DDT

Harry Pollard

[Reprinted from a Land-Theory online discussion, 26 April 2001]

You'll recall my thesis about DDT being the safest, the most effective, and importantly -- the cheapest pesticide we've ever produced. You might even recall my paper on it.

In its many years of use, there was apparently not one human fatality. (Among others, see the WHO report on spraying houses in India and the effect on the sprayers).

The reductions in malaria were astounding. I recall Sri Lanka, where the number of cases of malaria fell below 20. (Now several hundred thousand.)

And it didn't kill off all the birds -- and specifically the raptors -- higher in the food chain, you know. (See the Annual Bird Counts of the Audubon Society, and the Hawk Mountain Sanctuary Raptor Counts.)

Actually, the number of robins increased by 12 times from before to after DDT. (Take no notice of Rachel Carson's scare.)

Some things have come to light. Back in 1973, when I dumped my DDT paper on an uncaring world, I said that Montrose Chemical had a habit of pouring excess DDT into the sewers, which may have been responsible for the egg-thinning on Anacapa Island. However, I didn't know how much -- nor did anyone else.

Well, they have discovered it and are engaged in trying to cover up the estimated 110 tons they have found. I noted the drift of the chemical and they are north toward the island.

So, again, maybe this abundance of pesticide was responsible for the pelican problem.

However, the mindless attacks on the pesticide withdrew it from use. Take a look at the bit below - or find the full article at the New York Times web site.

Try to imagine the number of deaths that have been the consequence of ending the use of DDT - 30,000,000? 60,000,000? 90,000,000? The author's one million a year may be low. I've seen estimates as high as 3,000,000 a year (one quarter of them children).

But, still we saved the pelicans -- that were in no danger at all -- except perhaps at Anacapa.

Now the mindless, propagandized by the left, financed by the privileged Fat Cats, are trying to erect barriers between people and between peoples -- in the name of anti-Globalization.

If they succeed, I wonder what the consequences will be a decade, or two decades, or three decades, along the road?

***

Below, the beginning of a NYT article. (Go to the NYT site -- look for "Resurgence of a Killer".)

Two a minute. One million a year. That many people die from malaria, a mosquito-borne disease that has dramatically increased in the last twenty years. Malaria is devastating and debilitating. Forty percent of the world's people live with the risk of contracting it. Estimated cases range from 300 to 500 million. Ninety percent of the deaths occur in Africa south of the Sahara, where one in five young children who die, die from malaria.

In the first half of the 20th century, malaria was even more widespread, extending into Europe and the United States. The Global Malaria Eradication Campaign began after World War II, making widespread use of DDT to kill or repel the mosquitoes that carry the malaria parasite, and new drugs to treat the disease. The results were extraordinary. Malaria was eradicated in the US in the 1950s. It was gone from all developed countries as well as large areas of tropical Asia and Latin America by the mid-1960s. Only in Africa, where eradication efforts were limited, did the disease maintain its sway.