Follow Me On Twitter!

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Time To Bring Back DDT

My family and I traveled over the weekend. We went to a friend's wedding in Alabama. We stayed at a hotel chain while down there.

Just before leaving I found a bedbug in my daughter's suitcase. The fall--out was immediate.

First, I had a physical reaction. Having a coworker that had come into contact with bedbugs a couple of years ago,I had done a lot of research. There is only one thing you need to know: once you get bedbugs in your house, it can be nearly impossible to get rid of them. When I found the bedbug I started to black-out. I nearly hyperventilated.

My wife calmed me down, but then as she started reading on the internet about bedbugs, her physical reaction became much the same as mine initially.

Second, we had an emotional reaction. All 3 of us (wife, daughter and myself) have gone through a range of emotions since this discovery. Anger, fear, sadness, hopelessness, resolve, and everything in between. The emotional reaction continues even now.

Third, we had a time reaction. The amount of time we have already spent trying to prevent these things from coming into the house is mind-boggling. It started the minute we came home. We took nothing in except the clothing on our backs, which we then stripped out of and threw into the washer.

All day yesterday I spent going through things. I took all of our clothing to the laundromat and washed them in hot water, and dried them on high-heat. I threw away the luggage. I put things that could go into the dryer into it on high-heat. Everything that could get wet was scalded with hot water. Everything else is still in garbage bags outside.

Fourth, money reaction. I can't tell you how much this episode has already cost me, but it continues to go up all the time.

Do some research on bedbugs, they are nasty little critters. It is like a horror movie. And the fact that they are so hard to eradicate makes them worse.

Of course, there is an answer: DDT. Of course the environwhackos are staunchly opposed to DDT because it makes eagle eggs thin. Never mind that DDT virtually rid the world of bedbugs, but also of malaria. Now that it is illegal, both malaria and bedbugs are on the rise.

Yet environmentalists are still opposed to DDT. And they wonder why so many of us view the environmentalists movement as anti-human.

BRING BACK DDT NOW!!!!

P.S. For your viewing displeasure:

14 comments:

nanc said...

I CAN'T WATCH IT!

Ed Darrell said...

Environmentalists never abandoned DDT. WHO used it continuously from 1946 to today, when appropriate.

But we cannot increase poison doses and eliminate malaria, especially when the mosquitoes have developed resistance to DDT -- or outright immunity.

It's time you stopped lashing out at environmentalists, got off your gluteals and join us in fighting malaria. While you're carping about DDT being unfairly impugned, inaccurately, two kids die every minute from malaria.

Here are the facts: DDT destroys ecosystems. When used to fight malaria, if used for more than a few weeks, it breeds resistance in the mosquitoes, and it kills off all the mosquitoes' natural predators -- and so when humans are not completely cured in the brief interlude, malaria comes roaring back.

Malaria death rates today are half what they were at the height of DDT use. DDT is no panacea.

Quit playing Nero, fiddling while mosquitoes kill kids. Help us save some kids, will you?

LoneWolfArcher said...

You have to love when liberals make assumptions for which they have no idea what they are talking about.

Mr. Darrell, you have no idea what kind of charitable giving I do. Quit being a shill for the environmental movement and start thinking for yourself.

It also amazes me that you types will push forward the idea that insects, a lower life form, can develop resistance to DDT, but higher life forms, like eagles, cannot.

Of course, non-biased research into the effects of DDT on mosquitoes has concluded something quite different from your lies above.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/79127.php

That is one such study. So, Mr. Darrell, you continue to have the wool pulled over your eyes. I, in the meantime, will continue to put human-life above that of animals.

That Other Mike said...

"It also amazes me that you types will push forward the idea that insects, a lower life form, can develop resistance to DDT, but higher life forms, like eagles, cannot. "

By that logic, the fact that a flea can jump 200 times its own body length means that a donkey should be able to jump about 800-odd feet.

A donkey is not a flea; a mosquito is not an eagle. Your reasoning is flawed beyond repair.

LoneWolfArcher said...

The 0ther Mike, maybe if you were making an apples-to-apples comparison to what I said then you'd have a point. The fact is that based on your flawed logic (I am assuming you believe in evolution) a donkey could evolve into a creature that could jump like a flea. After all, they evolved from the same single cell at some point right?

But still my position stands. Environmentalists will trumpet that the evolutionary process is so pervasive that mosquitoes can develop resistance to a poison like DDT (though the repellent nature of DDT still exists), but eagles will go extinct from it. So eagles are outside of the evolutionary process?

Ed Darrell said...

Mr. Darrell, you have no idea what kind of charitable giving I do. Quit being a shill for the environmental movement and start thinking for yourself.

You're right. All I know is what you wrote, which was wrong, except that part which was false. Should I assume it was all parody, and that you contribute money contrary to what you write here?

That would be good news. Now confess: How much have you contributed to non-DDT solutions?

Heck, I'll wager you haven't contributed to DDT, either. You're happy to bash environmentalists and let African kids die by the minute.

It's time to stop carping and step up to the plate, and do something to fight malaria.

It also amazes me that you types will push forward the idea that insects, a lower life form, can develop resistance to DDT, but higher life forms, like eagles, cannot.

People completely ignorant of what they're looking at are often amused by the facts. They also deny the facts.

Generally, evolution occurs faster in those species that breed quickly, like mosquitoes. It occurs much more slowly in larger creatures that take longer to breed. In an eagle's generation of seven to ten years, we can have 350 to a thousand generations of mosquitoes.

Don't take my word for it. Check out Jonathan Weiner's Pulitzer-winning book, The Beak of the Finch, a story of evolution in our time. Do an index search for DDT.

I don't expect you to "believe" anything. Just pay attention to the evidence. Faith is not necessary and skepticism is a virtue. The science shows mosquitoes evolved resistance and immunity to DDT. It poisons them differently than the way it wipes out reproductive capabilities of birds, reptiles, amphibians and mammals. It's the difference between an acute toxin and an overdose of hormones.

Of course, non-biased research into the effects of DDT on mosquitoes has concluded something quite different from your lies above.

But somehow all that research got lost on the way to the printer, so you can't cite it.

Your claims sounds fishy to me.

[continued]

Ed Darrell said...

[continued from previous post]


And in the meantime, you cited this research, but apparently not after reading it:

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/79127.php

Had you read it, you might have noted that it cites rapid evolution of resistance by mosquitoes, which you now try to deny. It also calls for using DDT as Rachel Carson urged in 1962, in an integrated pest management plan that limits DDT use dramatically, to avoid the toxicity and endocrine disruption problems. Read it for yourself:
"A toxic chemical like dieldrin kills almost all of the mosquitoes that land on it, but also increases the chance for rapid build up of resistance," said Dr. Donald Roberts, study author and Professor of Tropical Disease at the US Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. "Since toxicity is dieldrin's only chemical action, resistance completely eliminates its usefulness. Unlike dieldrin, DDT's spatial repellency acts like a chemical screen, keeping 59% of the mosquitoes out of the hut at the outset. By comparison, alphacypermethrin and dieldrin did not deter the study mosquitoes from entering huts."

According to the study results, DDT is the only World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended chemical that provides all three levels of protection if the disease-carrying mosquito is not resistant. Even where resistance to its toxic action exists, DDT still provides protection through its repellent and irritant actions. These findings have implications for controlling malaria, the biggest killer of African children. Most malaria infections are acquired when Anopheles mosquitoes enter homes at night and bite people. Anopheles mosquitoes are known to exhibit stronger behavioral responses to DDT and other chemicals than Aedes aegypti, so the transmission protection DDT provides against malaria is likely to be greater than 73%.

"The findings of this study support WHO's recommendation to use DDT for indoor residual spraying," says Dr. Roberts. "DDT's repellent action makes it a powerful public health tool. It also explains why DDT remains effective against malaria-carrying mosquitoes in India, where mosquitoes developed resistance to its limited toxic action."


Now, since your article notes that DDT is less effective than other chemicals, can you explain why anyone would advocate using DDT as a repellent when DDT costs more, is dangerous, and there are other, more effective repellents in most cases?

That is one such study. So, Mr. Darrell, you continue to have the wool pulled over your eyes. I, in the meantime, will continue to put human-life above that of animals.

You have one study, but there are thousands on the other side. Weight of evidence, actual use, choose your research weapon, Rachel Carson and the environmentalists are right. DDT needs no boost, and DDT can offer no panacea to fighting malaria.

Even your own article urges integrated pest management.

It's time you stopped lashing out at environmentalists, got off your gluteals and join us in fighting malaria. While you're carping about DDT being unfairly impugned, inaccurately, two kids die every minute from malaria.

Nothing But Nets could use some help -- why not make a donation today and save a kid's life?

LoneWolfArcher said...

I have joined the fight against malaria by joining the fight to fully legalizing DDT!

And since you misrepresent the article (regarding the non-biased researched I referenced. For those that didn't cut and paste it to open it:

"DDT Highly Effective Against Resistant Mosquitoes"

Mr. Darrell is exactly what I rail against on this blog: ideological environwhacko that puts animal life above human life. Oh he floats red herrings occasionally to throw people off, but in the end that is what he is.

Ed, don't ever assume you have any authority or power to tell me what to do. I will continue to lash out at environwhackos, fight to legalize DDT, and to show the real facts, not facts bought and paid for by Green Peace.

Axe said...

Ed Darrel is a moron regurgitating lies and damn lies put forward by power-hungry anti-human wackos who made the DDT ban into EPA power grab.

Used indoors, and appropriately there is no harm from DDT. None. That's a fact. If you can not live with facts - you are a moron. That's another fact.

LoneWolfArcher said...

Axe, agreed. In fact I have ignore him after initially allowing these comments. I don't mind opposing views in comments, but Ed became a broken record. He can continue to spew his propaganda rhetoric, just not here.

Anonymous said...

I am all for bringing back DDT. What are the ingredients, I'll make it myself.

Anonymous said...

I like the way you dismiss Darrel with simple name calling when he presents you with facts. Your bravado is as impressive as your ignorance.

LoneWolfArcher said...

Hi Ed! LOL

Anonymous said...

This Ed Darrel is ALLWAYS in all sites that talks about the DDT's re-legalization. He (and others fools) don't have bedbugs in their houses, for sure! I have bed bugs now now and I want the end on ban
of this chemical. NOW!!!!! (If close Darrel in a building infest by bedbugs, he (and his friends) will change his point of view!