Comments on: DDT, Junk Science, Malaria, and insecticide resistance

By: The Reticulator » The problem with actually reading the article

The Reticulator » The problem with actually reading the article — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 18:17:38 +0000

[...] Normally the thing would be to keep quiet about having jumped to conclusions before reading. But while thinking about a reply, I found a good article in Bug Girls’ Blog that I want to link here for future reference: DDT, Junk Science, and insecticide resistance. [...]

By: Bug Girl

Bug Girl — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 02:06:13 +0000

Howie–you didn’t actually read this post, did you?

Bedbugs have been resistant to DDT since the 50’s.

By: howiecopywriter

howiecopywriter — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 14:45:07 +0000

Please get me some DDT, I need it so bad. The pyrethrins don’t really work. It is just to kill some bed bugs in my apartment in Bronx, New York City NY. Please. Save me. See http://www.greenscenedebate.com/2008/07/can-you-get-me-some-ddt-fast.html
This is not a joke. I need an insecticide that is persistent.

By: Bug Girl

Bug Girl — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:17:08 +0000

There’s a nifty graph that Metcalf did that shows a dose-response curve over time. Alas, it looks about the same as the graph I used above with the numbers of resistant species.
If I can find it online, I’ll stick it in.

Here’s one example–not dose response, but clearly showing diminishing returns on spraying:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook/0309036275/gifmid/28.gif

By: Drbuzz0

Drbuzz0 — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:54:57 +0000

One of the “junk science” articles said that the anti-ddt people “fail to understand that resistance does not imply immunity.” AYE! I think that the “Anti-DDT” crowd can understand that just fine.

Yes, I suppose if you want to go down the road of “Well use more! more MORE MORE!” Well, then eventually you don’t have to worry about resistance, right? I mean, one would think that if you use enough, any insects will be crushed off of the sheer weight of the tons of chemicals dropped on them…..

By: Bug Girl

Bug Girl — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:32:15 +0000

You’re the first person to report this–what kind of browser are you using? I do know that if you have a very small window size, there’s a problem.

By: Brian

Brian — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 09:32:00 +0000

Could you please fix your webpage
http://membracid.wordpress.com/2007/06/13/ddt-malaria-insecticide-resistance/
It has the Flickr photos and calendar right on top of the text pghs and chart.

By: Bug Girl

Bug Girl — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 01:09:25 +0000

VERY interesting!!
Great find!

By: jre

jre — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 19:59:41 +0000

There’s a lot more oddness with Bertrand Russel and Malthusians, but it’s really not about science at all.

Bingo! I also thought some of these comments were coming from left field -- I mean, Bertrand Russell? So I looked it up. Turns out that Russell is kind of a bête noire for the LaRouche organization. One of several books they have published on the international British-enviro-Straussian conspiracy states:

... a group of British intellectuals led by Bertrand Russell and H.G. Wells attempted to control scientific progress in order to keep the world backward and more easily managed by Imperialism. In this conspiracy theory, Wells wished Science to be controlled by some kind of priesthood and kept from the common man, while Russell wished to stifle it altogether by restricting it to a closed system of formal logic, that would prohibit the introduction of new ideas. This conspiracy also involved the promotion of the counterculture.

I didn't expect it, but this discussion has led into one of the darker and loonier corners of the political webosphere. Anyway, when one of your commenters refers to Bertrand Russell or Malthusians, you can make a pretty good guess as to where he/she is getting his/her reading material.

By: Bug Girl

Bug Girl — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 18:24:14 +0000

Well, there’s a lot going on in that article.
First, the photos: they are clearly calculated to produce an emotional response.
Second, he initially discusses his work in the AMAZON, which is quite different than Africa in both ecosystem and pest insect.
The questions asked by the interviewer are extremely leading: “Is it brainwashing?” “The policy move was an excuse for genocide…”
Come on!
Lastly, he makes a case that DDT will work *in certain situations.* I’m not disputing that–I’m saying that there are many situations where it will not work.
He also doesn’t address the issue of DDT being “appropriated” for agricultural use, which is an issue for all pesticides in use.
He does talk about pyrethroid resistance–but there is cross resistance between DDT and pyrethroids, so if a mosquito is resistant to one, odds are it’s resistant to the other! (See above; they attack the same ion channel.)
He and I agree that there must be an existing infrastructure for success; however, he makes this amazingly patriarchal statement: “People can’t handle their own disease problems. And you can’t empower them to do so.”

WTF? This sounds very much like what another poster said, which I think is patronizing and insulting to developing world peoples.
There’s a lot more oddness with Bertrand Russel and Malthusians, but it’s really not about science at all. He ends with a statement dissing large data sets, which is…mind boggling.
In short, I think that on some points we agree; and I also think that he is showing poor judgment to be associated with a group so far out on the fringe. He is on the board of directors of several associated groups, so he isn’t just an interviewee that is misquoted.
It’s difficult to take anything from this organization seriously.