Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
John Stossel :: Townhall.com Columnist
Hooray for DDT's life-saving comeback
by John Stossel
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Who says there's never any good news? After more than 30 years and tens of millions dead -- mostly children -- the World Health Organization (WHO) has ended its ban on DDT. DDT is the most effective anti-mosquito, anti-malaria pesticide known. But thanks to the worldwide environmental movement and politically correct bureaucrats in the United States and at the United Nations, the use of this benign chemical has been discouraged in Africa and elsewhere, permitting killer mosquitoes to spread death.

I don't expect any apologies from the people who permitted this to happen. But I am thankful this nightmare is ending.

DDT was banned by President Richard Nixon's Environmental Protection Agency in the early 1970s, after Rachel Carson's book, "Silent Spring," claimed to show that DDT threatened human health as well as bird populations. But some scientists found no evidence for her claims. Even if there was danger to bird eggs, the problem was the amount of DDT used, not the chemical itself.

Huge amounts of the chemical were sprayed in America. I've watched old videos of people at picnics who just kept eating while trucks sprayed thick white clouds of DDT on top of them. Some people even ran toward the truck -- as if it was an ice-cream truck -- they were so happy to have mosquitoes repelled. Tons of DDT were sprayed on food and people. Despite this overuse, there was no surge in cancer or any other human injury.

Nevertheless, the environmental hysteria led to DDT's suppression in Africa, where its use had been dramatically reducing deaths. American foreign aid could be used to finance ineffective alternative anti-malaria methods, but not DDT. Within a short time, the mosquitoes and malaria reappeared, and deaths skyrocketed. Tens of millions of people have died in that time.

DDT advocates pointed out that the ban amounted to mass murder. But they could not move the rich white environmental dogmatists who reflexively condemn all kinds of chemicals, and presumably lost no sleep when millions of poor African children died.

But now this has changed. Last month, the WHO announced that it supports indoor spraying of DDT and other insecticides "not only in epidemic areas but also in areas with constant and high malaria transmission, including throughout Africa."

"The scientific and programmatic evidence clearly supports this reassessment," said Dr. Anarfi Asamoa-Baah, WHO assistant director-general for HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria. "DDT presents no health risk when used properly."

WHO now calls DDT the "most effective" pesticide for indoor use. Some environmental groups have also changed their anti-DDT tune, including Greenpeace, Environmental Defense and the Sierra Club. Last year, Greenpeace spokesman Rick Hind told the New York Times, "If there's nothing else and it's going to save lives, we're all for it. Nobody's dogmatic about it."

That's easy to say now. But what about all the people who died when groups like Greenpeace dogmatically refused to budge on the ban? Might an apology be in order?

Junk-science debunker Steven Milloy, an adjunct scholar with the Competitive Enterprise Institute, wonders why the environmentalists took so long to change their minds.

"There are no new facts on DDT -- all the relevant science about DDT safety has been available since the 1960s," Milloy says.

Milloy adds: "It might be easy for some to dismiss the past 43 years of eco-hysteria over DDT with a simple 'never mind,' except for the blood of millions of people dripping from the hands of the WWF [World Wildlife Fund], Greenpeace, Rachel Carson, Environmental Defense Fund, and other junk science-fueled opponents of DDT."

Milloy reminds us that the same people who spread DDT hysteria are now pushing the global-warming scare. "If they and others could be so wrong about DDT, why should we trust them now?"

That's a fair question. For now, let's celebrate the coming elimination of malaria in Africa.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
John Stossel blogs at http://blogs.abcnews.com/johnstossel/ is an award-winning news correspondent and author of Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel--Why Everything You Know is Wrong.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read John Stossel's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate

News Articles On This Topic
 

Excellent correlation...
... about the enviro-wackos' tactics, earlier DDT, then global cooling, now global warming.

As he put it so well "rich white environmental dogmatists who reflexively condemn all kinds of chemicals", and anything else that makes modern life different from the Dark Ages.

Of course, these elites envision themselves tooling around in their private jets and chauffered limos making sure the rest of us hoi-polloi aren't using more than our meagerly allotted share of resources, and aren't damaging the view from their estates in any way.

I'm reminded of the photo op that Gore had to have during his run for pres. He was in a canoe in his woodsy duds, but the water level was too low in the stream to make the shot look good. So the floodgates of an upriver dam were thrown open, wasting God knows how many acre-feet of water, to raise the stream level to make his photo look good for his campaign ads. This is "Mr. Environment" we're talking about here.

What a load these guys spew.

DDT and blame.
I am glad that writers with a national identity are exposing more of these crimes against humanity. An apology isn’t necessary or adequate to make up for the horrors they have inflicted on the world’s suffering population. These misanthropic criminals, including Bill Ruckelshaus, need to be placed on trial for crimes against humanity or at the very least, depraved indifference.

Now that truly is a laudable goal for writers with national identities. A “Judgment at Nuremburg” trial is in order for the environmental movement. Not just for their stand on DDT. There are a whole host of issues they have promoted to the detriment of the health of the poorest and most wretched people of the world without mercy or compassion. Their trials and whatever judgment is meted out should reflect the same mercy and compassion they have extended to others.

What really amazes me is that some hotshot attorney has never filed a class action lawsuit against all of these groups. Even if no one finds criminality in their actions, certainly someone can see the validity of a civil action?



Honorable mention
Should also go out to those who pushed the "over-population and mass-starvation" nonsense, and those who are forever claiming that the world is running out of oil, or water, or open space, etc.

Here in whacko-central - Massachusetts, (Cambridge, of course) some "friends of animals" decided that a local pet store shouldn't be open. Their solution? Burn the place down, with the animals inside. Imagine the damage these nuts could do if they had more than 3 or 4 brain cells.

Let's just bask in the DDT please.
It's past time for it.

Thoughts of ANY trial is lunacy. The defendants would be those "rich white environmental dogmatists" who have plenty of money for their own defense - it would be a losing battle.

Besides, I'm just glad they 'took up the banner' against something so incredibly stupid as global warming. They are in full throat indignation even as the wolves of reason are bearing down on them. Can you not hear their pitiful squeals? And THIS may be their last gasp... wait for it.

Also an irony
Exerpt:
"Huge amounts of the chemical were sprayed in America. I've watched old videos of people at picnics who just kept eating while trucks sprayed thick white clouds of DDT on top of them. Some people even ran toward the truck -- as if it was an ice-cream truck -- they were so happy to have mosquitoes repelled. Tons of DDT were sprayed on food and people. Despite this overuse, there was no surge in cancer or any other human injury."

One of the newest chemo-drugs is structurally and chemically very similar to DDT (which was claimed by Rachel Carson as carcinogenic). Not widely known, but that should put paid to Ms. Carson's myth!

Next up
Maybe now we can get chlordane back.


Have to remember that the UN is also involved in this mess. Every three years they vote to extend the exemption that allows the use of DDT in homes (but banned for crops). Eventually United Nations Environment Program will get around to banning DDT again.

Rachel Carson
Do yunz know there is actually a Pittsburgh bridge recently named in this woman's honor for her work against DDT?

The big culprit
Let us not forget the principle culprit int he DDT tragedy, the EPA. Newly formed and wanting to flex its muscles to establish credibility, the EPA jumped on DDT even while aware the science was largely inconclusive (or actually showed DDT to be benign).

Another example of a department created to satisfy activists that 'something is being done", which then does more harm than good, all to demonstrate that it doesn't lack teeth.

DDT and Chlorodane
To eradicate malaria the DDT will have to be used outdoors to kill the mosquitos (all of them). We should do the same in the USA to stop West Nile virus and other mosquito born diseases.

It is a good time to reconsider the ban on Chlorodane for the killing of termites. Reasonable use of pesticides is the answer. Let's keep the eco-freaks out of our decision making processes.

Eco-freaks?
All of the above comments are valid, in addition
I remember being bombarded with anti DDT information(?) from the major news outlets of the time. Sixty Minutes type shows were skillfully fabricated around the menace presented by DDT. Being a person with limited or no access to alternative information, (no internet then) I bought the package. The doubts I had came from grainy films of thousands of Italians being coated in the stuff by G.I.s after the hostilities. I heard of NO ill effect, but what did I know? I am no "expert". Besides, who could doubt a person with the name of Rachel?

ABC,CBS,NBC and the NYT had the resources to get to the truth or at least investigate and present alternative views. They didn't! Propoganda and sensationalism trumped facts or truth in the news presentations. This is just as valid today across a wide spectrum of topics.

The talking heads we see are ignorant self satisfied boobs in all areas of human thought and endeavor. Please remember that. They are both stupid and ignorant. They should be included in any proposed trial.

Zip-Locks after walkies
The list of those making careers of junk science is endless, but usually in the catagory of unintended consequences. As is emphasized by Stossel, scores of millions, mainly children, have died because of PC Zip-Locks following someone who wrote a book. The first step in evaluating any messanger and message is: "What is the business they are in, and what is the product that they sell?" The second is: "Who benefits, and when?"

BrianR
You left out the punch line.
Those flood gates were opened DURING A DROUGHT.

I wonder
Corktip writes: It is a good time to reconsider the ban on Chlorodane for the killing of termites. Reasonable use of pesticides is the answer. Let's keep the eco-freaks out of our decision making processes.
;
;
;
;
;
How do the eco-freaks justify the ban on Chlordan? Termites put more green house gas in the air then any other source on earth - including man.

Chlordan was not banned.
Chlordane wasn't banned. Velsicol, the company that made chlordane pulled the label when EPA played fast and loose with the study they all agreed upon to determine whether homes treated with chlordane induced any form of illness versus homes that weren’t treated with chlordane. One hundred homes were chosen and only Velsicol and EPA knew which ones were treated. Approximately six months into the study someone at EPA leaked the names of which homes were which. Velsicol went to EPA and said that they needed to start over again in order to complete the study properly. EPA refused, saying that the study was for one year and it was just too bad the names were leaked. Velsicol gave up and pulled the label, however chlordane hasn’t been banned. As far as termites go, I don’t think anyone in the pest control industry could be persuaded to return to chlordane because we have better products available. Much better than chlordane ever was. DDT has a much better chance of returning that chlordane and DDT was banned.

Hockey Goon
"How do the eco-freaks justify the ban on Chlordan? Termites put more green house gas in the air then any other source on earth - including man."

You forget that NOTHING does more damage than man. They will hunt you down for suggesting otherwise. Lets not even talk about gas-passing cows.
Besides, as long as it's not human, they will fight to protect its life. If it is human, they'll let them die by the millions.

I am personally trying to stop those evil gas-passing cows by eating as many as I can.

The "Carson/Nader Syndrome"
"People drown. Therefore we must ban water."
That was the approach taken by the idiots at EPA and pushed by the MSM and the eco-freaks for decades.
In the 1970s, Milwaukee managed to save its precious huge American elm trees by the use of DDT by using bottles of DDT high in the trees, injecting the stuff into the bark to kill the Dutch Elm Beetle, the transmission mechanism of Elm Phloem Necrosis.
I've long since moved away, so I don't know if they had to quit using DDT and how the trees made out.

Gee
It’s a shame that in 40 years, no one found something that was even better. I guess there were more important projects. At least now I’m no longer bald or flaccid.

Overstating the breadth of WHO's reversa
The important thing to remember here is that the WHO's DDT ban has only been lifted inside the home, and not for outdoor or crop use. There are several reasons why, which no one posting here has bothered to mention:

1. DDT remains in the human body after being ingested for many years, but the detrimental effects of having DDT inside you is *less than* the detrimental effects of malaria.

2. Environmentalists (and the WHO) have known for years that the main problem with DDT is *not* its affects on humans, but its effects on ecology. Eg- the decline and recovery of the bald eagle is primarily attributed to easing off of DDT usage: http://www.fws.gov/endangered/i/b/msab0h.html

3. Overspraying of DDT encourages resistance of DDT and this is what has been seen in India and in other places. Using DDT in the house simply discourages mozzies from going inside, which is the best we can do so far.

So, therefore restarting the use of DDT in the home is not the perfect solution, but seems better than not, and much, much better than letting loose and lifting the ban completely.

No, there is no environmental conspiracy, and the EPA made the right decision to ban DDT those years ago.

Bald Eagles and DDT: Debunked
Andrewe writes:
"2. Environmentalists (and the WHO) have known for years that the main problem with DDT is *not* its affects on humans, but its effects on ecology. Eg- the decline and recovery of the bald eagle is primarily attributed to easing off of DDT usage:" http://www.fws.gov/endangered/i/b/msab0h.html

The link between the decline of bald eagles and DDT is a myth that is perpetuated even on authoritative web sites like the one you cited. For various reasons, bald eagles were nearing extinction before DDT was ever used. The connection between DDT and thinning egg shells has never been proven. Get the facts here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,202447,00.html

Bring DDT back here, too!
Thank you, Mr. Stossel, for this wonderful article. DDT needs to be returned to judicious use here in the USA, as well. Not because of insect caused deaths, but because of the rise of another pest that causes mental anguish & loss of property. Bed bugs are on the rise in this country, for various reasons, the ban on DDT being one of them. DDT is the only insecticide that has been shown to kill bed bugs, both live & in the egg. My family has suffered months of bites, lack of sleep, nervousness, & hypersensitivity to anything small that moves. It has definitely caused us much mental stress, close to what one would expect from post-traumatic stress disorder. We have also lost thousands of dollars due to discarding many household goods, replacing some, having to purchase plastic storage containers for everything else we own, extra laundry expenses & the costs of 3 profeesional extermination treatments. And we still have the bugs. Not as many, but they are still biting my children.
Insect-born diseases causing death is by far the best reason for DDT to return to use, but there are some quality of life issues that have many people praying & begging for the return of DDT to the USA.

MyOpine: Good grief! You're right!
I forgot all about the drought. That was the ultimate irony at the time and it slipped my mind!

Early-onset Alzheimer's. I had a Senior Moment.

DDT and the effect it has on all things
DDT did not cause egg shell thinning nor did it wipe out the bird population. During the DDT years the bird population increased 12 times, including robins. In spite of the lies Rachel Carson sprewed out in her book those scientists who testing robins to see how much DDT they could take found that it passed through their system and out their feces so fast it was almost impossible to kill them. Molecules in earth worms certainly wouldn't do it. As far as the bald eagle population returning because of the elimination of DDT, that is a load of horse pucky. During the peak DDT years the bald eagle population actually increased. The ban on hunting them is what increased the population, not the ban on DDT.

DDT does not remain in the body. It becomes the break down product DDE and no one has ever shown any detrimental effects of either of these traces. One of the scientists who drank DDT every day for two years to show how little effect it had on the human body finally died at the age of 82 I believe. He was climbing a mountain. Her claims about cancer and DDT turned out to be entirely wrong. The rest of it was speculation or lies.

Bald Eagles and DDT---not so fast!
To MrMike:

I am not so quick to believe your (or Steve Milloy's) claim that DDT had no effect on eagles' health.

First, a quick google search for [bald eagle ddt] (I only looked at the first 40 hits) shows that every web site (including many reputible ones) upholds the link. Only Steven Milloy tries to say anything differently. While this does not prove anything, it should give you a little bit of wonder. What makes Steven Milloy so smart that he's figured out something that no one else has?

I'd say that it's more likely that he's up to his old shtick again. He is constantly being a corporate flack and fighting for corporate rights and seems to be against human beings.

Now, on to the article. I can't comment on specific things in that article since most of his references are old and I can't find on the internet. However, it is easy to find studies one way or the other proving what you want. Here are a few that show the link between DDT/DDE and thinning egg shells of Eagles:

The following post illustrates my point much better than I could write:
http://www.able2know.com/forums/about78627-0-asc-10.html

As a side note, it is interesting how anyone who wants to defend DDT always brings up something from Milloy or Junk Science (the name should say it all...).

Look up the half life
DDT half life = 6 months.

Go research it.

If you dispute the effects on the human body, tell it to the people in Europe, immediately post WWII who were DUSTED WITH IT!

Bald Eagles and DDT: A Flawed Connection
To Andrewe:

Thanks for your reply, which I will refute point-by-point.

1. The Google search you performed only demonstrates one thing: the pervasiveness of the myth. It is so ingrained it has become one of those "everybody knows" things. It's the product of brainwashing.

2. Your statement that Milloy is "being a corporate flack and fighting for corporate rights" on this issue is laughable. The opposite is true. DDT costs a fraction of the less effective but patent-protected alternatives that are used. Big Pesticide companies hate Milloy; they want to see the myths about DDT perpetuated so they can continue to peddle their overpriced products.

3. Regarding the specific article to which I posted a link, the references ARE old, as the author admits, because the issue was settled (i.e., the myth was debunked) at least 20 years ago. If you want detailed sources, go to junkscience.com. There was more than enough information there to convince me.

4. One study, the results of which have been cited over and over for years, did link shell thinning to DDT. However, it was later discovered that the subject birds' diet inadvertently included a 75% reduction in calcium vs. a natural diet. Of course, that was barely reported anywhere.

5. Your comment that "Junk Science (the name should say it all...)" sums up your position: Lacking facts or logic to refute the Milloy/Junkscience.com evidence, you resort to maligning the name, as if that provides an iota of support to your position.




Unfortunately....
posts like those of "Andrewe" and "SkunkWorks Supt." are indicative of what the Left really believes. They love to blather on about how so concerned they are about the welfare of human beings worldwide, but when it comes to their actual practices, they make it abundantly clear that, to them, human life is very cheap.
They are content to pontificate for years and stroke their chins while millions perish in an agonizing manner. But hey, as long as they can't see it, maybe they don't believe it's really happening.
Yes "SkunkWorks Supt.", keep talking about the half-life of DDT while "Andrewe" stands up to the corporate flacks and accuses somebody else of being "against human beings". Then give yourself a pat on the back and tell yourself you're compassionate while 30+ million more pass into oblivion thanks to you and your phony environmentalist pals.

The facts from Fox?
QUOTE:
The link between the decline of bald eagles and DDT is a myth that is perpetuated even on authoritative web sites like the one you cited. For various reasons, bald eagles were nearing extinction before DDT was ever used. The connection between DDT and thinning egg shells has never been proven. Get the facts here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,202447,00.html


-Get the facts from Fox News? No thanks, I prefer not to be manipulated and lied to.

DDT
Well hurrah for Africa. Do you stop there? I hope not. That was one, in a long list of others, that were wrong in every aspect.

HEY, GROVER!
Where are you coming from?
Are you TOTALLY BLIND?
You're upside down, buddy!
You better go back and RE READ WHAT I WROTE.
If you think I'm a lefty, you better take off your tinfoil hat and soak your head in something better than what you've been drinking.

mumx6, there is another cure for bedbugs
...but it's more expensive.

Throw out all the old mattresses. That's the only cure I've heard about.

I'd also wash all the linens, sheets, and blankets -- even the ones in the closet.


concerned_citizen, since you want to
...avoid being manipulated and lied to, I suppose you also avoid CNN, ABC, NBC, Reuters, and the AP, all of whom have documented liberal biases. But I doubt you're serious about avoiding bias.

If you don't like the Fox News source, there were others that were mentioned, such as junkscience.

Sorry SkunkWorks Supt.
I've taken off my tin foil hat and read your previous post and I offer you my apology for misinterpreting your last post.

Sorry SkunkWorks Supt.
I've taken off my tin foil hat and read your previous post and I offer you my apology for misinterpreting your last post.

Grover
Gotcha.
Funny about those things out of context.
e.g.: I can show you in the Holy Bible where it says, VERBATIM, ". . .there is no God . . ."
Just look in that little bit where is found the Ten Commandments.
The rest of that phrase is "but Me." And a word before the beginning three dots is "for."
Good Luck

EPA is a Republican Idea
While we're all here bashing the EPA, let's not forget they were put in place by a REPUBLICAN president.

Quoth the Wiki: "As President, Nixon imposed wage and price controls, indexed Social Security for inflation, and created Supplemental Security Income (SSI). The number of pages added to the Federal Register each year doubled under Nixon. He eradicated the last remnants of the gold standard. Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), implemented the Philadelphia Plan, the first significant federal affirmative action program, and dramatically improved salaries for U.S. federal employees worldwide."

BTW, all of these would look real good on any Democrat's resume.

So, this coming November, for you Republican apologists who keep saying the "Democrats Would Be Worse", I'd like to ask -- HOW?

.
.
.

(Warning: Blatent Blog Plug)

Well, shoot, now that you've been warned, I might as well sign off!

DDT/GLOBAL WARMING
These same scaremongers on global warming were sounding the alarm about a new ice age just a few short decades ago. "Let's see, if they won't buy us scaring them about an ice age, lets see if we can scare them about global warming".

DDT safer than other stuff in use today?
If DDT is safe for humans then we should be using it *indoors* for roaches and bedbugs rather than the known toxic stuff used today.

There are some serious HUMAN issues with the various stuff being used in apartment complexes with concerns that children (particuarly minority children) are developing asthma and other stuff.

Wouldn't it be better to use DDT (indoors) here in the US than what essentially are nerve agents? And for that matter, what good does it do to remove sulfur from diesel fuel when the very same fuel gets used instead for home heating oil?

Yeah--bald eagles and DDT---not so fast!
To Andrewe

I just read the blog link you posted as your support that DDT really HAS been linked to thinning egg shells and the decline in the US eagle population.

Very UNCONVINCING --more environmental conjecture–or at least more of a restatement of environmentalist “facts” than fact verified by studies.

A couple of points from a common sense standpoint...If DDT was the direct cause for egg shells thinning in the wild--why didn't it have the same effect to commercial egg production? After all, commercial egg production was a WHOLE lot closer and far more direct to DDT’s agricultural usage than the "circle of life" food chain in the wild. One would have thought that farmers and chicken ranchers would have noticed and been alarmed about the increased breakage...odd that I don't recall any such reports--even during the height of the DDT scares.

Secondly, even supposing that the shell of an eagle egg is inherently thinner than that of a chicken–which it isn’t– if DDT did cause the decline of the eagle populations in the lower 48 states, why didn't DDTs VERY widespread use in Alaska have the same effect there? The mosquito is Alaska's unofficial state bird. Until banned, DDT was VERY liberally used to keep the mosquito populations in check. Eagles have always been thicker than crows in Alaska--I never heard of a significant decline in Alaska’s eagle population--at least none attributed to DDT.

The trick with science, it is SUPPOSED to answer all natural observations...not just those supporting a particular political --or environmental argument. But who knows-- maybe chickens, raised by the millions in the cramped quarters of an egg farm, are just naturally healthier than your average eagle below Canada’s southern boarder; or perhaps by nature, chickens are simply made of a lot stern stuff than the wild eagles found in the lower 48.

Who knows.

concern_citizen
You really should go to the Democrats for your information. They are experts at lying.
For example

Bill (I did not have sex with that woman) Clinton
Sandy (They just happened to be in my pants) Berger
John (They were my family's SUVs) Kerry
Hillary (We just found the billing records) Clinton
Teddy (I don't remember driving off a bridge) Kennedy
Howard (Republians never worked a day in their lives) Dean
Nancy ( I have a plan) Pelosi
Harry (Sure I took Abramsoff's money but it didn't affect me) Reid
Dan (forged documents still raise important issues) Rather
Peter (the voters had a tantrum) Jennings

Steve O
"mumx6, there is another cure for bedbugs
...but it's more expensive.

Throw out all the old mattresses. That's the only cure I've heard about.

I'd also wash all the linens, sheets, and blankets -- even the ones in the closet."

This is, unfortuanately, a common misconception. Yes, they hide in bedding & other fabrics. They also hide in any crack or crevice they can get into... wall cracks, electrical outlets & fixtures, bedframes, book spines, carpeting, wood floors, etc. More than half of the dozens of bed bugs I have found were not on the mattress or boxsprings, & our infestation is a small one! Thorough cleaning, putting vinyl or "allergy" coverings on mattresses & boxsprings, thorough checking and cleaning of all belongings & storing them in airtight containers AND several rounds of extermination, both professional and home applications, are the only possible cure currently available. Depending on where one lives, all of that is not a cure, because multi-family dwellings can become reinfested very easily by the insects' migration through the walls from other homes.

You can throw the mattresses out, but any new ones you bring in will be quickly infested by the bugs in other parts of the dwelling!

DDT is the only safe one shot kill known for bed bugs.

Wrong
This article steadfastly refuses to give any sources for its quotes. DDT had serious effects on many animals. It bioaccumulates at the top of the food chain, and nearly caused the extinction of bald eagles, brown pelicans, and peregrine falcons.

"But some scientists found no evidence for her claims." Just because a few (unnamed by you) scientists failed to find something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Who were these "some" scientists? Monsanto employees? Maybe they wanted to not find evidence. Most people who have studied DDT *did* find negative effects. Just because a few incompetent people failed doesn't mean anything.

Malaria deaths skyrocketed? Please! Where are your facts.

Harmless? What about studies by Chen and Rogan and others that DDT itself causes infant mortality? You conveniently failed to find this. Wow. Does that make YOU a "scientist?"

The Sierra Club supports DDT use? Give me a break! Not even close. Try checking your facts some time.

Goebbels liked to use the big lie technique of repeating falsehoods over and over until they became truth. Looks like Herr Stossel is trying the same thing.

Why DDT didn't affect commercial eggs
Simple. Because chickens aren't top predators that feed on other predators (birds and fish).

DDT works like this:
1. Bugs eat DDT-contaminated crops. Bugs get a tiny amount of DDT.
2. Small fish or birds or mammals eat several hundred bugs in their lifetime. All the DDT those bugs ate accumulates in their fat.
3. Larger fish/birds/mammals eat those fish/birds/mammals, and accumulates together all those doses.
4. Finally, a bald eagle or falcon or pelican eats those fish/birds/mammals, and gets the sum total DDT load of all the hundreds of thousands of bugs that made up the base of the food chain. And that DDT made their eggshells thin.

What does a chicken eat? Feed. Probably only the amount of DDT tht one of the small fish/birds ate. Hence not enough to thin eggshells.

Basic biology. Beats off-the-cuff uneducated guesses (sometimes called "common sense") 9 times out of 10.

Scientific facts are undeniable!
Dennis, it looks you are a Tim Lambert’s fan. As such you will always deny scientific evidence. Birds fed huge doses of DDT (3000 higher than usual in the environment!) didn't show eggshell thinning. Only flawed studies did -but were debunked and ordered by law to be remade.

So your magnification up the food chain is not a good example.

The two main studies that linked DDT to eggshell thinning were: a) by ames DeWitt (1958), and b) Dr. Bitman. Both were used at the DDT hearings and both were shown and proved flawed. That’s why Judge Sweeney declared DDT innocent and free of toxicity, and not a carcinogen, or a teratogen, or a mutagen. The same scientific opinion was shared by all Scientific Academies on Earth, The American Cancer Society, the WHO, etc.

When you read DeWitt’s study you actually see that quails hatched more eggs when fed DDT than those control quails not eating DDT! When the flawed Bitman study was orederd by a court to be repeated, but this time feeding the birds with the appropriate calcium levels normally found in bird’s food (Bitman was providing half the normal amount!) the birds (hen) eating DDT produced eggs with thicker eggshells.

Then, the Hawk Mountain Sanctuary logs show that hawks and bald eagles grew in population during the DDT years. They had been in the brink of extinction from the early part of the 20th century, 40 years before DDT was invented. It is history, and undeniable facts. But burying your head in the sand won’t make you any wiser.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.