# Millions Die Via Liberal Science



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

Well, according to numerous posts by some of the Left-wing buddies on the board, conservatives care naught about the earth, about environmentalism, or even clean-up efforts! Just about profits! 

 As today is *World Malaria Day, *it might be appropriate to take a look at how well liberal efforts work out

1. World Malaria day  A Day to Act
*25 April *is a day to commemorate global efforts to control malaria. The theme of the fourth World Malaria Day - Achieving Progress and Impact - heralds the international community's renewed efforts make progress towards zero malaria deaths by 2015.World Malaria Day represents a chance for all of us to make a difference. Whether you are a government, a company, a charity or an individual, you can roll back malaria and help generate broad gains in health and human development. World Malaria Day 2011

2. o Annual worldwide cases of acute illness due to malaria: 300-500 million 
o *Annual worldwide deaths due to malaria: 1.1-2.7 million, *mostly among children under five years of age http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/documents/GlobalBurdenofMalaria.pdf

3. Malaria is transmitted from person to person through the bite of a female Anophelesa species of *mosquito prevalent throughout sub-Saharan Africa *and considered to be the most dangerous. Africa's Malaria Death Toll Still "Outrageously High"

4. concerns about *the impact of DDT* (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloro-ethane) and its derivates on human health, in spite of the fact that DDT has been *used widely for seven decades and no properly replicated and confirmed study has found any specific human health harm. *Given the enormous and proven public health benefits arising from the use of DDT in disease control, high levels of human exposure to DDT among those living in sprayed houses but presented *no evidence of actual human harm *arising from that exposure.Where DDT has been *used in malaria control over many decades*, populations have grown and health outcomes have improved. Environmental Health Perspectives: DDT and Malaria Prevention

So, why have so many *millions been allowed to die*, in the absence of DDT usage? 

*Liberalism.  The infamous liberal science as exemplified, in this case, by Rachel Carsons Silent Spring.*

5. *Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, *which in 1962 exposed the hazards of the pesticide DDT, eloquently questioned humanity's faith in technological progress and helped *set the stage for the environmental movement*.Silent Spring  meticulously described how DDT entered the food chain and accumulated in the fatty tissues of animals, including human beings, and caused cancer and genetic damage. Carson *concluded that DDT and other pesticides had irrevocably harmed birds and animals and had contaminated the entire world food supply.* 
NRDC: The Story of Silent Spring


6. British politician Dick Taverne was damning in his *criticism of Carson*:
Carson *didn't seem to take into account the vital role (DDT) played in controlling the transmission of malaria *by killing the mosquitoes that carry the parasite (...) It is the single *most effective agent ever developed for saving human life *(...) Rachel Carson is a warning to us all of the *dangers of neglecting the evidence-based approach *and the need to weight potential risk against benefit: it can be argued that the anti-DDT campaign she inspired was responsible for almost as many deaths as some of the worst dictators of the last century. Taverne, Dick (2005). "The Harm That Pressure Groups Can Do". In Feldman, Stanley; Marks, Vincent. Panic Nation.


7. *On June 14, 1972, 30 years ago this week, the EPA banned DDT despite considerable evidence of its safety offered* in seven months of agency hearings. After listening to that testimony, the EPA's own administrative law judge declared, "DDT is not a carcinogenic hazard to man...DDT is not a mutagenic or teratogenic hazard to man...The use of DDT under the regulations involved here [does] *not have a deleterious effect *on freshwater fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds or other wildlife." *Today environmental activists celebrate the EPA's DDT ban as their first great victory. *Silent Spring at 40 - Reason Magazine

So, *what have we learned*? A valuable lesson, one hopes, about liberal versus conservative thought and action: 

a. Conservatives believe that custom and tradition result in individuals living in peace. Law is custom and precedent.  Liberals are destroyers of custom and convention. To a conservative, *change should be gradual*, as the new society is often inferior to the old. We build on the ideas and experience of our ancestors. The species is wiser than the individual (Burke). 

b.* Liberals are impulsive, and imprudent*. They believe in quick changes, and risk new abuses worse than the evils that they would sweep away, since remedies are usually not simple. Plato said that prudence is the mark of the statesman.  There should be *a balance between permanence and change*, while liberals see progress as some mythical direction for society. 

Today is World Malaria Day...we owe that to liberals.


----------



## Truthseeker420 (Apr 25, 2011)

that was a long leap. couldn't you have just said I hate liberals.


----------



## editec (Apr 25, 2011)

DDT was destroying the bird population.

If you cannot figure out why killing off the birds would be a disasterous thing, so bad that DDT was banned to stop it, not amount of followup explanation is likely to convince you.


----------



## midcan5 (Apr 25, 2011)

As always simple scapegoating and labeling. If we were all conservatives, in your use of the word, we'd still be living in caves, or maybe burning people at the stack, or killing witches for being the source of all that is bad on earth. You instead in an ironic twist of facts and fate place that burden on some ogle you label liberal. It keeps you from real thought, and condemns progress and ideas you are clueless about. If it makes you happy all the better for you, doesn't make any of that nonsense sense to anyone who knows even a bit of history. The places where death is too frequent a visitor are the traditional (conservative) societies in which representative constitutional, need I say liberal government do not exit. 

A Short History of Conservative Obstruction to Progress | Conceptual Guerilla

"If history teaches us anything about politics it is this: Given enough time, liberals always win. The US was forged in liberalism, and has become more liberal with each generation. The leftward movement has seldom been smooth or consistent, but it has been unstoppable." Keith A. Pickering

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Origins-Political-Order-Prehuman-Revolution/dp/0374227349/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8]Amazon.com: The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution (9780374227340): Francis Fukuyama: Books[/ame]


If anyone wants to understand political conservatism, I suggest Albert O. Hirschman's brilliant 'The Rhetoric of Reaction.' "He argues that a triplet of 'rhetorical' criticisms--perversity, futility, and jeopardy--'has been unfailingly leveled' by 'reactionaries' at each major progressive reform of the past 300 years--those T. H. Marshall identified with the advancement of civil, political and social rights of citizenship...Charmingly written, this book can benefit a diverse readership." http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/HIRRHE.html?show=reviews


----------



## L.K.Eder (Apr 25, 2011)

thank you rachel, for saving me.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

> *Malaria Vaccine*
> Vaccine Progress
> 
> A Phase III trial of the worlds most clinically advanced malaria vaccine candidate was launched in Kisumu, Kenya, in July 2009, under the auspices of the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI)/CDC Research and Public Health Collaboration.
> ...







> DDT, DDE, DDD
> 
> CAS ID #: 50-29-3, 72-55-9, 72-54-8, 72-55-9,72-54-8
> 
> ...



ATSDR - ToxFAQs: DDT, DDE, DDD



> How can DDT, DDE, and DDD affect my health?
> 
> DDT affects the nervous system. People who accidentally swallowed large amounts of DDT became excitable and had tremors and seizures. These effects went away after the exposure stopped. No effects were seen in people who took small daily doses of DDT by capsule for 18 months.
> 
> ...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

editec said:


> DDT was destroying the bird population.
> 
> If you cannot figure out why killing off the birds would be a disasterous thing, so bad that DDT was banned to stop it, not amount of followup explanation is likely to convince you.



"*Annual worldwide deaths due to malaria: 1.1-2.7 million, mostly among children under five years of age*."

Heck, color me silly, but I'm one of those whachacall conservatives who thinks-  now don't laugh-  that people are more important than birds....


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

> RBM Partnership marks a decade of progress on *World Malaria Day 2011 and sets its sights on near zero deaths by 2015
> *
> Commemorations of World Malaria Day taking place in donor and endemic countries this week highlight the considerable progress reached in the last decade, *with key international figures urging an extraordinary intensification of efforts and clear plans for attaining the goal of near zero deaths by 2015.*
> 
> ...








> The Roll Back Malaria initiative, launched by WHO in 1998, led to the Abuja Declaration in 2000, which defined progressive intervention coverage targets for control designed to eliminate malaria as a public health problem, while emphasizing that this could only be achieved through vastly strengthened local health systems.9 Increased resources through the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, the World Banks Booster Program, the US Presidents Malaria Initiative and many others has meant that this page is finally beginning to turn as intervention coverage is rising.10


WHO | Malaria eradication back on the table


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

midcan5 said:


> As always simple scapegoating and labeling. If we were all conservatives, in your use of the word, we'd still be living in caves, or maybe burning people at the stack, or killing witches for being the source of all that is bad on earth. You instead in an ironic twist of facts and fate place that burden on some ogle you label liberal. It keeps you from real thought, and condemns progress and ideas you are clueless about. If it makes you happy all the better for you, doesn't make any of that nonsense sense to anyone who knows even a bit of history. The places where death is too frequent a visitor are the traditional (conservative) societies in which representative constitutional, need I say liberal government do not exit.
> 
> A Short History of Conservative Obstruction to Progress | Conceptual Guerilla
> 
> ...



1. "If history teaches us anything about politics it is this: Given enough time, liberals always win."

I was curious as to whether or not there would be one of you folks so fearful and insecure that defending your flawed philosophy would take precidence to finding empathy for those who die as a result of support of same.

And, Middy, you are the cake-taking prize winner!
Bravo!

I had the stopwatch all set...but it was unnecessary! You were the quickest by far!

2. " If we were all conservatives, in your use of the word, we'd still be living in caves,..."

You are sooooo good at bumper-stickers!
Thinking, not so much.


3. Care to try again? 
Was it a good idea for the liberal-enviromental greeniacs to ban DDT?


----------



## Nosmo King (Apr 25, 2011)

So, we have to assume that rather than champion policies that would protect human and animal life on the planet by restricting hazardous emissions, the Conservative environmental policy is bring back DDT.


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 25, 2011)

DDT may be responsible for the rise in Autism?

something has caused the rise and it was not Rush Limbaugh.

He just causes Post Adult Retardation.  It is however an affliction you choose to get.


----------



## Greenbeard (Apr 25, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> "*Annual worldwide deaths due to malaria: 1.1-2.7 million, mostly among children under five years of age*."
> 
> Heck, color me silly, but I'm one of those whachacall conservatives who thinks-  now don't laugh-  that people are more important than birds....



Does that come with the caveat "as long as it doesn't cost any money to save them!" ?



> As Congress struggles to negotiate a budget deal to keep the government running, the head of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) told lawmakers Wednesday that the GOP version of the budget bill would result in the deaths of at least 70,000 children who depend on American food and health assistance around the world.
> 
> "We estimate, and I believe these are very conservative estimates, that H.R. 1 would lead to 70,000 kids dying," USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah testified before the House Appropriations State and Foreign Ops subcommittee.
> 
> "Of that 70,000, 30,000 would come from malaria control programs that would have to be scaled back specifically. The other 40,000 is broken out as 24,000 would die because of a lack of support for immunizations and other investments and 16,000 would be because of a lack of skilled attendants at birth," he said.


----------



## Bfgrn (Apr 25, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Well, according to numerous posts by some of the Left-wing buddies on the board, conservatives care naught about the earth, about environmentalism, or even clean-up efforts! Just about profits!
> 
> As today is *World Malaria Day, *it might be appropriate to take a look at how well liberal efforts work out
> 
> ...



Come on PC, this is just another example of you lying, using deceit and ignoring FACTS to promote your far right wing dogma and ignorance.

DDT - History
In 1955, the World Health Organization commenced a program to eradicate malaria worldwide, relying largely on DDT. The program was initially highly successful, eliminating the disease in "Taiwan, much of the Caribbean, the Balkans, parts of northern Africa, the northern region of Australia, and a large swath of the South Pacific" and dramatically reducing mortality in Sri Lanka and India. However widespread agricultural use led to resistant insect populations. In many areas, early victories partially or completely reversed, and in some cases rates of transmission even increased. The program was successful in eliminating malaria only in areas with "high socio-economic status, well-organized healthcare systems, and relatively less intensive or seasonal malaria transmission".

DDT was less effective in tropical regions due to the continuous life cycle of mosquitoes and poor infrastructure. It was not applied at all in sub-Saharan Africa due to these perceived difficulties. Mortality rates in that area never declined to the same dramatic extent, and now constitute the bulk of malarial deaths worldwide, especially following the disease's resurgence as a result of resistance to drug treatments and the spread of the deadly malarial variant caused by Plasmodium falciparum. The goal of eradication was abandoned in 1969, and attention was focused on controlling and treating the disease. *Spraying programs (especially using DDT) were curtailed* due to concerns over safety and environmental effects, as well as problems in administrative, managerial and financial implementation, but *mostly because mosquitoes were developing resistance to DDT.* Efforts shifted from spraying to the use of bednets impregnated with insecticides and other interventions.
DDT - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 25, 2011)

Does that come with the caveat "as long as it doesn't cost any money to save them!" ?


Yes sir.

Millions die from hunger each year too, does that mean that there is not really enough food in the world?  Or that they cannot afford to have food imported or even to buy it locally?

Millions die from infections, injuries and such each year that could be prevented if they could afford medical care.


----------



## konradv (Apr 25, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > DDT was destroying the bird population.
> ...



You seem to be one of those people who thinks this is a either/or question.  You're focusing on millions lost, when billions have been saved by science.


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 25, 2011)

konradv said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > editec said:
> ...



Yea many are limited to an absolutest thought process, it is either this or that and nothing in between.

Absolutism is a sign of the Sith.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

Nosmo King said:


> So, we have to assume that rather than champion policies that would protect human and animal life on the planet by restricting hazardous emissions, the Conservative environmental policy is bring back DDT.



You know, I must thank you....it was one of your posts that provided the incipient idea for the OP....

Now you wrote "rather than champion policies that would protect human and animal life on the planet by restricting hazardous emissions..."


DId you miss this from the OP?

 concerns about the impact of DDT (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloro-ethane) and its derivates on human health, in spite of the fact that *DDT has been used widely for seven decades *and *no properly replicated and confirmed study has found any specific human health harm. *Given the *enormous and proven public health benefits *arising from the use of DDT in disease control, high levels of *human exposure to DDT among those living in sprayed houses but presented no evidence of actual human harm *arising from that exposure.Where DDT has been used in malaria control over many decades, populations have grown and health outcomes have improved. 
Environmental Health Perspectives: DDT and Malaria Prevention


To show my appreciation, I bolded stuff to help you out this time.


----------



## Truthmatters (Apr 25, 2011)

Yet more proof that the right hates science because they dont understand it.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> 4. concerns about *the impact of DDT* (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloro-ethane) and its derivates on human health, in spite of the fact that DDT has been *used widely for seven decades and no properly replicated and confirmed study has found any specific human health harm. *Given the enormous and proven public health benefits arising from the use of DDT in disease control, high levels of human exposure to DDT among those living in sprayed houses but presented *no evidence of actual human harm *arising from that exposure.Where DDT has been *used in malaria control over many decades*, populations have grown and health outcomes have improved. Environmental Health Perspectives: DDT and Malaria Prevention





*Article Not Found

Sorry, the article that you've requested cannot be found; please check the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and try again.

If you continute to experience problems with the site, please provide a detailed account of the circumstances on our feedback form.

Thank you for your patience.
*


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

editec said:


> DDT was destroying the bird population.
> 
> If you cannot figure out why killing off the birds would be a disasterous thing, so bad that DDT was banned to stop it, not amount of followup explanation is likely to convince you.



Link please


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> > RBM Partnership marks a decade of progress on *World Malaria Day 2011 and sets its sights on near zero deaths by 2015
> > *
> > Commemorations of World Malaria Day taking place in donor and endemic countries this week highlight the considerable progress reached in the last decade, *with key international figures urging an extraordinary intensification of efforts and clear plans for attaining the goal of near zero deaths by 2015.*
> >
> ...







PoliticalChic said:


> DId you miss this ...........................?


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 25, 2011)

Val I got the article and the message you did in an overlaying window.


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 25, 2011)

Right wingers hate science because it does not always offer absolute answers.  And they just cannot understand the concept of Analog, they are binary mentalities.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

L.K.Eder said:


> thank you rachel, for saving me.



As early as 1921, the journal Ecology reported that bald eagles were threatened with extinction  22 years before DDT production even began. According to a report in the National Museum Bulletin, the bald eagle reportedly had vanished from New England by 1937  10 years before widespread use of the pesticide.

Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Opinion - FOXNews.com

From the 900,000 that die every year;

Fuck you.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

> PEDIATRICS Vol. 118 No. 1 July 2006, pp. 233-241 (doi:10.1542/peds.2005-3117)
> 
> In Utero Exposure to Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) and Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (DDE) and Neurodevelopment Among Young Mexican American Children Brenda Eskenazi, PhDa, Amy R. Marks, MPHa, Asa Bradman, PhDa, Laura Fenster, PhDb, Caroline Johnson, PhDa, Dana B. Barr, PhDc and Nicholas P. Jewell, PhDa a Center for Children's Environmental Health Research, School of Public
> 
> ...



DDT


----------



## Nosmo King (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> > thank you rachel, for saving me.
> ...


DDT can change into many different forms that are only slightly different from the original. They call these new forms metabolites. They think that one of these metabolites, abbreviated DDE, interferes with certain reproductive enzymes in birds.

Enzymes act as helpers for certain chemical reaction. They can speed up biological processes, slow them down, etc.. In birds, certain reproductive enzymes affect how much calcium is deposited in eggshells. DDE probably gets in the way of some of these enzymes. Consequently, eggshells have less calcium, which makes them easier to break.


----------



## Truthmatters (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > DDT was destroying the bird population.
> ...



How can you live in this world today a nd NOT know about DDT and its decimation of any bird population it comes into contact with?


It fucks them up and deforms their offspring.

What happens is your bird population dies and you end up with more mosquitos and more malaria.


Birds eat bugs.



Jesus Im weary of talking to people who know nothing about the world arround them and then spewing hate on anyone who educates themselves in a reasonable manner.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

Nosmo King said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > L.K.Eder said:
> ...



The thin shell stuff is just that, stuff.  The link shows it's non-sense and that ddt had no effect.


Look, I don't want to kill off anything except the mosquito that is killing nearly 1 million a year.  That's what ddt was built for, once malaria is under control, and/ro that vaccine is available, we stop using ddt since there isn't a need.

Honestly, would you rather;

You kids get sick from being around ddt

or 

Dead cuz they were not around ddt


----------



## Truthmatters (Apr 25, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> Right wingers hate science because it does not always offer absolute answers.  And they just cannot understand the concept of Analog, they are binary mentalities.



they are the people who fire off thier mouths without loading their brains first.

Knowitalls who dont bother to know anything first.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

Truthmatters said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > editec said:
> ...



Then you will have no problem providing a link proving what you say is true.

and make sure it's newer than mine.  B/c mine says your full of shit.

I'm not and neither are you.


----------



## konradv (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> > thank you rachel, for saving me.
> ...



The effects of DDT aren't a myth.  There's also nothing logically wrong with the notion that there could be more than one reason for their falling numbers.  Seems the only myth being perpetrated is that, those who rail against environmental policy know anything at all about science!!!


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

Truthmatters said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Right wingers hate science because it does not always offer absolute answers.  And they just cannot understand the concept of Analog, they are binary mentalities.
> ...



Oh, the irony.

^^^^Ironic post of the month^^^^
​


----------



## del (Apr 25, 2011)

all i know is that when i was a kid in the 60's, you rarely saw raptors.

see them all the time now.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

konradv said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > L.K.Eder said:
> ...



Link says they were endagered 20 years before ddt

I know, science.  WTF is a conservative doing quoting science and WTF are liberals doing ignoring facts.


oh wait

Those facts don't hold up your long held lies, I mean beliefs.  

oh wait, there is no proof of a god, so you can't have beliefs, so actually I do mean lies.


----------



## del (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



quoting an opinion piece as fact is pretty silly, imo.


----------



## dilloduck (Apr 25, 2011)

Nosmo King said:


> So, we have to assume that rather than champion policies that would protect human and animal life on the planet by restricting hazardous emissions, the Conservative environmental policy is bring back DDT.



Yes--kill Africans, not birds.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

del said:


> all i know is that when i was a kid in the 60's, you rarely saw raptors.
> 
> see them all the time now.



That would be due to the hunting ban.

Are you seeing more crows, robins, blue jays, sparrow, etc, etc?

I'm gunna guess no.

Why?

B/c they were not hunted and there is no effect on birds from ddt, b/c it's a liberal lie from the 60's.  Chemical companies created poison weapons to use in VN, so to get revenge the libs made shit up, kept repeating the lie, and now they assume it's true no matter how many studies are done.


----------



## Truthmatters (Apr 25, 2011)

They believe ANYTHING a Fox shill says over the entire scientific community.

They pick who to believe so they can retain their failed ideas.


----------



## del (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > all i know is that when i was a kid in the 60's, you rarely saw raptors.
> ...



the hunting ban?



you had me going for a minute there. good one!

hunting ban-that's a corker

you're a funny bastard


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

del said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...



How many links would you like?

I'm unaware that "Ecology" is an opinion piece.


----------



## Truthmatters (Apr 25, 2011)

The guy you quoted is a Fox shill


----------



## del (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



yes, your opinion piece referred to ecology. 

kudos


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

del said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



While the AP acknowledged the fact that bald eagle populations were considered a nuisance and routinely shot by hunters, farmers and fishermen  spurring a 1940 federal law protecting bald eagles  the AP underplayed the significance of hunting and human encroachment and erroneously blamed DDT for the eagles near demise.


----------



## del (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



yes, you accurately quoted your opinion piece. 

it's still some funny shit though.


----------



## konradv (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



LOL!!!  You got a problem with the possibility of there being two dangers ar the same time?  Does the article mention that they were finding thin eggs 20 years before DDT?  If not, I don't really see what you're trying to prove, except that you'll twist anything to make your side look better!!!


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

spiked-science | Article | Why we need DDT

Silent Spring claimed that the pesticide DDT (1) was a threat to wildlife, and also to human health. As Ronald Bailey, science correspondent for Reason magazine, points out: 'Carson was&#8230;an effective populariser of the idea that children were especially vulnerable to the carcinogenic effects of synthetic chemicals.' Carson declared that 'a quarter of a century ago, cancer in children was considered a medical rarity. Today, more American schoolchildren die of cancer than any other disease'. *To support this claim, she claimed that '12 percent of all deaths of children between the ages of one and 14 are caused by cancer'.*

A quote from your lying hero


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

In reality, deaths from most other causes in children were steadily declining, while deaths from cancer remained fairly static. As Ronald Bailey's figures show, in 1938, cancer killed 939 children under 14 in the USA, in a general population of 130million. In 1998, with a general population of 280million cancer killed 1700.

spiked-science | Article | Why we need DDT


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

Carson wrote: 'Dr [James] DeWitt's now classic experiments [show] that exposure to DDT, even when doing no observable harm to the birds, may seriously affect reproduction. Quail, into whose diet DDT was introduced throughout the breeding season, survived and even produced normal numbers of fertile eggs. But few of the eggs hatched.'

In fact, DeWitt's 1956 article in the Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry came to a very different conclusion. DeWitt reported no significant difference in egg hatching between birds fed DDT and birds not fed DDT. Carson also omitted to mention DeWitt's report that DDT-fed pheasants hatched about 50 percent more eggs than 'control' pheasants. As to DDT causing cancer in humans, study after study reports no association between DDT exposure and cancer rates. 

spiked-science | Article | Why we need DDT

Why do liberals hate science that doesn't back up thier bullshit?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

Do your own fucking research.


----------



## del (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> Do your own fucking research.



tissue?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

del said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > Do your own fucking research.
> ...



No thank you.

I've did plenty of looking shit up for you, but you have chosen to ignore it all.

Still no response to; Are you seeing more birds of other breeds.

hmm

shame


----------



## del (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



as a matter of fact, i do. more cardinals, especially. i don't know if that has anything to do with ddt or not, but i definitely see more birds of all types, especially large predator birds like hawks, eagles, herons.

you can believe it's some kind of leftist revenge for nam if you want, and i'll disagree with/laugh at you.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

konradv said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...



My side?  You mean the side of humans?  The side that doesn't want children to die b/c some dumb **** told you ddt was bad, but she lied.

damn some people on here are just stuck on stewpud

I hated ddt when I was young, then so newer research came out and proved the old crap wrong, so I'm going to go with the new stuff.


Do you still think T-rex walks upright and drags it's tail?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

del said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



Is it cuz it's spring maybe?

Cuz where I live there are no more than usual.

And plz, keep ignoring the new research, my respect for you is dropping with each post.


----------



## del (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



i'm pretty sure trex broke up when tommy bolin died


----------



## Sarah G (Apr 25, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> DDT may be responsible for the rise in Autism?
> 
> something has caused the rise and it was not Rush Limbaugh.
> 
> He just causes Post Adult Retardation.  It is however an affliction you choose to get.



Limbaugh's spreading post adult retardation is easy to cure, just push the button on your radio to the "off" position.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...





Why are you still focusing on birds..................?  






> CONCLUSIONS. Prenatal exposure to DDT, and to a lesser extent DDE, was associated with neurodevelopmental delays during early childhood, although breastfeeding was found to be beneficial even among women with high levels of exposure. Countries considering the use of DDT should weigh its benefit in eradicating malaria against the negative associations found in this first report on DDT and human neurodevelopment.
> 
> In Utero Exposure to Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) and Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (DDE) and Neurodevelopment Among Young Mexican American Children -- Eskenazi et al. 118 (1): 233 -- Pediatrics







> *Malaria Vaccine*
> 
> In Phase II testing, the vaccine reduced cases of malaria in young children 5 to 17 months by 53%.
> 
> CDC - Malaria - Features - Malaria Vaccine


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

I guess we should expect full bi-partisan support for USAID funding to support phase III malaria vaccination efforts...................?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



So that's saying the kids took longer to learn things but didn't die.

Seems like an overall plus to me.

I mentioned the vacc already.  That takes a lot of time to do, to get to everyone.  Not a reason to stop using ddt, until we can get to everyone.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> I guess we should expect full bi-partisan support for USAID funding to support phase III malaria vaccination efforts...................?



Nearly 1 million deaths.

you'd have to be a cold muther fukker to turn away from that.

But I bet we could find money in reducing regulations.

To save lives, I'm certain we can get bi-partisan on that.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

Who knew the US EPA could control what the rest of the world could do to eradicate malaria, but nice to know Republicans support helping Africans with disease control.






> *DDT Ban Takes Effect*
> 
> [EPA press release - *December 31, 1972*]
> 
> ...


----------



## Toro (Apr 25, 2011)

L.K.Eder said:


> thank you rachel, for saving me.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> > I guess we should expect full bi-partisan support for USAID funding to support phase III malaria vaccination efforts...................?
> ...











> *RBM Partnership marks a decade of progress on World Malaria Day 2011 and sets its sights on near zero deaths by 2015*
> 
> Progress in the fight against the disease has been attributed to the leadership of malaria endemic countries, bold partnerships with the private sector, innovative academic thinking, and increased resources made available by The Global Fund to fight HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria, the World Bank, UNITAID and* the US President's Malaria Initiative (PMI) *as well as bi-laterals such as France and the UK.
> 
> ...



RBM Partnership marks a decade of progress on World Malaria Day 2011 and sets its sights on near zero deaths by 2015


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> > *Malaria Vaccine*
> > Vaccine Progress
> >
> > A Phase III trial of the worlds most clinically advanced malaria vaccine candidate was launched in Kisumu, Kenya, in July 2009, under the auspices of the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI)/CDC Research and Public Health Collaboration.
> ...



Great job!


but...
"With respect to other health effects, such as early pregnancy loss, fertility loss, leukemia, and various cancers, van den Berg (2009) admitted that in "many cases the results have not been consistent between studies," but he went on to state that "these accumulating reports bear much concern, particularly in relation to chronic effects." *This is a stunning embrace of belief over science.*"
Africa Fighting Malaria Article| DDT and Malaria Prevention


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > 4. concerns about *the impact of DDT* (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloro-ethane) and its derivates on human health, in spite of the fact that DDT has been *used widely for seven decades and no properly replicated and confirmed study has found any specific human health harm. *Given the enormous and proven public health benefits arising from the use of DDT in disease control, high levels of human exposure to DDT among those living in sprayed houses but presented *no evidence of actual human harm *arising from that exposure.Where DDT has been *used in malaria control over many decades*, populations have grown and health outcomes have improved. Environmental Health Perspectives: DDT and Malaria Prevention
> ...




I believe you will find same quote here:

Africa Fighting Malaria Article| DDT and Malaria Prevention


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

It's not 1972 any more... They have discovered more effective ways to eradicate the disease than just blanketing the place with DDT.


----------



## Truthmatters (Apr 25, 2011)

Africa Fighting Malaria - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Overview and HistoryFormed in 2000, AFM's staff members have current or former links with a range of right-wing and free market think tanks including the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Institute of Economic Affairs and Tech Central Station, organisations that are all critical of environment movements, as is AFM itself.

AFM promotes the pesticide DDT as one of the most effective means of fighting malaria. It asserts that global health organizations must be free to employ all available tools to fight malaria and that the limited use of DDT for spraying homes and hospitals is a powerful and necessary tool in this fight. Based on a document authored by the AFM's founder Roger Bate, critics argue that the group's motivation for promoting DDT has more to do with a careful crafted strategy to divide and discredit the environmental movement than it does with genuine concern for the health of Africans.[2][3][4][5]


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > Valerie said:
> ...



So nets with bug spray on them are doing wonders!!

I kinda hafta laugh at this.

Was it the Army or Marines that started hosing down thier tents with bug spray back in WW2?

And this idea is just now getting to Africa?      Well, better late than never.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> > *Malaria Vaccine*
> > Vaccine Progress
> >
> > A Phase III trial of the worlds most clinically advanced malaria vaccine candidate was launched in Kisumu, Kenya, in July 2009, under the auspices of the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI)/CDC Research and Public Health Collaboration.
> ...



I am so pleased with the efforts that you, Valerie, put in, that I must say, it should be a model for posting/rebutting on the net!

Just an all around great job, makes your point, and counters much of what is in the OP.

Rep on the way!

Still, the OP makes two points that cannot be ignored.
1. Millions of lives have been lost due to a misguided, albeit well intentioned one.

2. A more gradual and scientifically tested approach- i.e., a more conservative approach, would have been the correct one.

Rather than a point by point answer, I suggest that #4 in the OP, and a post above which actually comments in a manner similar to the OP, that is the banning of DDT was the 'stunning embrace of belief over science (post #64)' is an echo of my 'liberals choose feeling over knowing.'


----------



## jillian (Apr 25, 2011)

konradv said:


> You seem to be one of those people who thinks this is a either/or question.  You're focusing on millions lost, when billions have been saved by science.



that would require that they actually *think*

next maybe she'll do a thread saying there shouldn't be any immunization.

then we can all just pray to keep children healthy.



the sad part,  no make that pathetic part, is that there are issues to be discussed. but morons who post hack jobs like the o/p actively prevent those discussions b/c who in their right mind is going to take such lunacy seriously.... well, except for other hacks, of course.


----------



## Truthmatters (Apr 25, 2011)

Why is it you guys seem to always provide nothing but think tank bullshit to defend your positions?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> It's not 1972 any more... They have discovered more effective ways to eradicate the disease than just blanketing the place with DDT.



1972 - 2010

38 years

about 38 million people dead over some non-sense

While I'm glad the nets work and the vacc is on the way, that doesn't mean we can't help more faster by spraying ddt.


----------



## Truthmatters (Apr 25, 2011)

all according to right wing shill oraganizations.


You people are so manipulatable


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

jillian said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > You seem to be one of those people who thinks this is a either/or question.  You're focusing on millions lost, when billions have been saved by science.
> ...



What a screaming attempt to be relevant!

Easier, I guess, than reading the thread.


----------



## Truthmatters (Apr 25, 2011)

Your links are from right wing shill organizations.


Do you ever present info that  is non partisan?


----------



## jillian (Apr 25, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...



i tend not to read hack threads. i was responding to the idiot o/p.



which pretends to be relevant


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

Truthmatters said:


> Your links are from right wing shill organizations.
> 
> 
> Do you ever present info that  is non partisan?



See how you like this one:

"...van den Berg (2009) concluded that environmental management and other nonchemical methods within [integrated vector management] strategies . . . will increase the sustainability of control efforts and assist in achieving malaria elimination objectives. *There is little evidence to support such a statement; in fact, the supposed solutions proffered and their modes of delivery have contributed to the weakening of malaria control *programs and the global increase in malaria. After almost 70 years of use,* DDTwhen used in IRS programsremains one of the safest and most effective methods of saving lives from malaria*. van den Bergs assessment makes no constructive contribution to advancing the goal of controlling a very preventable disease."
DDT and Malaria Prevention


Ms. Truthie, what is explains is, even a 2009 study which propounds your position and that of the liberals in this thread, is totally false.

What works?

DDT

And, let me remind all, who was and is behind the ban on DDT?
Environmentalists, liberals.

As usual, the Left both knows what is best, and is wrong with metromonic regularity.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

jillian said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



Well, at least you are consistent.

What is that old saw about not being able to teach new tricks....?

The usual personal attack, chock-a-block with words like 'moron' and 'hack' rather than any real thinking.

Someone reading your posts might think that you find thought a burden.


But, I have no doubt that one day you'll have a real opinion....or at least begin to form an exploratory committee.


----------



## Flopper (Apr 25, 2011)

There are good alternatives to using DDT to control Malaria.

Safer alternatives to malaria-controlling DDT focus of UN-backed meeting


----------



## del (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> > It's not 1972 any more... They have discovered more effective ways to eradicate the disease than just blanketing the place with DDT.
> ...



explain to me, again, how changes in u.s. law affected malaria in asia or africa?

i'll wait.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 25, 2011)

del said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > Valerie said:
> ...




I didn't tell you a first time.  Maybe b/c you didn't ask.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

*
Ruckelshaus was born in Indianapolis, Indiana, to a distinguished family with a long history of practicing law in Indianapolis and serving in Republican Party politics.*

William Ruckelshaus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





Wooops!  




> *William Doyle Ruckelshaus served as the first EPA Agency Administrator, from December 1970 to April 1973*. During EPA's formative years, he concentrated on developing the new agency's organizational structure; enforcement actions against severely polluted cities and industrial polluters; setting health-based standards for air pollutants and standards for automobile emissions; requiring states to submit new air quality plans; a*nd the banning of the general use of the pesticide DDT*.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


----------



## Nosmo King (Apr 25, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > So, we have to assume that rather than champion policies that would protect human and animal life on the planet by restricting hazardous emissions, the Conservative environmental policy is bring back DDT.
> ...


Your site constantly mentions no harmful effects to humans.  Did it consider the damage DDT does to wildlife?  If this constitutes your argument against environmental protection, I have to say: "What have I been thinking?  A degree in Environmental Engineering and all this time if we had only kept the poisons available, we would be living in a post-industrial Eden!"

C'mon, Polly!  Keep DDT and all's well with the world?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

Nosmo King said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



"Annual worldwide deaths due to malaria: 1.1-2.7 million, mostly among children under five years of age."

You have no idea how I appreciate a post such as yours, which reveals how little you understand.
What good is your degree sans the moral understanding about the millions of deaths?

There were several major political movements of the last century that evolved from the same thinking....

...140 million humans died in those cases....


I can illustrate it for you, but I can't comprehend it for you.


----------



## Nosmo King (Apr 25, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


I'm not unmindful of the death rate from Malaria.  I don't believe that undoing environmental regulations is the way to prevent those deaths.  Not unless you would be willing to forget about the deaths, illnesses and damage  undoing environmental regulations would produce.

"The only way we can keep them from revolting is to shoot them en mass!"

"No, if you listen to their demands and reform your government, the revolt will stop."

"Shooting them always worked before!"

Restrict DDT and all the deaths from Malaria (in countries who are not under the jurisdiction of the USEPA) are on the hands of the American regulators who made this decision.  And as they made this decision, ALL their regulations should now be eliminated and no further restrictions placed on industry or agriculture.  That's your argument.  It's a rather hollow one, isn't it?


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...






Nice of you to focus on only one piece of info posted...  


*According to the World Health Organization's 2010 World Malaria Report nearly 289 million insecticide-treated nets were distributed in sub-Saharan Africa, between 2008 and 2010, enough to cover almost 76% of populations at risk - up from just 5% in 2000.*


----------



## Ravi (Apr 25, 2011)

What a stupid thread. In countries were Malaria is prevalent, DDT is still used. It is not used in the US and Malaria is not a problem here.

I have no idea why this thread exists.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> And, let me remind all, who was and is behind the ban on DDT?
> Environmentalists, liberals.
> 
> As usual, the Left both knows what is best, and is wrong with metromonic regularity.





 






Valerie said:


> *
> Ruckelshaus was born in Indianapolis, Indiana, to a distinguished family with a long history of practicing law in Indianapolis and serving in Republican Party politics.*
> 
> William Ruckelshaus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> ...


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...






I'll take the word of the clinical trials by the American Academy of Pediatrics over some schmuck with an agenda making random assertions...


----------



## Nosmo King (Apr 25, 2011)

Ravi said:


> What a stupid thread. In countries were Malaria is prevalent, DDT is still used. It is not used in the US and Malaria is not a problem here.
> 
> I have no idea why this thread exists.


There are Conservatives who think that environmental protection is a bad thing as it restricts the rights of producers to dump all that stuff out back somewhere.

This Malaria/DDT ruse is supposed to give them intellectual cover.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 25, 2011)

Nosmo King said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > What a stupid thread. In countries were Malaria is prevalent, DDT is still used. It is not used in the US and Malaria is not a problem here.
> ...


That makes more sense than what I was thinking PC meant. I thought she wanted us to manufacture and spray DDT in the US because it would cure Malaria in third world countries.

Somehow.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

Ravi said:


> I have no idea why this thread exists.





It's World Malaria day, Rav... Time to re-write history, obfuscate facts and use dead Africans in an attempt to score cheap political points!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

Ravi said:


> What a stupid thread. In countries were Malaria is prevalent, DDT is still used. It is not used in the US and Malaria is not a problem here.
> 
> I have no idea why this thread exists.



If only Alexander Pope were alive today, to see the truth of his famous "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing...."

He'd be so pleased to see your 'little knowledge.'

1. It wasn't until 2006 that the World Health Organization realized how important DDT was....

2. Even so, they OK's same for indoor use only.

"The World Health Organization reversed a 30-year-old policy yesterday and declared its support for indoor use of the pesticide DDT to control mosquitoes in regions where malaria is a major health problem. 

The Geneva-based WHO, which provides advice to many developing countries, believes the benefits of the long-acting pesticide far outweigh any health or environmental risk it may pose. 

"Indoor residual spraying with DDT..."
WHO Urges Use of DDT in Africa - washingtonpost.com

3. "What a stupid thread."
Well, that explains your presence, doesn't it!

4. From 2009: "In 2001, more than 100 countries signed the Stockholm Convention, a United Nations treaty which sought to *eliminate use *of 12 persistent, toxic compounds, including DDT. Under the pact, use of the pesticide is allowed only for controlling malaria. 

Since then, *nine nations*Ethiopia, South Africa, India, Mauritius, Myanmar, Yemen, Uganda, Mozambique and Swazilandnotified the treaty's secretariat that they are using DDT. Five othersZimbabwe, North Korea, Eritrea, Gambia, Namibia and Zambia--also reportedly are using it, and six others, including China, have reserved the right to begin using it, according to a January Stockholm Convention report."
Should DDT Be Used to Combat Malaria?: Scientific American

5. 2010: "The AU member states are looking at the possibility of using Dichlorodiphenyl-Trichloroacetic Acid (DDT) safely to eliminate malaria mosquitoes which has continued to claim thousands of lives every year." Africa Fighting Malaria News | AU mulls use of DDT to fight malaria

6.  To review, and, of course,  to convince you that there is no reason why this thread should exist, the point is that *environmentalism is almost entirely a Left-wing prejudice,but * has largely reversed itself on the question of DDT.

Those of you still supporting the banning make my point.

Just as Left-wing movements cost the lives of untold millions in the last century, the Malaria-DDT debate is a documented case of millions of deaths in the third world.

Intelligent folks will, I am certain, learn from this.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > I have no idea why this thread exists.
> ...



1. Does the fib 'Time to re-write history,' mean you are giving up??

Oh, and you were doing so well...the best of your ilk!

Now, if I were 're-writing history', you certainly could find some untruths, or errors... but you didn't did you?
So, I guess I'm simply recording history, eh?

2. "...score cheap political points."

So I scored 'em?
Well, that is honest of you.


3. Isn't it sad that that admission comes from you at the cost of millions of lives.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

Nosmo King said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > What a stupid thread. In countries were Malaria is prevalent, DDT is still used. It is not used in the US and Malaria is not a problem here.
> ...



You know, when you put "Conservatives" and "intellectual" together in a post, I get that 'Chris Matthews thrill up my leg!'

Much obliged!


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

You just keep blabbering your delusions and I'll keep posting facts.





> Health Hazards
> DDT Study Finds New Hazard
> Babies born in the U.S. to mothers emigrating from Mexico show mental and physical impairment, a UC Berkeley survey finds.
> July 05, 2006|Marla Cone | Times Staff Writer
> ...


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > And, let me remind all, who was and is behind the ban on DDT?
> ...






What?  No reply to these facts.........


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

THIS is why I never bother with Political Chic.  She proved looong ago how well she can ignore facts and fabricate delusions and personal insults... 


I didn't post in this thread to defend liberals, I post here to defend the facts...


----------



## Ravi (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> THIS is why I never bother with Political Chic.  She proved looong ago how well she can ignore facts and fabricate delusions and personal insults...
> 
> 
> I didn't post in this thread to defend liberals, I post here to defend the facts...




She knows no facts. She probably doesn't know that overspraying DDT for agriculture actually increases the incidences of malaria among the population.

All she really cares about is bashing liberals and I honestly don't recall her ever bashing them for a valid reason.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Apr 25, 2011)

Truthseeker420 said:


> that was a long leap. couldn't you have just said I hate liberals.



The more words Politica Chick uses, the less she has to say.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> THIS is why I never bother with Political Chic.  She proved looong ago how well she can ignore facts and fabricate delusions and personal insults...
> 
> 
> I didn't post in this thread to defend liberals, I post here to defend the facts...



Let me correct that for you: you post in defense of warped brains of bien-pensant compulsive meddlers.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> > THIS is why I never bother with Political Chic.  She proved looong ago how well she can ignore facts and fabricate delusions and personal insults...
> ...






  The posts here speak for themselves...  I will not indulge your bullshit delusions, sorry.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Valerie said:
> ...



There is never a clearer indication of retreat and rout than the neg rep you sent.


----------



## L.K.Eder (Apr 25, 2011)

Two Thumbs said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> > thank you rachel, for saving me.
> ...



why do you hate the bald eagle, fox news aficionado?


and your faux umbrage is thoroughly laughed at, great american.

unfuckingbelievable, the little **** thinks he can speak for malaria victims.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 25, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...






  Keep telling yourself that...


----------



## jillian (Apr 25, 2011)

Valerie said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Valerie said:
> ...



i particularly liked her use of the phrase bien-pensant. i'm sure that proves to everyone how intellectual she is.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 28, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > DDT was destroying the bird population.
> ...



It was doing nothing of the sort.  God, editec is so gullible, he'll believe anything.

Rachel Carson - who certainly deserves to be burning in Hell for all the deaths she's caused - claimed that DDT made birds' eggshells thinner.  As it turned out, the studies she based that claim on were faked.  

One of the researchers making that claim turned out to have fed his test birds a low-calcium diet along with the DDT.  Unsurprisingly, a lack of calcium will make eggshells thinner all by itself, and when that fault was corrected, the eggshells became normal again.

Further studies showed that, in fact, levels of DDT that birds were likely to encounter in the wild were not harmful.  However, _Science_, the journal originally publishing the claims that DDT thins bird eggshells, refused to print a retraction or the results of later research.  In fact, they stated categorically that they would never publish anything about DDT that was not antagonistic.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 28, 2011)

Nosmo King said:


> So, we have to assume that rather than champion policies that would protect human and animal life on the planet by restricting hazardous emissions, the Conservative environmental policy is bring back DDT.



No, we have evidence that, rather than champion policies that would protect human life, the left would prefer to cling to outdated and incorrect research because it fits their ideology.  We can assume that conservatives' environmental policy is to save millions of lives every year.

Of course, they're just brown people in third-world countries (since the US happily used DDT to eradicate malaria here before deciding no one else should use it), so it's unlikely that liberals are going to give a rat's ass.  What's important is that the left can cuddle itself warmly in the belief that they're "saving the planet".  Nothing trumps a liberal warm fuzzy.


----------



## del (Apr 28, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > editec said:
> ...



us regulations are not enforced in africa where the vast majority of malaria cases occur. 

people don't contract malaria in the u.s. they get it overseas, where, again, u.s. regulations have no force. 

how many americans do you think have died of malaria since 1972?

hint: it's not millions 

it's nice to see you and the other bloviator who wrote the OP are on the same page, though.


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 28, 2011)

del said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



Thanks you beat me to it.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 28, 2011)

Nosmo King said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > L.K.Eder said:
> ...



Except, of course, that no one's ever been able to prove it without rigging the experiment results.  You can hypothesize all you like; without proof, it's just blowing smoke.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 28, 2011)

Truthmatters said:


> They believe ANYTHING a Fox shill says over the entire scientific community.
> 
> They pick who to believe so they can retain their failed ideas.



"The entire scientific community"?  You mean the one that's increasingly pushing to have the DDT bans lifted?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 28, 2011)

del said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



All right, Sparky.  How about the _Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons_?  That work for you?

http://www.jpands.org/vol9no3/edwards.pdf

I'm guessing you're just going to dismiss anything that doesn't fit your worldview.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 28, 2011)

del said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



Oh, yeah, threatening to withhold financial aid from sub-Saharan Africa unless they forego the use of DDT isn't "enforcing US regulations" at all.  

Why don't people contract malaria in the US?  Oh, yeah, that's because we liberally (you should excuse the expression) used DDT until malaria in the US was eradicated.


----------



## del (Apr 28, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



an opinion piece by a dead professor?

even for you, that's weak. 

keep swinging, corky


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 28, 2011)

del said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



JAPS doesn't publish opinion pieces, dipwad.  Just because the research and conclusions don't suit you doesn't make them "opinion".  Sorry you're so uneducated you've never heard of the JAPS.

What does the fact that he died have to do with anything?

YOU keep swinging.


----------



## del (Apr 28, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



so how many have died worldwide as a result of the tragic decision to ban its use in the united states, corky?


----------



## Greenbeard (Apr 28, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> JAPS doesn't publish opinion pieces, dipwad.  Just because the research and conclusions don't suit you doesn't make them "opinion".  Sorry you're so uneducated you've never heard of the JAPS.



I'm hoping that you're not actually familiar with JPandS. If you're not, you might want to familiarize yourself with it.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 28, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...





No YOU!  






> The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is a politically conservative non-profit organization founded in 1943.[1] The group was reported to have approximately 4,000 members in 2005, and 3,000 in 2011.[2][3]
> 
> Association of American Physicians and Surgeons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Old Rocks (Apr 28, 2011)

*Just a blog, but the fellow seems to have some points.*

No, DDT is not the easy answer to malaria « Millard Fillmore&#039;s Bathtub

1. There is no shortage of DDT.

2. Not only is DDT not a panacea, it is increasingly not effective against malaria-carrying mosquitoes.

3. Richard Tren leads an astro-turf organization that collects hundreds of thousands of dollars, but does very little if anything to actually fight malaria. These sorts of diatribes increase contributions to his organization&#8217;s coffers, but they don&#8217;t help fight malaria.

4. In actual practice over the last decade, bednets have proven to reduce malaria by 50% to 85% in areas where they are deployed; DDT is only 25% to 50% effective.

5. Bednets cost about $10 and last about five years &#8212; $2.00 per year. DDT costs upwards of $12 per application, and must be applied twice per year &#8212; $24.00 per year. Bednets stop mosquitoes cold. DDT depends on mosquitoes biting people first, then resting on a DDT-coated wall &#8212; and we hope that it&#8217;s a young mosquito that has not yet contracted malaria itself and is not shedding the parasites.

6. Malaria deaths, worldwide, are lower now than at any other time in human history. Since the U.S. stopped using DDT on cotton in 1972, the death rate to malaria has been cut in half. The death toll to malaria is, today, less than 25% of what it was when DDT use was at its peak. Statistically, it appears that cutting DDT use also cuts malaria.

7. We know that&#8217;s not the case, but those statistics prove that we can beat malaria without DDT &#8212; as indeed, the U.S. Army beat malaria without DDT to build the Panama Canal by 1915, 24 years before DDT was discovered to have any insecticidal properties. In the U.S., with the great aid of the Tennessee Valley Authority, malaria was essentially wiped out by 1939 &#8212; seven years before DDT became available for use against mosquitoes. No nation relying on DDT has been able to eradicate malaria


----------



## Old Rocks (Apr 28, 2011)

Greenbeard said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > JAPS doesn't publish opinion pieces, dipwad.  Just because the research and conclusions don't suit you doesn't make them "opinion".  Sorry you're so uneducated you've never heard of the JAPS.
> ...



*LOL!!!!!!*

Association of American Physicians and Surgeons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Journal of American Physicians and SurgeonsThe Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons (JPandS), until 2003 named the Medical Sentinel,[34][35] is the journal of the association. Its mission statement includes " a commitment to publishing scholarly articles in defense of the practice of private medicine, the pursuit of integrity in medical research  Political correctness, dogmatism and orthodoxy will be challenged with logical reasoning, valid data and the scientific method." The publication policy of the journal states that articles are subject to a double-blind peer-review process.[36]

The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons is not listed in major academic literature databases such as MEDLINE/PubMed[37] nor the Web of Science.[38] The National Library of Medicine declined repeated requests from AAPS to index the journal, citing unspecified concerns.[3] Articles and commentaries published in the journal have argued a number of non-mainstream or scientifically discredited claims,[3] including:

that the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services are unconstitutional;[39] 
that "humanists" have conspired to replace the "creation religion of Jehovah" with evolution;[40] 
that human activity has not contributed to climate change, and that global warming will be beneficial and thus not a cause for concern;[41] 
that HIV does not cause AIDS;[42][43] 
that the "gay male lifestyle" shortens life expectancy by 20 years.[44] 
A series of articles by pro-life authors published in the journal argued for a link between abortion and breast cancer.[45][46] Such a link has been rejected by the scientific community, including the U.S. National Cancer Institute,[47] the American Cancer Society,[48] and the World Health Organization,[49] among other major medical bodies.[50]

A 2003 paper published in the journal, claiming that vaccination was harmful, was criticized for poor methodology, lack of scientific rigor, and outright errors by the World Health Organization[51] and the American Academy of Pediatrics.[52] A National Public Radio piece mentioned inaccurate information published in the Journal and wrote: "The journal itself is not considered a leading publication, as it's put out by an advocacy group that opposes most government involvement in medical care."[53]

Quackwatch lists JPandS as an untrustworthy, non-recommended periodical.[54] An editorial in Chemical & Engineering News by editor-in-chief Rudy Baum described JPandS as a "purveyor of utter nonsense."[55] Investigative journalist Brian Deer wrote that the journal is the "house magazine of a right-wing American fringe group [AAPS]" and "is barely credible as an independent forum."[56]


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 29, 2011)

Greenbeard said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > JAPS doesn't publish opinion pieces, dipwad.  Just because the research and conclusions don't suit you doesn't make them "opinion".  Sorry you're so uneducated you've never heard of the JAPS.
> ...



Wikipedia?  You want to denigrate a source, and your example of a reliable source upon which to base that is WIKIPEDIA?!

Fail on an epic level.  Bards should be writing sagas about a failure this heroic.


----------



## konradv (Apr 29, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



It is an opinion piece.  There's no independent research, just a review of research that others have done.  A review article with so many loaded words and opinions that you'd never find in a normal research paper.  Regardless of whether you believe him or not, it IS an opinion paper.


----------



## konradv (Apr 29, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Greenbeard said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



That's the FAIL of the completely clueless, to denigrate Wikipedia just because it is Wikipedia.  That article had footnotes that didn't come from Wikipedia.  You want to trash the article, you have to trash the sources.  Of course, that would take actual work and research rather than just swallowing whatever fits your bias.


----------



## Greenbeard (Apr 29, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Wikipedia?  You want to denigrate a source, and your example of a reliable source upon which to base that is WIKIPEDIA?!



There's no need to be embarrassed, people quote from journals they're unfamiliar with all the time (they generally wouldn't defend so zealously a journal they weren't familiar with but I'm sure that happens sometimes, too).

Again, I'll suggest your familiarize yourself with JPandS (or, uh "JAPS," as you call it) if you're going to continue defending it in the future (the long and short of it is that they have no problem with publishing bullshit, particularly if that bullshit is associated with fringe rightwing ideology). There are plenty of looks at their greatest hits around the web so it shouldn't be too difficult to bring yourself up to speed.

I have to say, if you've reached the point where you have to go to JPandS to find support for your position, it might be time to re-examine it a bit.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 29, 2011)

Aww sweet Cecilie called me an imbecile!  








			
				Cecilie1200 said:
			
		

> Hi, you have received -74 reputation points from Cecilie1200.
> Reputation was given for *this* post.
> 
> Comment:
> ...


----------



## del (Apr 29, 2011)

Valerie said:


> Aww sweet Cecilie called me an imbecile!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



somehow i imagine that being called an imbecile by cecile doesn't have quite the sting she envisions.

still, i feel left out.


----------



## del (Apr 29, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



why can't you just answer the question instead of trying to change the subject and making unsupported allegations?


----------



## Toronado3800 (May 5, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Well, according to numerous posts by some of the Left-wing buddies on the board, conservatives care naught about the earth, about environmentalism, or even clean-up efforts! Just about profits!
> 
> As today is *World Malaria Day, *it might be appropriate to take a look at how well liberal efforts work out
> 
> ...



Oh my God. Did you just quote or write something claiming DDT is safe?  Leads me to distrust anything from the source and I have read your typings with interest for some time.

There is a debate if DDT use in malarial world would increase the average human life expectancy. Especially if you just look for one generation.  Good / bad effect debates are worth it.  

There are some environmental steps I would not take to pro-long human life though.

Would you use DDT around your kids? Scary.


----------



## Toronado3800 (May 5, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Greenbeard said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



Nice enough I just wanted folks to read it again.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (May 6, 2011)

del said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> > Aww sweet Cecilie called me an imbecile!
> ...



Suuuure it has no sting.  That's why we're posting neg rep messages:  because they're so meaningless.


----------



## konradv (May 7, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Valerie said:
> ...



IMO, Rep messages are meaningless, because they seem to have more to do with how many friends you have on the board than whether you post meaningful stuff.


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 7, 2011)

Toronado3800 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Well, according to numerous posts by some of the Left-wing buddies on the board, conservatives care naught about the earth, about environmentalism, or even clean-up efforts! Just about profits!
> ...



1. Did you note item #4?  Check it out.

2. I have an older relative who told me that where he lived, in the mountains, a truck came around every week sending out billows of DDT clouds...and all of the kids used to love to run and play and hide in the mist.


----------



## rdean (May 7, 2011)

Very few die from "conservative" science.  Why?  Because they have no science.

6% baby

6%


----------



## ABikerSailor (May 7, 2011)

konradv said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



If you need proof of that, just look at Cali Twit.


----------

