# DDT - dangerous to birds? dangerous to humans? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 16, 2007, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049 "2007-07-16T23:32:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![MoskTheDissenter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9d8465/32.png) [@MoskTheDissenter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MoskTheDissenter)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2007, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/41 "2007-07-18T19:36:41Z")
Like I said: link to some data instead of wikipedia and articles that say the exact opposite of what you are trying to point out. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2007, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/42 "2007-07-18T19:51:01Z")
[QUOTE=MoskTheDissenter] Like I said: link to some data instead of wikipedia and articles that say the exact opposite of what you are trying to point out. [/QUOTE] I do agree Wikipedia is not that great a cite, but the cite from Source Watch points to the likely origin of the idea of blaming environmentalists came from, and why it is a myth. That was from \*\*Haunted \*\*, as for me, I did not use Wikipedia at all. More disinformation from you even in this thread alone. ---
**Author:** ![Haunted](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/898d66/32.png) [@Haunted](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haunted)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2007, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/43 "2007-07-18T19:51:23Z")
I’m sorry for getting so emotional/angry in my posts. This whole thing is just so unbelievably disgusting that it makes me furious. It seems like every time you turn around you see another greedy person doing things that are so selfish and twisted, so hard to fathom, that you can hardly wrap your brain around them. Blah. It’s so discouraging. On a brighter note, here’s the truth about Rachel Carson. [http://www.time.com/time/time100/scientist/profile/carson.html](http://www.time.com/time/time100/scientist/profile/carson.html) ---
**Author:** ![MoskTheDissenter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9d8465/32.png) [@MoskTheDissenter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MoskTheDissenter)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2007, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/44 "2007-07-18T20:12:07Z")
[QUOTE=Haunted] I’m sorry for getting so emotional/angry in my posts. This whole thing is just so unbelievably disgusting that it makes me furious. It seems like every time you turn around you see another greedy person doing things that are so selfish and twisted, so hard to fathom, that you can hardly wrap your brain around them. Blah. It’s so discouraging. On a brighter note, here’s the truth about Rachel Carson. [TIME | Current & Breaking News | National & World Updates](http://www.time.com/time/time100/scientist/profile/carson.html) [/QUOTE] I apologize for my comments. I can’t edit and I responded a bit too quickly. My point was simply that casting doubt on motives is easy to do, but doesn’t prove much. I haven’t linked to junkscience, I’ve linked to scientific research. Further, there is the fact that DDT isn’t a profit-maker for chemical companies. The DDT ban benefits them, as they can sell more profitable patented insecticides. I also am a bit emotionally involved in the issue; I’ve seen firsthand the remarkable success in Eritrea and I’ve seen firsthand the terrible failures of overused drugs and expensive nets. ---
**Author:** ![Haunted](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/898d66/32.png) [@Haunted](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haunted)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2007, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/45 "2007-07-18T20:33:24Z")
> [@](#): > > My point was simply that casting doubt on motives is easy to do, but doesn’t prove much. Indeed. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2007, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/46 "2007-07-18T20:57:15Z")
[QUOTE=MoskTheDissenter] I apologize for my comments. I can’t edit and I responded a bit too quickly. My point was simply that casting doubt on motives is easy to do, but doesn’t prove much. I haven’t linked to junkscience, I’ve linked to scientific research. Further, there is the fact that DDT isn’t a profit-maker for chemical companies. The DDT ban benefits them, as they can sell more profitable patented insecticides. I also am a bit emotionally involved in the issue; I’ve seen firsthand the remarkable success in Eritrea and I’ve seen firsthand the terrible failures of overused drugs and expensive nets. [/QUOTE] This is the first time we’ve heard about your firsthand experience. Please supply heart-wrenching details. Unfortunately, the anti-Rachel Carson, anti-environmental sources you’ve already cited have sullied your message. And cast doubts upon your motives. (As does your User name.) ---
**Author:** ![MoskTheDissenter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9d8465/32.png) [@MoskTheDissenter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MoskTheDissenter)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2007, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/47 "2007-07-18T21:27:29Z")
[QUOTE=Bridget Burke] This is the first time we’ve heard about your firsthand experience. Please supply heart-wrenching details. Unfortunately, the anti-Rachel Carson, anti-environmental sources you’ve already cited have sullied your message. And cast doubts upon your motives. (As does your User name.) [/QUOTE] The only two things I’ve provided links to are scientific studies, both on pubmed, both in journals. Perhaps you’re referring to someone else’s links? I did suggest that you could read the NYT articles linked by someone else, but I didn’t think the NYT was very controversial. And again, arguing that something is false because the source has a bias is a logical fallacy. Don’t sources that have a pro-environmental bias sully your point? As far as my experiences in Africa, I’ve been there and discussed the situation with humanitarian workers, locals, and government officials, and I’ve kept up on scientific research in the area. For heartrending details, you can google for malaria victim images. In any case, it is irrelevant to any issue save that of me not being a “pesticide pusher”. And my user name? Mosk is a California supreme court justice that had a tendency to dissent from the majority. The first several Google hits reveal this. It’s really silly that you’d even mention it, though. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2007, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/48 "2007-07-18T21:31:43Z")
[QUOTE=MoskTheDissenter] Further, there is the fact that DDT isn’t a profit-maker for chemical companies. [/QUOTE] Sure it is. They just don’t make as much per kilo. > [@](#): > > The DDT ban benefits them, as they can sell more profitable patented insecticides. With DDT they make it up in volume. And that contributed to the vicious circle we had in the 60s; we’d put down some DDT and some mosquitos survived it and produced more DDT-resistant mosquitos so we put down more DDT and some mosquitos survived it, etc. We humans and our DDT were the agents of anopheles evolution and were inadvertently encouraging the eventual respread of one of our greatest killers by making a superskeeter out of its vector. > [@](#): > > I also am a bit emotionally involved in the issue; I’ve seen firsthand the remarkable success in Eritrea and I’ve seen firsthand the terrible failures of overused drugs and expensive nets. Do you have more recent data than [this?](http://www.eritreadaily.net/News2005/article200504281.htm) > [@Eritrea Daily.net](#): > > But today Eritrea, one of the poorest countries in the world, stands out as a success story in controlling malaria. > > The statistics are compelling. The number of people dying from malaria has dropped by between 55 to 65 percent since 1999. Mortality of children under five years of age dropped by 53 percent, while there was a 64 percent drop in the death rate for older children and adults. > > “In 1991, our death toll among pregnant women from malaria was very high,” Eritrea’s Health Minister, Saleh Meky says. > > “Today, it is non-existent.” > > … > > Walker says there are now more than 850,000 nets are being used in Eritrea with the numbers increasing. > “It’s become a major very cost effective way of dealing with the problem,” he says. > > “The nets are either free to the most needy or else very heavily subsidized. The ones that are being used also require being re-treated once a year. That is often where this process falls down in other countries. But again in Eritrea it’s worked well as of the 800,000 odd bed nets, at least half a million of them are being re-treated every year.” > > … > > “If you go back five years, Eritrea used indoor spraying very extensively. But that’s been cut back a lot with this project,” he says. > > “We’ve also introduced other kinds of insecticides which are more environmentally friendly than those they were using. Spraying though still continues, according to the extent of the malaria problem and the behavior of the mosquito in a particular area.” It looks to me like they are cutting back on the worse pesticide actors, presumably including DDT, and those “expensive” nets they’re giving away are doing their job. But yes, the WHO does support the surgical use of indoor DDT spraying on walls where mosquitos light, and that is where DDT’s persistence helps it shine while not attacking enough of the anopheles population to select for resistance, which is what the spraying the whole outdoors method of the 40s-60s did. ---
**Author:** ![MoskTheDissenter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9d8465/32.png) [@MoskTheDissenter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MoskTheDissenter)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2007, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/49 "2007-07-18T21:58:47Z")
Aside from making up profits by selling DDT in volumes, how does that disagree with anything I said? I did talk about the success in Eritrea as compared to the wetter mid-african area. And why would they want to ramp up and sell a ton of DDT when with the status quo they can make the stuff they are making now and make the same proft? It’s not as if we are going to start up with massive spraying efforts again. No one is suggesting that; I at least am suggesting only that we get on board with the WHO and other who have recently come around and make sure that DDT is cheap and available for those countries that need it, instead of insisting they use more toxic or less effective treatments. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2007, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/50 "2007-07-19T04:16:14Z")
[QUOTE=Khadaji] The [Junk Science](http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.html#ref7) site disputes the claim that it is dangerous to birds - including the claim about eggshell thinging. I’m not familiar enough with [JunkScience.com](http://JunkScience.com) to know if it is considered reputable. Can any doper chime in on that regard? [/QUOTE] Check out the [whois info for the domain junkscience.com](http://whois.uberdose.com/www.junkscience.com) ```auto Registrant: Steve Milloy 12309 Briarbush Lane Potomac, MD 20854 US ``` Now check out what [sourcewatch.org](http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_Milloy) has to say about Steven Milloy. > [@](#): > > Steven J. Milloy is a columnist for Fox News and a paid advocate for Phillip Morris, ExxonMobil and other corporations. From the 1990s until the end of 2005, he was an adjunct scholar at the libertarian think tank the Cato Institute. > > Milloy runs the website [Junkscience.com](http://Junkscience.com), which is dedicated to debunking what he alleges to be false claims regarding global warming, DDT, environmental radicalism and scare science among other topics. Whether or not you agree with the political stance of these organizations I think it’s hard to escape the fact that this man is pushing a specific political agenda. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2007, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/51 "2007-07-19T12:23:50Z")
[QUOTE=MoskTheDissenter] The only two things I’ve provided links to are scientific studies, both on pubmed, both in journals. Perhaps you’re referring to someone else’s links? I did suggest that you could read the NYT articles linked by someone else, but I didn’t think the NYT was very controversial. And again, arguing that something is false because the source has a bias is a logical fallacy. Don’t sources that have a pro-environmental bias sully your point? As far as my experiences in Africa, I’ve been there and discussed the situation with humanitarian workers, locals, and government officials, and I’ve kept up on scientific research in the area. For heartrending details, you can google for malaria victim images. In any case, it is irrelevant to any issue save that of me not being a “pesticide pusher”. And my user name? Mosk is a California supreme court justice that had a tendency to dissent from the majority. The first several Google hits reveal this. It’s really silly that you’d even mention it, though. [/QUOTE] So, you’re generally anti-environment. Not simply where DDT is concerned. And you did speak approvingly of one of the more notorious anti-environmental, pro-corporate sites. > [@](#): > > As far as the junk science guy goes, he is a little, ah, bombastic. But he is not way out on a limb, and there’s not much of his research that is arguable. Thanks for telling me about Judge Mosk. Odd that you’d choose [his](http://www.berkeleydaily.org/article.cfm?archiveDate=06-20-01&storyID=5518) name. > [@](#): > > Mosk’s 1972 ruling, possibly the most important environmental decision in the court’s history, extended to private developers a law requiring a study of each major project’s likely environmental impact and ways to avoid harm. Again, it’s sad that you hurt your cause by not immediately identifying yourself as someone with personal experience. [This](http://www.eritreadaily.net/News2005/article200504281.htm) story about Eritrean success against malaria doesn’t mention DDT. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2007, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/52 "2007-07-19T13:43:27Z")
I am pretty sure that personal observations about other posters are not going to move the discussion forward, so I really suggest that such remarks be left for a different Forum. [/Modding] ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2007, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/53 "2007-07-19T14:47:02Z")
[QUOTE=MoskTheDissenter] And why would they want to ramp up and sell a ton of DDT when with the status quo they can make the stuff they are making now and make the same proft? [/QUOTE] Actually, that’s why I don’t really think many of the pro-DDT people are in the employ of the pesticide industry. I suspect some are True Conservatives[sup]TM[/sup] who are convinced that, “what worked in 1947 should still work in 2007, dagnabbit!” I’ll try to think of other examples of groups whose goals have been disavowed by the industries rumored to bankroll them because the groups’ goals are counter to the industries’ self-interests. I’ll get back to you about that. And there’s an element of disingenuous pro-business-at-all-costs anti-environmentalism behind a lot of the pro-DDT discussion, especially when those same people also vilify the UN, the WHO, and foreign aid in other discussions. Milloy, though, takes that to a whole new, sleazier level. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2007, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/54 "2007-07-19T17:02:45Z")
[QUOTE=tomndebb] I am pretty sure that personal observations about other posters are not going to move the discussion forward, so I really suggest that such remarks be left for a different Forum. [/Modding] [/QUOTE] OK. I’ll try to behave… ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2007, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/55 "2007-07-19T22:14:43Z")
I must confess, I do get tired of the ad hominem arguments. Yes, Steve Milloy has an agenda … and so do Hilary Clinton and President Bush and you and I. So what? The question is scientific, look to science for the answers. Milloy has an interesting page [here](http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.html) , which references dozens and dozens of scientific studies. Please don’t bother saying once again that Milloy has an agenda … read the studies, read the results, then we’ll have something to discuss. Any pesticide is deleterious when overused. However, having lived and worked many years in malarious tropical countries, and having seen people die from the disease, I can assure you that malaria is a serious problem, one that requires serious solutions. Currently, the only way to successfully attack tropical malaria is a multifaceted program involving education, landscape cleanup (removing standing water), treated bed nets, anti-malarial drugs, and judicious use of insecticides. The reason DDT is a good one is that it is cheap, and the countries with malaria are by and large broke beyond belief. The patents on DDT expired long ago, so there is competition in the market. As a result, it does not have the high profit margins for the producers which other chemicals have. The idea that chemical companies are pushing its use is nonsense, they make much more money on more modern chemicals. Sure, they’d like you to buy it, but they’d prefer you bought Malathion™ or the like. The proper use of DDT is to use it only when the other methods have failed, to use small quantities, and to avoid spraying it outdoors. Finally, Rachel Carlson overhyped the dangers of DDT, but so what? She was a pioneer and a lone voice pointing out the dangers of the indiscriminate use of pesticides, and deserves immense respect for that, regardless of any errors she might have made. w. ---
**Author:** ![Haunted](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/898d66/32.png) [@Haunted](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haunted)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2007, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/56 "2007-07-19T23:23:44Z")
> [@](#): > > Milloy has an interesting page here , which references dozens and dozens of scientific studies. Please don’t bother saying once again that Milloy has an agenda … read the studies, read the results, then we’ll have something to discuss. Great idea. Let’s start with this: > [@](#): > > IV. Human exposure > > Actual human exposures have always been far lower than the “acceptable” level. > > Human ingestion of DDT was estimated to average about 0.0026 milligrams per kilogram of body weight per day (mg/kg/day) about 0.18 milligrams per day. > > [Hayes, W. 1956. J Amer Medical Assn, Oct. 1956] **intention** , would you please get a copy of the October, 1956 _Journal of the American Medical Association_, scan it and post it? Then, after we’ve all discussed it, we can move on to this: > [@](#): > > In 1967, the daily average intake of DDT by 20 men with high occupational exposure was estimated to be 17.5 to 18 mg/man per day, as compared with an average of 0.04 mg/man per day for the general population. > > [IARC V.5, 1974]. We’re going to need you to get whatever the IARC, V.5, from 1974, and scan it and post it. Then after we discuss that study, we’ll move on to the next ones. Those would be: > [@](#): > > [Ottoboni, A. et al. California’s Health, August 1969 & May 1972] They should be easy to find! Thanks! Gosh, I wonder why Mr. Milloy didn’t use any “evidence” for his statements that he could link to so we could review it for ourselves? Oh, well, I’m sure it’s not important. I mean, it’s not like we can’t trust the guy. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2007, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/57 "2007-07-19T23:28:03Z")
[QUOTE=intention] The proper use of DDT is to use it only when the other methods have failed, to use small quantities, and to avoid spraying it outdoors. Finally, Rachel Carlson overhyped the dangers of DDT, but so what? . [/QUOTE] Right, I agree. DDT is fairly safe when used as you say- in small amounts, inside, as a vector control. But I don’t think R Carlson really overhyped it. DDT \*was \*being used in truely massive and dangerous amounts back then, with no thought as to safety. Again:Look at this line from Wiki again: “\*This use only requires a small fraction of that previously used in agriculture; for the whole country of Guyana, covering an area of 215,000 km², the required amount is roughly equal to the amount of DDT that might previously have been used to spray 4 km² of cotton during a single growing season.” \* They used **FIFTY THOUSAND** times what is considered safe today. And, worse, the skeeters were growing resistant to it, due to that wasteful and dangerous over-usage. ---
**Author:** ![Haunted](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/898d66/32.png) [@Haunted](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haunted)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2007, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/58 "2007-07-20T00:09:57Z")
> [@](#): > > Finally, Rachel Carlson overhyped the dangers of DDT, but so what? Sure, if by _overhyped_ you mean[this](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_carson#Posthumous_criticism): > [@](#): > > Carson, however, never actually called for an out-right ban on DDT, instead arguing in Silent Spring that: > > No responsible person contends that insect-borne disease should be ignored. The question that has now urgently presented itself is whether it is either wise or responsible to attack the problem by methods that are rapidly making it worse. The world has heard much of the triumphant war against disease through the control of insect vectors of infection, but it has heard little of the other side of the story - the defeats, the short-lived triumphs that now strongly support the alarming view that the insect enemy has been made actually stronger by our efforts. Even worse, we may have destroyed our very means of fighting.[38] > > She noted that “Malaria programmes are threatened by resistance among mosquitoes”[39] and emphasized the advice given by the directer of Holland’s Plant Protection Service: “Practical advice should be ‘Spray as little as you possibly can’ rather than ‘Spray to the limit of your capacity’…Pressure on the pest population should always be as slight as possible.”[40] > [@](#): > > Furthermore, experts have argued that restrictions placed on the agricultural use of DDT (something Carson actually did advocate) have increased its effectiveness as tool for battling malaria. Pro-DDT advocate Amir Attaran has said, “The outcome of the treaty [banning DDT’s use in agriculture] is arguably better than the status quo…For the first time, there is now an insecticide which is restricted to vector control only, meaning that the selection of resistant mosquitoes will be slower than before.”[41] And even Roger Bate, director of Africa Fighting Malaria, has said “A lot of people have used Carson to push their own agendas. We just have to be a little careful when you’re talking about someone who died in 1964.”[42] It sounds to me like she pretty much wrote the same things you did. Are you overhyping or was it just her? ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2007, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/59 "2007-07-20T01:32:56Z")
A blogger, Tim Lambert, has been [tirelessly tracking](http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/ddt/) the right-wing effort to blame Rachel Carson and the environmental movement for all the malaria deaths. As he continually point out, they have actually probably saved lives by reducing the widespread use of DDT in agriculture and thereby slowing the development of resistance in mosquitoes to it and other pesticides, thus allowing DDT and other pesticides to be effective in some areas. [Here](http://membracid.wordpress.com/2007/06/13/ddt-malaria-insecticide-resistance/) is another blogger, an entomologist, who has jumped into the fray. ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2007, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049/60 "2007-07-20T04:58:16Z")
[QUOTE=Haunted] Sure, if by _overhyped_ you mean[this](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_carson#Posthumous_criticism): … It sounds to me like she pretty much wrote the same things you did. Are you overhyping or was it just her? [/QUOTE] Actually, I was referring to her claim that DDT causes cancer when I said “overhyped”. I can’t find any scientific evidence for that at all. But like I said, it’s no matter, she did the world an outstanding service by pointing out the dangers of indiscriminate use of poisonous chemicals. w. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ddt-dangerous-to-birds-dangerous-to-humans/412049.md?page=4)