Thread: In Response to Numerous Requests - The DDT Scam with Citations

I have been bombarded with requests (some nicely worded, many not, but that's OK) for further information about the DDT scam that killed 25 million people, mostly children in Africa.

Here are 3 works from journals and so forth that all say basically the same thing I did about the DDT scam

However (hold on to your seats) each ends with a huge list of citations backing up the facts that are presented

All the same stuff, fake science, EPA abuse of power and ignoring court findings, rampant deaths in Africa, etc.......REAL similar to the AGW scam that fortunately failed where this one succeeded.

http://dwb.unl.edu/Teacher/NSF/C06/C...icals/ddt.html

http://www.jpands.org/vol9no3/edwards.pdf

http://www.aei.org/files/2011/01/21/2011-HPO-01-g.pdf

So I'll sit back and wait for the replies saying it is all right wing propaganda, funded by EXXON, and so forth. But THIS TIME, they have to check every citation since they raised such a fuss about it the first time around....

Its all here, with references to the ORIGINAL sources.....Times Three

Enjoy

Originally Posted by Elmer Fudd

I have been bombarded with requests (some nicely worded, many not, but that's OK) for further information about the DDT scam that killed 25 million people, mostly children in Africa.

Here are 3 works from journals and so forth that all say basically the same thing I did about the DDT scam

However (hold on to your seats) each ends with a huge list of citations backing up the facts that are presented

All the same stuff, fake science, EPA abuse of power and ignoring court findings, rampant deaths in Africa, etc.......REAL similar to the AGW scam that fortunately failed where this one succeeded.

http://dwb.unl.edu/Teacher/NSF/C06/C...icals/ddt.html

http://www.jpands.org/vol9no3/edwards.pdf

http://www.aei.org/files/2011/01/21/2011-HPO-01-g.pdf

So I'll sit back and wait for the replies saying it is all right wing propaganda, funded by EXXON, and so forth. But THIS TIME, they have to check every citation since they raised such a fuss about it the first time around....

Its all here, with references to the ORIGINAL sources.....Times Three

Enjoy

From http://www.jpands.org/vol9no3/edwards.pdf

The World Bank extended $165 million dollars to India’s malaria sufferers, but specified that no DDT could be used. Madagascar suffered from a similar forced lack of mosquito control. Dozens of other countries, where massive numbers of malaria deaths continue to occur, also cannot receive financial aid unless they agree not to control mosquitoes by using DDT.

Not referenced. I could find no confirmation of the statement. Prove it!

From the WB web site: The World Bank and DDT - Use of in India

India currently experiences endemic malaria and occasional epidemics, especially of severe malaria. The percentage of severe cases of malaria has risen over the years, partly due to resistance to DDT spraying and chloroquine drugs.

So show me where a WB report of 2000 specifies that "that no DDT could be used. "

The Use of DDT and Recommendations: The GOI has already banned DDT in the agricultural sector and restricted its use in public health to 10,00 metric tons a year — except in the case of a major outbreak. The actual use of DDT is far below this ceiling. In 1993, WHO studied the use of DDT for controlling vector borne diseases, and after
careful review concluded that: (i) DDT exposure as a result of indoor residual spraying does not provide convincing evidence of adverse effects; and (ii) there was limited justification on toxicological or epidemiological grounds for changing current policy towards indoor residual spraying of DDT, recommending that DDT can be safely used for
indoor spraying. However, recognizing that DDT has low vector mortality in many settings, and potentially adverse effects on the environment, it was decided that: 1) BHC will be banned for use from April, 1997; 2) the use of DDT should be gradually phased out and the available alternative utilized for public health programs (DDT will only be
used for targeted epidemic prone areas and malaria endemic regions); 3) the GOI will review the parameters of DDT use on an annual basis; and 4) as part of the enhanced malaria control program, the NMP will develop specific guidelines for criteria and complete data requirements needed to evaluate the efficacy of insecticides (DDT and
others) used for vector control by 1998 to include:

Originally Posted by MannieD

From http://www.jpands.org/vol9no3/edwards.pdf
Not referenced. I could find no confirmation of the statement. Prove it!

From the WB web site: The World Bank and DDT - Use of in India


So show me where a WB report of 2000 specifies that "that no DDT could be used. "

LOL......3 works all documenting fraud, scientific dishonesty, abuse of power, on, and on, and on....and you could only find 3 inconsistencies on relatively minor points??? What about the big picture?....... You are not working hard enough Manny......

Originally Posted by Elmer Fudd

LOL......3 works all documenting fraud, scientific dishonesty, abuse of power, on, and on, and on....and you could only find 3 inconsistencies on relatively minor points??? What about the big picture?....... You are not working hard enough Manny......

3 works but none of them accepted scientific research papers or journals - in fact all three are publications from "think tanks" the first of which is well documented as receiving funding from the chemical and pharmaceutical companies. Even the BMJ has noted that it is not a reliable source
http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c1819.extract
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America...nce_and_Health
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...nce_and_Health

Although these papers have a bibliography of sorts they are not well referenced - at least not a level I would demand from a paper on the health effects of a substance. I will concentrate at the moment on your first "paper" A goof number of the papers are to questionable sources like "Heartland institute" a book written by the founder of the so called "journal" this is published in, a seminar talk and some that are so old they should have been admitted to a geriatric ward!!

So what would I accept? The gold standard in health care studies is what is called "Evidence Based Medicine" and one of the best sites is one called the "Cochrane Collaboration"

Let us compare the standards of the papers
http://www.thecochranelibrary.com/us...e/CD006657.pdf
Chalk and cheese eh?

Originally Posted by Elmer Fudd

I have been bombarded with requests (some nicely worded, many not, but that's OK) for further information about the DDT scam that killed 25 million people, mostly children in Africa.

Those idiotic myths you 'believe' in so strongly actually have nothing to do with reality and everything to do with some hidden economic agendas by the people who spread these myths. The only "DDT scam" is the one you're pushing. The use of DDT was never "banned" in Africa so nobody was "killed" from the lack of it. Your lies and misinformation about DDT were completely debunked here but you seem incapable of comprehending the facts even when they are pointed out to you. The Wikipedia article on DDT is packed with citations and references to actual scientific articles published in respectable peer reviewed science journals. The articles you cite here are not from "journals" as you claim and the supposed "huge list of citations backing up" your delusions is actually totally worthless crap that doesn't reference any actual supporting scientific evidence. The facts don't support your rightwingnut anti-environmental fantasies.

Originally Posted by Elmer Fudd

LOL......3 works all documenting fraud, scientific dishonesty, abuse of power, on, and on, and on....and you could only find 3 inconsistencies on relatively minor points??? What about the big picture?....... You are not working hard enough Manny......

I guess we have different understanding of the words "inconsistencies" and "minor" because I do not understand how a misleading statement like "The World Bank extended $165 million dollars to India’s malaria sufferers, but specified that no DDT could be used. Madagascar suffered from a similar forced lack of mosquito control. Dozens of other countries, where massive numbers of malaria deaths continue to occur, also cannot receive financial aid unless they agree not to control mosquitoes by using DDT." is a "minor inconsistency". Such a misleading statement makes Edward's whole paper not credible.

If I had worked harder, I would have been able to point to other "minor inconsistencies" in Edwards' work.

Originally Posted by MannieD

I guess we have different understanding of the words "inconsistencies" and "minor" because I do not understand how a misleading statement like "The World Bank extended $165 million dollars to India’s malaria sufferers, but specified that no DDT could be used. Madagascar suffered from a similar forced lack of mosquito control. Dozens of other countries, where massive numbers of malaria deaths continue to occur, also cannot receive financial aid unless they agree not to control mosquitoes by using DDT." is a "minor inconsistency". Such a misleading statement makes Edward's whole paper not credible.

If I had worked harder, I would have been able to point to other "minor inconsistencies" in Edwards' work.

Manny, BB, Livefree.....the big picture is there, facts are facts, DDT was Banned on bogus science. The EPA ignored the information, they ignored the court findings, and the administrator ADMITTED it was all for political reasons.....

.......documented, incontrovertible FACTS...............accept it , you will sleep better.......


But this is America....if you prefer to ignore (due to religious reasons) you have the right to:

see-hear-speak-no-evil.jpg

Originally Posted by Elmer Fudd

Manny, BB, Livefree.....the big picture is there, facts are facts,

Yeah, it's just too bad that you are blind to the facts and choose to cling to debunked myths and lies.

Originally Posted by Elmer Fudd

DDT was Banned on bogus science.

False. The use of DDT was restricted because of well researched and very sound science. Your sources are the only bogus thing here.

Originally Posted by Elmer Fudd

The EPA ignored the information,

False. The EPA used the best available scientific data and their decision has only been confirmed by later research.

Originally Posted by Elmer Fudd

they ignored the court findings,

False. Another lie. The courts decided that the EPA had acted correctly in banning DDT.

DDT
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(excerpts)

DDT was less effective in tropical regions due to the continuous life cycle of mosquitoes and poor infrastructure. It was not applied at all in sub-Saharan Africa due to these perceived difficulties. Mortality rates in that area never declined to the same dramatic extent, and now constitute the bulk of malarial deaths worldwide, especially following the disease's resurgence as a result of resistance to drug treatments and the spread of the deadly malarial variant caused by Plasmodium falciparum. The goal of eradication was abandoned in 1969, and attention was focused on controlling and treating the disease. Spraying programs (especially using DDT) were curtailed due to concerns over safety and environmental effects, as well as problems in administrative, managerial and financial implementation, but mostly because mosquitoes were developing resistance to DDT.[21] Efforts shifted from spraying to the use of bednets impregnated with insecticides and other interventions.[22][23]

...The EPA then held seven months of hearings in 1971–1972, with scientists giving evidence both for and against the use of DDT. In the summer of 1972, Ruckelshaus announced the cancellation of most uses of DDT—an exemption allowed for public health uses under some conditions.[12] Immediately after the cancellation was announced, both EDF and the DDT manufacturers filed suit against the EPA, with the industry seeking to overturn the ban, and EDF seeking a comprehensive ban. The cases were consolidated, and in 1973 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the EPA had acted properly in banning DDT.[12]

Originally Posted by Elmer Fudd

and the administrator ADMITTED it was all for political reasons.....

Another lie and total BS. That did not happen in the real world, only in some rightwingnut fantasyland.

Originally Posted by Elmer Fudd

.......documented, incontrovertible FACTS..............accept it , you will sleep better.......

No Fudd, you're spewing pure BS again. Your so-called "facts" aren't really facts at all, they are rightwingnut fantasies and propaganda without any basis in reality. You have presented no "documentation" whatsoever, just nutjob rants from clueless fools. No one with any brains or the ability to use google is going to fall for your lies and misinformation.

Originally Posted by Elmer Fudd

But this is America....if you prefer to ignore [reality, as you always do, Fudd] (due to religious reasons) you have the right to...

...remain ignorant, confused and bamboozled, as you repeatedly demonstrate yourself to be, Fudd.