Wretchard at the Belmont Club has an interesting piece from Dr. D.R. Roberts of the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, MD. Dr. Roberts recently published an article in The Lancet examining the current increase in deaths from malaria and how DDT can help prevent them.
The current anti-DDT hystery is not based on hard science, but on simplistic scare tactics. There is absolutely no credible, reproducable scientific or epidemeological evidence that DDT used in the quantities necessary for malaria control poses any sort of public health risk. What is clearly and scientifically proven is that the rise in malaria deaths is directly attributable to the decline in DDT usage across the Third World.
Completely banning DDT across the globe would only excerbate the problems and lead to hundreds of thousands more unnecessary deaths. Already the triumph of environmentalist ideology over hard science has led to the preventable deaths of millions over the past few decades. The use of DDT for malaria control is effective, safe, and necessary, and the WHO and USAID along with other groups should end the needless policy of preventing its use.
Rgr that! DDT is a victim of political sabatage by rich countries. If the US had Africa’s problem I wonder if DDT would still be banned. Hundreds of thousands of deaths and needless sufferings for no reason. The UN thinks nets and education can fix the problem when all the evidence shows that DDT saves lives when it’s reintroduced. Sad stuff. Thanks for mentioning this sad truth.
The article in the Lancet was not published “recently”; it was published five years ago. Specifically, it was published before the decision was taken *not* to ban DDT; the WHO does not prevent its use and nor does USAID. Nobody is currently proposing a ban either, so I am not sure what you mean by “the current anti-DDT hysteria”, unless your definition of “current” is the last ten years.
Indiscriminate DDT use carries one very specific public health risk; the development of DDT resistant mosquitoes. That’s why people who know a lot about malaria recommend nets and malathion in most cases, with DDT held back as a last resort.
Well, it’s recently if you consider a geologic timescale… OK, you got me on that one.
The Belmont Club discussed whether or not there’s a ban on DDT, and while there isn’t an official ban, there are severe restraints on DDT usage that make it nearly impossible for developing countries to use it effectively. Countries like South Africa that don’t need development aid have used DDT to great success.
House spraying doesn’t really qualify as “indiscriminate” – the agricultural use of DDT does. Neither nets nor malathion are nearly as effective in prophylactic use against malaria infection as DDT is. DDT is the single most effective way of preventing malaria infections, which is why so many epidemeologists are advocating its useage.