Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

nafex - [NAFEX] OT: DDT (was glyphosate 41)

nafex@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: North American Fruit Explorers mailing list at ibiblio

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Anton Callaway <marillen@earthlink.net>
  • To: North American Fruit Explorers <nafex@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [NAFEX] OT: DDT (was glyphosate 41)
  • Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 08:54:55 -0400 (GMT-04:00)

The evidence from Science is rarely 100% conclusive. That said, I think the
evidence that DDT caused eggshell thinning in some bird species and had other
detrimental environmental effects is more convincing than evidence to the
contrary. Most of the early studies that failed to show eggshell thinning in
the laboratory used bird species that are low on the food chain, whereas the
greatest effect in the wild was on bird species high on the food chain, where
environmentally persistent, fat-soluble toxins like DDT accumulate.
Unfortunately for the public, those flawed laboratory studies are often cited
even today in support of the notion that DDT is safe.

Another misleading fact that is often cited is that even after DDT's ban
(here), seabird eggshells have not returned to their pre-DDT thicknesses
(although they have gotten significantly thicker and raptor populations have
rebounded). Is this due to other chemicals that influence the same
biological process? Is it due to the continued use of DDT elsewhere in the
world? We don't know for sure yet. Science moves slowly, but in the
long-term is more reliable than zealotry. (BTW, Steve, I did not view your
email as zealous at all. I thought you asked a fair question, but some of
the misinformation being spread around is from people with an axe to grind.)

It is true that the story is more complex than either side likes to admit.
DDT is still used in many countries with severe malaria problems because it
is so effective in killing mosquitoes (and is cheap to produce).

Anton


-----Original Message-----
>From: Steve <sdw12986@aol.com>
>Sent: Oct 29, 2010 12:05 AM
>To: North American Fruit Explorers <nafex@lists.ibiblio.org>
>Subject: Re: [NAFEX] Glyphosate 41
>
>
>I would be happy to have DDT back on the market. It was probably safer
>for humans than much of what is used now.
>I wouldn't want it until there was real proof that it DIDN'T cause the
>decline in birds of prey. Was it a big lie that eagle eggs shells got
>thinner and weaker, causing nesting failure? If they did get thinner,
>what caused it if not DDT?
>
>Steve (in the Adirondacks, where we now have lots of eagles)
>
>
>
>On 10/1/2010 10:50 AM, Dr. Lucky Pittman wrote:
>> Dave L wrote:
>>
>>...........
>> .............
>> The ‘sad’ thing is that the DDT ban was based on hysteria fomented by a
>> novel – and overrode all evidence produced by grounded scientific
>> investigation.
>>
>> DDT has gotten an undeservedly bad rap.
>>
>> 3 Billion and Counting…
>>
>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/27559
>>
>> LLP
>>
>_______________________________________________
>nafex mailing list
>nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
>
>Reproduction of list messages or archives is not allowed.
>This includes distribution on other email lists or reproduction on web sites.
>Permission to reproduce is NEVER granted, so don't claim you have permission!
>
>**YOU MUST BE SUBSCRIBED TO POST!**
>Posts from email addresses that are not subscribed are discarded.
>No exceptions.
>----
>To subscribe or unsubscribe, go to the bottom of this page (also can be used
>to change other email options):
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/nafex
>
>File attachments are NOT stripped by this list.
>TAKE STEPS TO PROTECT YOURSELF FROM COMPUTER VIRUSES!
>Please do not send binary files.
>Use plain text ONLY in emails!
>
>NAFEX web site: http://www.nafex.org/





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page