God help us (Metlakatla: homes, food, association)

[Metlakatla]

WHO Calls for More DDT Use Vs. Malaria, World Health Organization Urges Developing Countries to Use DDT More-Outdoors-In Malaria Fight - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/15/ap/health/mainD8K5C8QG1.shtml - broken link)

Yes, Barkely; it's still used.

[Moose Hollow]

Originally Posted by Glitch

Because a few birds have their eggshells adversely effected you are trying to tell me that is ample justification for killing millions of humans? Truly amazing.

I didn't say that! You need not put words in my mouth. I just think there has to be a better way.

[Glitch]

Originally Posted by Moose Hollow

I didn't say that! You need not put words in my mouth. I just think there has to be a better way.

Obviously there wasn't a better way, or those millions of people would not be dead today. Now we have the West Nile virus spreading throughout the lower-48 unchecked because of mosquitoes, so more people will continue to die. But as long as we save a few birds, who cares? They are just humans after all.

[MissingAll4Seasons]

Originally Posted by Glitch

Because a few birds have their eggshells adversely effected you are trying to tell me that is ample justification for killing millions of humans? Truly amazing.

Considering that those few birds have a much smaller population than humans, the loss of thier numbers and reproduction is indeed justification for disallowing chemical control of insects that *may* have played a part in the illness and death of "millions" of humans. That's just the plain numbers of it -- 1 million lost out of 6.6 billion is nothing compared to 500 out of 5,000. Unless, of course, you feel there is more intrinsic value in a human life than any other species on the planet... and should, therefore, count more.

One should also consider that many of the countries where these millions of humans lived are also subject to famine, war, and other forms of pestilence that would still have thinned their population regardless of the malaria issue because they also do not have proper education, nutrition and health care. And some of those countries actually still DO spray DDT.

Disease and pestilence are nature's little way of controlling any population that has exceeded it's resources... it doesn't just happen to humans.

[Rance]

It's a natural selection thing. Who are we to play Gods and devise chemicals to alter the world? The fish in the Baltic are poison because of it and fertalizers. So a few can die now for lack of chemical use...or a few can die later when the lakes river and oceans are poisoned enough to kill or poison fish etc. How do you reckon people in those countries survived up to the point of DDT use?
I would think mosquito netting would be a cheap alternative. And maybe some Off or Cutters mosquito repellant. I prefer to have eagles flying in my skies than seeing dead fish washed up on beaches. Just my opinion.

[Metlakatla]

I guess that's easy to say, Missingall4seasons, when it's happening on the other side of the world.

There is a big difference between crop dusting with DDT and using it as indoor pesticide control, as far the birds are concerned, at least. Indoor use of DDT does not cause near the environmental damage that crop dusting did. Please do not confuse the two. And please understand that these people in these countries have every right to try to save their own children's lives rather than just sitting back and figuring what the hell, they're gonna starve to death or some such anyway.

Let me repeat this. Crop dusting and indoor pesticidal use are two different things. Indoor use doesn't cause near the environmental damage that crop dusting does.

[Glitch]

Originally Posted by MissingAll4Seasons

Considering that those few birds have a much smaller population than humans, the loss of thier numbers and reproduction is indeed justification for disallowing chemical control of insects that *may* have played a part in the illness and death of "millions" of humans. That's just the plain numbers of it -- 1 million lost out of 6.6 billion is nothing compared to 500 out of 5,000. Unless, of course, you feel there is more intrinsic value in a human life than any other species on the planet... and should, therefore, count more.

One should also consider that many of the countries where these millions of humans lived are also subject to famine, war, and other forms of pestilence that would still have thinned their population regardless of the malaria issue because they also do not have proper education, nutrition and health care. And some of those countries actually still DO spray DDT.

Disease and pestilence are nature's little way of controlling any population that has exceeded it's resources... it doesn't just happen to humans.

This is a classic eco-fanatic example, lets kill millions of humans to save a few birds. Hitler would've been proud of your position. Why don't you propose slaughtering another couple million humans in order to save your precious polar bears? Humans that have such a deep hatred toward other human beings that they prefer to see them killed by the millions are truly mentally deranged.

[MissingAll4Seasons]

Originally Posted by Glitch

This is a classic eco-fanatic example, lets kill millions of humans to save a few birds. Hitler would've been proud of your position. Why don't you propose slaughtering another couple million humans in order to save your precious polar bears? Humans that have such a deep hatred toward other human beings that they prefer to see them killed by the millions are truly mentally deranged.

Firstly, we're not talking about *slaughtering* millions of people to save a few birds or polar bears. We're talking about accepting that millions of people will *die of natural causes* in their natural environment because we have chosen not to poison the ecosystem with our artificially created chemicals.

Secondly, I'm neither an eco-fanatic or a fascist-nazi, I'm just looking at the numbers in the situation and seeing a clear interconnection. In fact, your stance, that one species is somehow more important than all others, is much more in keeping with Hitler's "superior race" theories.

Thirdly, I don't harbor a deep hatred toward other humans so much so that I would prefer to see them killed by the millions. But what I do see is a species that routinely overpopulates and depletes it's environment because it takes more resources than is prudent and leaves behind toxins that eventually kill/poison the host. There's only one other species/genus like that -- they're called VIRUSES.

Personally, if we're going to get into name calling here, people who refuse to accept that all life is equally important and that humans are only one species on this planet, and somehow feel justified in their ignorance of the impact downstream extinction will have on them... well, they are just downright deluded, self-righteous, sanctimonious and pretentious.

[Metlakatla]

Whoops--I need to edit my post. I mistook you for Moose Hollow.

Once again, since no one is getting it, crop dusting and indoor pesticide use are two very different processes with very different environmental effects.

[MissingAll4Seasons]

Originally Posted by Metlakatla

Whoops--I need to edit my post. I mistook you for Moose Hollow.

Once again, since no one is getting it, crop dusting and indoor pesticide use are two very different processes with very different environmental effects.

Yes, I totally agree that indoor use is a completely different situation than crop dusting. But we'd still need to determine, for example, if some mousie that ate some contaminated crumbs in your house went out and got himself eaten by an eagle if that eagle's egg shells would still be fatally thin. Or, if one of these chemicals could have longterm affects on you or your offspring... because we know lots of chemicals don't affect us until we try to breed and then do all sorts of damage to the embryo (and other species embryos as well).

I do agree that we should spend some serious effort attempting to find a means of controlling harmful/potentially harmful insects and pest because I don't think anyone or anything deserves to die when it could be prevented. I've spent time in Egypt and India, which have an extremely difficult time with mosquitos, so I'm not armchair quarterbacking here. I just think that mechanical methods (like nets, screens, lure lights, etc) might be equally effective as the chemicals. And if people are really concerned about those countries where all the people are dying, why not do something to help improve their quality of life and medical care, rather than complaining about a ban on a toxic chemical?