and eat in clouds of DDT. When the trucks came to spray, people often acted as if the ice cream truck had come. They were so happy to have mosquitoes repelled. Huge amounts of DDT were sprayed on food and people, who just breathed it in. Did they all get cancer and die? Nope. Amazingly, there's no evidence that all this spraying hurt people. It killed mosquitoes. (DDT also kills bedbugs, which are now making a comeback.) It did cause some harm, however. It threatened bird populations by thinning eggshells. In 1962, the book "Silent Spring" by Rachel Carson made the damage famous and helped create our fear of chemicals. The book raised some serious questions about the use of DDT, but the legitimate nature of those questions was lost in the media feeding frenzy that followed. DDT was a "Killer Chemical," and the press was off on another fear campaign. DDT was banned. But fear campaigns kill people, too. DDT is a great pesticide. The amount was the reason for the DDT problems. We sprayed far more than is needed to prevent the spread of malaria. It's sprayed on walls, and one spraying will keep mosquitoes at bay for half a year. It's a very efficient malaria fighter. But today, DDT is rarely used. America's demonization of it caused others to shun it. And while the U.S. government spends tax money fighting malaria in Africa, it refuses to put that money into DDT. It might save lives, but it might offend environmentalist zealots and create political fallout. DDT was banned in America after we started celebrating Earth Day. Environmentalists made a lot of claims then -- I have an amusing clip of an environmentalist exclaiming, "You are breathing probably the last of the oxygen!" Soon after that the environmentalists mounted their campaign against DDT. The result? A huge resurgence of malaria, more than 50 million dead, mostly children.
"If it's a chemical, it must be bad," said scientist Amir Attaran. "If it's DDT, it must be awful. And that's fine if you're a rich, white environmentalist. It's not so fine if you're a poor black kid who is about to lose his life from malaria."
Attaran is leading a campaign of hundreds of scientists urging the use of DDT to combat malaria. It's needed especially in Africa, he says, because malaria kills thousands there every day. "If I were to characterize what USAID does on malaria," he said, "I'd call it medical malpractice, I would call it murderous."
©2005 JFS Productions, Inc. Distributed by Creators Syndicate
bump
There have been MANY studies trying to establish a link between DDT and eggshell thinning and the results were overwhelming: many things can cause eggshell thinning but DDT is not one of them.
>>Big fan of John Stossel.<<
He's a lone voice of reason at ABC.
I like Stossel. How did he ever get a job in the MSM?
I'm a big fan as well. I read awhile back that he gets a lot of flack from the lefties at dinner parties and so on. He's gotta be a tough guy. I always liked the pieces he'd do for 20/20 called "Gimme a Break."
Sowell blames the lack of affordable housing on the environmental movement. It's so obvious you can't see it!
Have the scientists set up a meeting with Bono. No joke. If they can convince him of the facts here, it would go a long way to getting this done. I know the guy has his quirks, but he is quite involved in African aid, and is also respected in liberal circles. Putting partisanship aside for the sake of these children, I would do whatever it took to get in his appointment book.
Some intersting facts about the 'deadle' DDT.
Even this alleged harm is based on fraudulent "science". It has since been proven to be absolutely false.
DDT: A Case Study in Scientific Fraud
Effects of DDT on EggshellsThe alleged thinning of eggshells by DDT in the diet was effective propaganda; however, actual feeding experiments proved that there was very little, if any, correlation between DDT levels and shell thickness. Thin shells may result when birds are exposed to fear, restraint, mercury, lead, parathion, or other agents, or when deprived of adequate calcium, phosphorus, Vitamin D, light, calories, or water. While quail fed a diet containing 2 percent calcium produced thick shells, a calcium content of only 1 percent resulted in shells 9 percent thinner than normal. In the presence of lead, shells were 14 percent thinner, and with mercury, 8 percent thinner.
Bitman and coworkers demonstrated eggshell thinning with DDT by reducing calcium levels to 0.56 percent from the normal 2.5 percent. After this work was exposed as anti-DDT propaganda, Bitman continued his work for another year. Instead of the calcium-deficient diets, however, he fed the quail 2.7 percent calcium in their food. The shells they produced were not thinned at all by the DDT. Unfortunately, the editor of Science refused to publish the results of that later research. Editor Philip Abelson had already told Dr. Thomas Jukes of the University of California in Berkeley that Science would never publish anything that was not antagonistic toward DDT (T. Jukes, personal communication). Bitman therefore had to publish the results of his legitimate feeding experiments in an obscure specialty journal, and many readers of continued to believe that DDT could cause birds to lay thin-shelled eggs.
(Emphasis Added)
Solution: Give DDT a new name.
If all the malaria hubub was going on today, myriad companies would be being sued out of business for having had the audacity to use the most amazing pesticide the world has ever known. I'm surprised they're not back-suing the companies that used it then.
OTOH, had we been using it all these years the mosquitos would probably be immune now.
Ok fine. But why does America's ban on DDT mean it can't be used in Africa? Is it only available from the USA? Not a rhetorical question; I seek enlightenment.
Stossel may be a liberal, but like Bernie Goldberg, he is not afraid to tell Truth To Power. I can respect a liberal like that.
In fact, a respectable liberal is so conservative these days that it hardly seems to fit. Think "Give'em Hell" Zell Miller.
They all hate him, but he keeps his job because of one thing: RATINGS.
Rachel Carson is a genocidal criminal.
This is comment sounds familiar :D
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.