Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Land Shark who wrote (45511)	1/4/2014 1:59:06 PM
From: Alastair McIntosh	Respond to of 86355

Wrong again. DDT is one of the insecticides approved for IRS by the WHO. However, the alternative insecticides are more expensive, more toxic, or not as effective. I don't think that anyone supports the indiscriminate spraying of DDT. The risks to human health from IRS of DDT are tenuous and insignificant compared to the known risks of malaria. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has this to say about DDT: Numerous studies in the United States and abroad have examined the possible association between exposure to DDT and related compounds and cancer in humans. Studies have been conducted of members of the general population as well as of occupationally exposed individuals. Exposure has been traditionally assessed by measuring DDT residues (most often DDE because of its persistence in the body and in the environment) in blood or in adipose tissue. Current data indicate that DDT in either media is a valid biomarker of exposure to DDT residues and each media correlate well with one another providing that the concentration of residues is adjusted for lipid content. The drawback of trying to associate current residue levels determined at or near the time of diagnosis with the occurrence of cancer is that levels at diagnosis may be very different than those at the time when cancer began to develop, and this is particularly relevant for cancers that exhibit a long latency. These and other issues inherent to epidemiological studies make it difficult to draw definite conclusions about exposure to DDT/DDE/DDD and cancer. However, taking all factors into consideration, the existing information does not support the hypothesis that exposure to DDT/DDE/DDD increase the risk of cancer in humans. Similar results for liver damage, etc. atsdr.cdc.gov