Politics has an unfortunate way of leading to bad environmental decisions. Often, politicians in Western Europe and the United States set the
environmental policies for other parts of the world that they do not fully understand. This can lead to environmental disasters, such as the
millions of people who have died from malaria.
Malaria is a disease spread by mosquitoes in tropical regions. More than 1 million people die from malaria each year. The actual number of deaths may be much higher. Some scientists have estimated that the total is probably between 2 and 3 million, noting that most deaths in regions affected by malaria are not adequately investigated or recorded. This horrible disease disproportionately affects poor children in Africa.
African leaders are frustrated by the inadequate aid that they receive from Western Europe and the United States to combat malaria. These leaders know that there is a simple solution to the problem. That solution is a chemical known as DDT.
I bet that you cringed when you saw the acronym "DDT." That is because liberals and the media outlets that they influence hate DDT. They have done their best to associate the chemical with death and destruction of the environment. While DDT is certainly harmful to insects, and may affect birds to some extent, it actually has many beneficial uses.
Liberals never like to admit that they do not fully understand something, and DDT is a good example. The next time a liberal tells you that DDT is harmful to humans, ask him what study he is citing. I would be willing to bet that he will not be able to name one!
The reason for this is simple. The fear of DDT is not based on scientific studies. It comes from Rachel Carson's unfounded assertion that DDT causes cancer in human beings. To date, no study has been able to establish a meaningful link between DDT and cancer, much less that DDT causes cancer. It is important to understand the history of this chemical and the controversy surrounding DDT. Only then can one make an informed decision about it.
Othmar Zeidler first created DDT in 1874. The chemical appears to have received little attention until 1939, when Paul Hermann Muller, a scientist from Switzerland, discovered that DDT was deadly to many species of insects. During World War II, the Allied forces needed insecticides to protect their troops and civilian populations from insects that spread diseases. DDT was used to kill mosquitoes in tropical regions and eliminate lice from cities in Europe. While a liquid form of the chemical was usually sprayed in areas suffering from insect pests, a powdered form of DDT was also issued to Allied troops in Asia. This powder effectively protected soldiers from fleas, lice, mosquitoes, and other insect pests.
DDT impressed the army as well as the civilians it shielded from harmful insects. In 1948, Paul Hermann Muller received the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine. The effectiveness of DDT at killing insects was now well established. With the war over, DDT continued to be used as an insecticide, and it was sprayed on fields of crops across the United States.
While DDT was killing agricultural pests in the United States, government organizations realized the need to combat insect-borne diseases in developing areas of the world. In the early 1950s, the World Health Organization noticed that malaria was killing large numbers of people, primarily in Africa, Asia, and South America. In some afflicted regions, about 192 out of every 100,000 people were dying from malaria.
Recognizing this crisis, the World Health Organization set the lofty goal of completely eliminating malaria. In 1955, it began to combat malaria, primarily by using DDT. Agents working on behalf of the World Health Organization sprayed DDT in swamps and on the walls of homes. Within a short period of time, the mortality rate in some affected areas was reduced from 192 per 100,000 to 7 per 100,000.
Despite the tremendous success of the program in the areas where it was initially implemented, the World Health Organization became concerned. Some mosquitoes were showing signs of immunity to DDT. The World Health Organization became afraid, and by 1969 it abandoned its goal of eliminating malaria.
This program was disappointing, but what horrifies me most about it was the hasty way in which the decision was made. DDT was never used in Sub-Saharan Africa. The World Health Organization theorized that mosquitoes in tropical regions would be quicker to develop immunity to DDT, as the insects reproduce year-round in the warm weather. The result was that Sub-Saharan Africa never received any DDT or other assistance from the World Health Organization at this time. Today, it is no coincidence that the number of malaria cases in Africa is much higher than in other regions of the world that are also affected by malaria.
This is a classic example of environmental policies being applied unequally with disastrous consequences. If the leaders of the nations of Sub-Saharan Africa had been consulted, they certainly would have requested assistance with combating malaria. If the results achieved by using DDT in other regions had been explained to them, these leaders may have adamantly demanded it!
Malaria is a disease spread by mosquitoes in tropical regions. More than 1 million people die from malaria each year. The actual number of deaths may be much higher. Some scientists have estimated that the total is probably between 2 and 3 million, noting that most deaths in regions affected by malaria are not adequately investigated or recorded. This horrible disease disproportionately affects poor children in Africa.
African leaders are frustrated by the inadequate aid that they receive from Western Europe and the United States to combat malaria. These leaders know that there is a simple solution to the problem. That solution is a chemical known as DDT.
I bet that you cringed when you saw the acronym "DDT." That is because liberals and the media outlets that they influence hate DDT. They have done their best to associate the chemical with death and destruction of the environment. While DDT is certainly harmful to insects, and may affect birds to some extent, it actually has many beneficial uses.
Liberals never like to admit that they do not fully understand something, and DDT is a good example. The next time a liberal tells you that DDT is harmful to humans, ask him what study he is citing. I would be willing to bet that he will not be able to name one!
The reason for this is simple. The fear of DDT is not based on scientific studies. It comes from Rachel Carson's unfounded assertion that DDT causes cancer in human beings. To date, no study has been able to establish a meaningful link between DDT and cancer, much less that DDT causes cancer. It is important to understand the history of this chemical and the controversy surrounding DDT. Only then can one make an informed decision about it.
Othmar Zeidler first created DDT in 1874. The chemical appears to have received little attention until 1939, when Paul Hermann Muller, a scientist from Switzerland, discovered that DDT was deadly to many species of insects. During World War II, the Allied forces needed insecticides to protect their troops and civilian populations from insects that spread diseases. DDT was used to kill mosquitoes in tropical regions and eliminate lice from cities in Europe. While a liquid form of the chemical was usually sprayed in areas suffering from insect pests, a powdered form of DDT was also issued to Allied troops in Asia. This powder effectively protected soldiers from fleas, lice, mosquitoes, and other insect pests.
DDT impressed the army as well as the civilians it shielded from harmful insects. In 1948, Paul Hermann Muller received the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine. The effectiveness of DDT at killing insects was now well established. With the war over, DDT continued to be used as an insecticide, and it was sprayed on fields of crops across the United States.
While DDT was killing agricultural pests in the United States, government organizations realized the need to combat insect-borne diseases in developing areas of the world. In the early 1950s, the World Health Organization noticed that malaria was killing large numbers of people, primarily in Africa, Asia, and South America. In some afflicted regions, about 192 out of every 100,000 people were dying from malaria.
Recognizing this crisis, the World Health Organization set the lofty goal of completely eliminating malaria. In 1955, it began to combat malaria, primarily by using DDT. Agents working on behalf of the World Health Organization sprayed DDT in swamps and on the walls of homes. Within a short period of time, the mortality rate in some affected areas was reduced from 192 per 100,000 to 7 per 100,000.
Despite the tremendous success of the program in the areas where it was initially implemented, the World Health Organization became concerned. Some mosquitoes were showing signs of immunity to DDT. The World Health Organization became afraid, and by 1969 it abandoned its goal of eliminating malaria.
This program was disappointing, but what horrifies me most about it was the hasty way in which the decision was made. DDT was never used in Sub-Saharan Africa. The World Health Organization theorized that mosquitoes in tropical regions would be quicker to develop immunity to DDT, as the insects reproduce year-round in the warm weather. The result was that Sub-Saharan Africa never received any DDT or other assistance from the World Health Organization at this time. Today, it is no coincidence that the number of malaria cases in Africa is much higher than in other regions of the world that are also affected by malaria.
This is a classic example of environmental policies being applied unequally with disastrous consequences. If the leaders of the nations of Sub-Saharan Africa had been consulted, they certainly would have requested assistance with combating malaria. If the results achieved by using DDT in other regions had been explained to them, these leaders may have adamantly demanded it!
