"Controlled indoor spraying of the infamous pesticide DDT is poised to make a comeback in countries that have tried and failed to do without it in the battle against malaria," reports news service Reuters.
The Institute of Public Affairs* has published several proponents of DDT, including Roger Bate in an article titled 'The Ban on DDT is Killing Millions in the Third World'.
------------------
*I'm a Senior Fellow at the IPA.
Dear,
its indeed good to fight the spread of malaria in africa,and my comment is that God may countinue supporting you as we look to control of malaria i africa,my question is do you fund projects on HIV/AIDS and Malaria control in the community,because ther is a small village in south sudan that there are too much spread of malaria in the community,we form another community based organisaation support the community in the control,the organisation is called,SOUTH SUDAN DEVELOPMENT AID,We would be greatfully to hear from you as we look forward to the control of the disease in the community
I got the feeling some time ago that Tim Lambert was the "Mark Latham" of science bloggers: more interested in fighting that getting to the truthy of the matter.
"I don't subscribe to your theory that all-powerful environmentalists control the world. They don't have the power to ban DDT and they have only a limited influence on governments."
This is hyperbole. I don't subscribe to a (consiracy) theory that environmentalist's control the world either, neither do I blame environmentalists in general: I am critical of some NGOs who continue to be irreponsible on certain issues, fail to correct harmful misinformation and exaggeration they themselve create, and who are insensitive to the adverse aspects of policies they pursue and the harms of misinformation they have created, particularly in the third world.
Lambert "So someone in the RSA government wanted to blame environmentalists for the epidemic."
Attaran "Facing pressure from environmentalists, the national malaria control programme abandoned DDT ".
No Tim "wanting to blame" is your own SPECULATION about motive, Attaran BMJ 200 merely says that they did exert polical pressure to ban DDT prior to the decision being made.
Lambert "[Goodman et al] says that they switched to pyrethroids to improve the effectiveness of the program against malaria, not because of environmentalist pressure."
Goodman et al's only relevant section:
"However, in recent years several shortcomings of RHS have been highlighted. The effectiveness of DDT was compromised by the insecticide's irritant effect, which led to a high proportion of bloodfed mosquitoes leaving huts and not resting indoors (Sharp et al. 1990). Frequent replastering and painting over sprayed walls has also impaired effectiveness. In 1995, more than 48% of the homesteads replastered at least some of their walls, rendering the insecticide ineffective (Mnzava et al. 1998). The switch to pyrethroid insecticides, which do not smell or leave visible deposits, has reduced the prevalence of this practice, but it remains a common occurrence, with a fifth of homesteads replastering or painting before the end of the malaria season in 1997–1998 (S.S. Dlamini, Mnzava AEP, Sharp BL, LeSueur D & Mthembu DJ, unpublished data)."
Nope, Tim it does not actually make the assertion you put forward, or even discuss political pressure.
Lambert "It seems to me that your comments are politically motivated and you are just looking for rocks to throw at environmentalists."
Here yet again, Tim you resort to speculation about motives instead of factually analysing human welfare policies. It happens that I actually know much more about myself than you do, from direct personal experience. Your speculation here about me is the precise opposite of the truth. My motivation for criticising particular NGOs originates from personal moral antipathy (in fact outrage) for their insensitivity to the harms they cause, and their frequent willingness to say anything, true, false or whatever, to achieve their own political objectives, and is based on direct knowledge of people in these organisations. It's the NGO ROCK THROWING and its collateral damage that causes my own activity in forums such as this, which is the main way I exert whatever political intentions I personally have.
I'm pleased though, that you seem to have desisted in dealing with Attaran arguments by political jibe. This discussion would make more progress if you eliminated that tendancy completely. I'm dissapointed you do not understand the need for NGOs to accept moral responsibility for predictable consequences of their strongly advocated policies. They expect other organisation to.