Exact match. Not showing close matches.
'[ot] First GE crops turned out to be allergenic, n'
Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> Russell McMahon wrote:
> I had a problem parsing this sentence :)
>> DDT is still THE best method of combating Malaria in (what we'd call)
>> subsistence level residences in Africa.
> There are many things that in theory could improve such situations. But
> some of these plans don't consider that in such regions (can only talk
> about Brazil, but I assume it's not much different in Africa in this
> respect) the people who live in subsistence level residences don't really
> have the general background education to be able to use such dangerous
> products responsibly. (It's difficult enough for the Harvard schooled
> multimillionaire owner of the plant, imagine how difficult it is for the
> illiterate peasant...)
You mention 'could' but DDT was demonstrated to work very effectively in
this situation. The benefit was obvious. It was cheap, worked well in
small doses, and would stay for a long time on walls continuing to work
so you didn't need to re-apply it very often. At one point before it was
made illegal, malaria practically disappeared from many areas.
There is evidence to suggest that mosquito's develop resistance to it
over time though, which isn't surprising. Life finds a way. However, it
could help, and the resistance develops quite slowly. In areas where
malaria is holding back the economy, introducing DDT could conceivably
give enough time (10 years or so) so that the economy in the area can
develop to the point that other methods can be effectively used once DDT
loses it's effectiveness.
>> The cost benefit* is demonstrably far in favour of using DDT in this
> Possibly. But then, you may change your mind when you see how less
> dangerous products are being used by people who can't read and understand
> the instructions, who have never learned and don't know what "instructions"
But DDT was never proven to be that dangerous! Most of the reasoning
behind the law was based on one poorly designed study in , and a popular
book (Silent Spring by Rachael Carson), which caused a huge public
outcry. This was
And we had it, it was CHEAP to produce, and worked great. Nothing has
come close to working that well since, to my limited knowledge.
>> But it's deemed too dangerous to use on a blanket basis and
>> banned without real thought.
> Maybe, or maybe just with thoughts you don't know?
Propaganda and public fear over reports about Agent Orange fueled things
more than logic I think.
More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2006
, 2007 only
- New search...