Slashdot Mirror
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."
Or, more on topic, how the WHO screwed over Borneo by recklessly spraying DDT without first examining its effects on the local population. They ended up very likely causing more deaths than the malaria outbreak originally would have.
There were no scientific studies done,
That's a complete lie.
While some of the claims in Silent Spring are wrong (as are plastered violently over the Web), there are known effects on wildlife.
Read an account from 1959 regarding "Operation Cat-drop". Unless you think all the cats on a portion of the island just coincidentally up and died after the DDT spraying.
But there are studies out there. Just search. The bird stuff was wrong, but DDT is highly toxic to fish and other predators, for instance. Just do a search on Google scholar for "fish toxic DDT" and you'll get a nice large list of articles to read.
The human DDT danger is still debated, mind you. I can point to articles as recent as last year for that.