Natalia - can you say more about: "The biggest problem in the tropics is mostly western corporate interference applying their solutions to something that used to take care of itself" -especially the 'used to take care of itself" part?
Is malaria more of a problem then before Western interference? Thanks for a very interesting discussion. Lawry _____ From: Darryl or Natalia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2007 3:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] Silent Spring is a case study in the tragedy of goodintentions Darryl says that if there are such studies, they are not well known. Given the success of beneficials introduction in so many other applications, even good old Prince Albert's solution of introducing sparrow hawks to get rid of the Crystal Palace's trapped birds, it's hard to believe that it hasn't been tried. It is likely that, as with North American efforts, much is done on a local scale that we don't realize because the problem never spirals into epidemic proportions. We tend to hear mostly about western solutions because they now control more affected regions' economies. The very best beneficials are going to be whatever is in the affected region that feeds on the mosquito larvae. Dragonfly nymphs for sure, possibly water beetles or boatmen. Introduction of beneficials must be frequent under warm conditions. Mosquito nets are effective, and would spare millions of lives just on the basis of low counts of actual malaria carrying mosquitoes. It's exposure to high numbers which increase chances of infection. The biggest problem in the tropics is mostly western corporate interference applying their solutions to something that used to take care of itself, but has fallen into their lap because of corporate need to infiltrate these regions for profit. They change the delicate balance, then miscreate the solutions in the only way they know how -- with fast-acting chemicals that result in eradication of the beneficials that best address the problem, thereby increasing numbers of the anopheles genus. Science will never eradicate this fluke; it's here for the same reason as everything else which has life. We can only act and react responsibly. Natalia Lawrence de Bivort wrote: Very interesting, Natalia. What kind of beneficials might work in tropical areas? Would they be a one-time application, or periodic application? I'm sure experiments have been tried with this approach. Do you have a sense of how well they worked, or whether they had negative consequences? Many thanks.... Lawry _____ From: Darryl or Natalia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 4:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] Silent Spring is a case study in the tragedy of goodintentions My first thought in response to the malaria problem was that Unicef should stop charging people US $5.00 for mosquito nets. This is usually cost prohibitive for people whose annual income may not exceed same, or whose monthly food allowance would have to be spent. Donations were supposed to have paid for these nets, but, as usual, administrative costs come first. What it likely means is that there is a huge surplus of nets doing no one any good, and people die needlessly. I just gave Darryl a call on this topic, having remembered a previous discussion about DDT use on this list. Darryl Beschell has, as some of you know, worked extensively with farmers and government to reduce or avoid pesticide use. His first response was that DDT use, typically applied in areas of still water where the malaria-carrying mosquito breeds, also wipes out all beneficials (predators) which would otherwise be feasting upon the vector's larvae, therefore eventually making the problem far worse. DDT also kills amphibians in the water, effects the birds and other wildlife using the ponds, and though it doesn't cause cancer, can bring about one of many mammalian health concerns such as asthma, allergies, reproductive irregularities and also interferes with calcium uptake -- hence, among many concerns -- the poor quality of bird's egg shells . If you don't eradicate the beneficials, there'll be fewer malaria carrying mosquitos. Introducing more water dwelling or visiting beneficials to these areas would be the least harmful answer. Draining still water is another less toxic solution, since DDT use would kill off life in the ponds anyway. Natalia Lawrence de Bivort wrote: I don't think Carson pretended to be a chemical research scientist. Above all, she gave the alarm, and I think her essential thesis - that infusing the food stream and environment with industrial chemicals is a bad thing - has stood the test of time very well, e.g. cigarettes, MSG, transfats, etc. That she didn't focus on cigarettes is not much of a criticism; that she alerted a society and its environmental scientists to pay attention to these things is high praise. No tragedy at all there. DDT is a good example of an agent that is inadequately understood. And malaria is a horrible disease. And yes, trying to rectify errors and improve our health through systemic interventions will produce unintended effects. No surprise there. But is it not better than to try and solve problems than ignoring them for fear of not always getting it right? Dandelions? Wente has got to be kidding! Dandelion salad, dandelion wine.... Does anyone know if malaria can be stopped by any means other than stopping DDT? Cheers, Lawry _____ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cordell, Arthur: ECOM Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 1:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] Silent Spring is a case study in the tragedy of goodintentions Harry can annoy but he can also (in his own way ) inform. It was in one of Harry's postings that I first became aware of the DDT controversy and Rachel Carson's role. Arthur ---------------------------------- Comment Carson's toxic legacy; Her book Silent Spring is a case study in the tragedy of good intentions MARGARET WENTE 24 May 2007 <javascript:void(0)> The Globe and Mail I was 12 when I read Rachel Carson's newly published book, Silent Spring, in 1962. Although I'd never heard the term "environmentalist," she turned me into one. I didn't understand the complicated science in it. But I was horrified by her evocation of a natural world whose creatures were being wiped out by man-made poisons - the silent spring, where no birds sang. In school, I wrote an essay praising Silent Spring, and another one explaining why a bomb shelter wouldn't help you survive a nuclear attack. (That was an apocalyptic time, not unlike our own.) Born 100 years ago this week, Ms. Carson is still revered as the patron saint of the environmental movement. Schools, conferences and special days are named after her. Among her foremost admirers is Al Gore. "Silent Spring came as a cry in the wilderness, a deeply felt, thoroughly researched and brilliantly written argument that changed the course of history," he wrote. Indeed it did - and not necessarily for the better. In fact, it led to one of the greatest tragedies of modern times. Thanks to Ms. Carson's all-out attack on pesticides, DDT was banned in the West. But DDT was also the most effective anti-malarial agent ever invented; before it fell into disrepute, it was credited with saving 100 million lives. When the Western nations cut off their support for DDT spraying programs in the Third World, the death toll shot back up. Today, malaria cripples local economies and kills 2.7 million people every year - mostly children under 5. In a devastating investigative piece, New York Times journalist Tina Rosenberg wrote, "Silent Spring is now killing African children because of its persistence in the public mind." "Poor woman. She never actually said 'Ban DDT,' " says Amir Attaran, an expert on public-health and development policy at the University of Ottawa. "Her point was that we should use chemicals less." But for environmental fundamentalists, Silent Spring was the ideal propaganda tool to drive home their message. And even though the World Health Organization has now reversed itself on DDT, countless environmental and cancer activists continue to cite the DDT ban as one of environmentalism's greatest "victories." DDT's persistence in the environment did, indeed, affect certain bird species, such as eagles. But after decades of testing, there's not a shred of evidence that it causes cancer in humans, as Ms. Carson claimed. Although she was an eloquent, impassioned writer, science wasn't her strong suit. "She focused on the one environmental subject [chemicals] where you have to have the greatest scientific knowledge," says Prof. Attaran. Silent Spring is riddled with anecdotal evidence and misleading assertions that flunk the most basic science test. "Today more American school children die of cancer than from any other cause," she wrote, implying that pesticides were to blame. But the real reason for this alarming trend was the dramatic decline in other causes of child mortality, especially infectious diseases. At the time she wrote, the mortality rate from childhood cancer hadn't changed for decades. Curiously, she also overlooked the greatest man-made cancer agent of them all: cigarettes. Today the legacy of Silent Spring is all around us. As cities and towns rush to ban lawn sprays, you can thank Ms. Carson for the dandelions in the park. The belief that man-made agents are unnatural, and thus inherently bad - even in the most minute amounts - is now widespread. Millions of people are convinced that toxic chemicals in our food, our water, and our air are responsible for the cancer epidemic, even though no such epidemic exists. Her apocalyptic prophecies about how mankind is destroying the Earth are faithfully reproduced by extremists in the global warming crowd. Most seriously, groups like the Sierra Club continue to lobby against DDT because of the potential for "widespread misuse" - yet another example of the distressing tendency among environmentalists to sacrifice the interests of the Third World because they think they know better. Ms. Carson wasn't really the mother of environmentalism either, as her admirers like to claim. By the time she came along, the environmental movement had been going strong for decades, and the public had already embraced the importance of species conservation and the preservation of open spaces. The movement was already poised for its next - and far more problematic - wave, the assault on Big Chem. "She didn't launch that movement," says Prof. Attaran. "She was used by it." And she was not used well. She may have turned the sixties generation on to environmentalism. But ultimately, Silent Spring is a case study in the tragedy of good intentions. [EMAIL PROTECTED] _____ _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
