I knew someone with O-Positive blood that never got bitten. Perhaps it's the taste...
"The second amendment isn't about duck hunting anymore than the first amendment is about playing Scrabble." --Henry Bowman
Posted on 08/14/2002 10:51:15 PM PDT by kattracks
Usually, it is difficult to pin blame on a single source for the spread of a disease. No one is to blame for the worldwide growth of cancer. Many different people and organizations share the blame for the current AIDS situation.
But in the case of West Nile Virus, there is a single source that should be blamed. She's a heroine to leftists around the world, but it' s her fault that the dangerous virus is slowly reaching across the United States, leaving death in its wake.
The person who should be blamed is Rachel Carson.
In 1962, Carson's book "Silent Spring" appeared on the world scene. A hysterical attack on the pesticide DDT, the book caused a sensation in the United States, hitting the New York Times best-seller list. Carson claimed that DDT constituted a major risk to human health, as well as severely damaging the reproductive processes of certain animals. In 1970, largely in response to her fear mongering, the Environmental Protection Agency was formed. Almost immediately, the EPA restricted the production of DDT and banned its use on American soil.
The impact of the U.S. slowdown in DDT production reached far beyond our borders. People in the Third World felt it most. Before the U.S. crackdown on DDT, the "miracle pesticide" had been a cheap and effective way of killing mosquitoes in underdeveloped countries. Since mosquitoes transmit diseases like malaria and West Nile Virus, DDT use helped impede the outbreak of malaria, thereby reducing the death rate.
The American Council on Science and Health estimates that DDT saved 100 million lives in the two decades before it was banned in the United States. The World Health Organization says that 30 million to 60 million people have died of malaria since the 1970s. Most of those deaths would have been prevented if DDT had been available.
Until now, Third World deaths due to lack of DDT didn't affect us here at home. We could ban DDT and be fine -- our geography and affluence allowed us to easily use different pesticides. But with the outbreak of West Nile Virus on our shores, Rachel Carson's deadly work is finally beginning to hit home.
West Nile Virus is transmitted to humans from birds infected with the disease by mosquitoes. Mosquitoes bite the birds, become carriers of the virus and then bite humans and other birds, which are infected with the virus. If, as seems most likely, the spread of the virus is not a terrorist incident, then the virus was caused by natural processes -- the migration of birds infected with the disease.
And so, Rachel Carson's fight against DDT has come home to roost. If the United States had continued production of DDT on a global scale, West Nile Virus could have been stopped in the Third World, at least delaying its trek across the Atlantic.
The goal of the environmentalists was to decrease pesticide use in the United States. Now, Louisiana is calling for the Air Force to spray pesticides across the state. This will surely become common practice if West Nile Virus spreads. What now, environmentalists?
West Nile Virus is changing the American way of life. The Centers for Disease Control recommends that we stay indoors during dawn, dusk and early evening, and never leave the house without being covered in DEET, a bug repellent. And environmentalists are working against the use of DEET.
Perhaps the best label for Rachel Carson and her cohorts is one of unintentional bioterrorist. A bioterrorist is defined as one who uses biological weapons, such as diseases, to purposely murder civilians. Carson surely did not want people to die for lack of DDT, but that is the unalterable result. DDT could have saved millions of lives. Because of Carson, it did not. Neglect is tantamount to murder when human life is at stake.
Americans listened to the wild accusations of Rachel Carson. They took her advice at face value. And they will pay the price for "Silent Spring's" hysteria all through this long, hot summer.
Contact Ben Shapiro | Read his biography
©2002 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
Let's give William Ruckelshaus his due, as well. See the malaria/DDT links on my profile page.
Tomorrow I'll post Frank Notestein's 1944 demographics paper for the Milbank Memorial Fund. It's quite simple to depopulate an area: increase the death rate, decrease the birth rate, outmigrate people, or any combination thereof. It's truly amazing the outrageous propaganda that people are willing to believe [and hello! to lurking DUers]. I'll ping you both when I post it.
My premise is a simple one. My grand-daughter brought home lice from her day-care facility, which resulted in an intensive internet search of current treatments. Permethrin, the active ingredient in the most popular lice products, has been indicated in causing leukemia, lymphoma and other life-threatening diseases.
So while there appears to be a direct link between the prohibition of DDT and mosquito spread-diseases, how can we determine how many lives were spared because the general population was not exposed to a chemical that could lead to other types of life-threatening diseases?
There's an excellent essay linked on my profile page to www.fightingmalaria.org.
When DDT gets in the rivers, bugs eat it. Up the chain it goes until some human goes fishing. If birds, cows, pigs, snakes, you name it, were getting sick from DDT, it doesn't take a genious to figure out that it's also a danger to humans.
Ok, now that being said, there is some limited benifit in its use. In Vietnam, 1967, peumonic plague hit the local village. After seven villagers died from it we sprayed our company area with DDT every day. You could taste it in the food, smell it in the air. You could feel it in your hair, in your cloths all the time. It was ever-present for nearly three weeks, but that was the end of the plague. I'd take my chances with DDT any day rather than take a chance with plague. But for most things I'd rather settle for a can of OFF.
I knew someone with O-Positive blood that never got bitten. Perhaps it's the taste...
"The second amendment isn't about duck hunting anymore than the first amendment is about playing Scrabble." --Henry Bowman
I meant to say "AB-Negative," not O-Pos. Sorry!
"The second amendment isn't about duck hunting anymore than the first amendment is about playing Scrabble." --Henry Bowman
Just about any chemical is safe if used properly.
My mind is off on a different tangent today. I'll just float this one quickly and be off and if anybody wants to expand on it feel free- the notion came into my mind as I read the article.
Carrier pigeons are extinct I believe, but are there other birds that are pretty much guaranteed to migrate to a narrowly specific geographic area? What I'm getting at is- would it be in any way possible to develop some dangerous bio agent or virus- Ebola for example- and then purposefully infect a bird (or several), tag that bird with some sort of tracking device and then have an "agent" pick it up when it reached Europe from Africa or N America from S America? What about attaching a small phial of the virus to the bird's leg and tagging it the same way? Is there any species of bird or animal such kooky idea would work with?
If it did work, it would be a brilliant way to bypass security at airports, ports and national borders. What you would need is a Muslim ornithologist in the receiving country and a biotech guy to forward it to once it was secured from the avian transporter.
Hey, I'll put it in a story if nothing else...
copyright Prodigal Son 2002 --- just kidding??? Maybe/Maybe not.
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.