DDT or Malaria -- Which is Worse?

Assassin bug wonders: "Although the topic of malaria has been discussed on Slashdot, DDT use has not. After having banned DDT (C14H9Cl5)" in 2004, Tanzania has reversed their ban on DDT use. What is the Slashdot community's opinion regarding the use of DDT for mosquito control versus genetically modified mosquitoes?" "Key facts to consider:

• Insects have developed resistance, for every tactic that has been used against them (including biological control, crop rotation, and various chemicals)
• Although the direct effects of DDT on humans might be benign, the effects on wildlife and the environment are well documented
• In some countries, such as India, popluations of DDT-resistant mosquitoes exist
• The fitness (i.e., reproductive success in the wild) of mutant mosquitoes is not well understood."

Comments

It's true

[Henry V .009]

The DDT necessary to save thousands of lives in the world's malarial hellholes is miniscule compared to that required for the crops of even a medium farm.

And DDT-hate on the part of international aid organizations (international aid is the entire health budget for some impoverished African countries) has led to countries refraining from using DDT.

Not using DDT kills poor Africans.

DDT is the cheapest, most effective way of protecting against the world's deadliest disease. Anti-malarial netting is somewhat effective, but simply does not compare to DDT.