RUSH LIMBAUGH DEVOTED HIS JULY 11 “Morning Minute” to an attack on Rachel Carson and her 1962 book, Silent Spring. According to Limbaugh, Carson is responsible for more human death and misery than Stalin or Mao, claiming that the environmental backlash generated by her book led to the banning of DDT, which until then had been used to eradicate Malaria-bearing mosquitoes. Malaria, Limbaugh claimed, now infects upward of 400 million people every year, and claims some 2 million souls each year (a death rate of 500 per 100,000 — or about 0.5% of those infected).
On the surface, the argument is pretty cut-and-dried. Mosquitoes spread malaria; DDT kills mosquitoes; without DDT Malaria reaches epidemic levels and millions of people die; Rachel Carson was the one responsible for eliminating DDT, therefore Rachel Carson is responsible for all those deaths. QED.
There are a couple of things wrong with Limbaugh’s argument, though. First off, he didn’t take into account the increasing resistance of mosquitoes to DDT. Researchers first noticed the existence of DDT-resistant mosquitoes in 1959 [1], more than three years before Carson’s book hit the shelves. Now entire populations of resistant malaria-bearing mosquitoes have been reported in India [2]. Of course, this resistance developed through the process of evolution, and we’ve already documented Limbaugh’s attitude toward that subject.
Secondly, DDT use in countries most affected by Malaria has never been discontinued (hence the increasing resistance to DDT of mosquito populations):
The manufacture and use of DDT was banned in the US in 1972, on the advice of the US Environmental Protection Agency. The use of DDT has since been banned in most other developed nations, but it is not banned for public health use in most areas of the world where malaria is endemic. Indeed, DDT was recently exempted from a proposed worldwide ban on organophosphate chemicals. [3]
Of course, such inconvenient facts are to be ignored because they don’t fit Limbaugh’s template (and I use that word purposefully)* of the policies of the environmentalist “whackos” (as Limbaugh calls them).
*Limbaugh claims the media has a “template” which they use to determine which facts get reported, and the manner in which they will be reported. Ironic, isn’t it?     Â
[1] The theory of natural selection (part 1) – Are there examples of rapid evolutionary change?
[2] Wikipedia: DDT
Ironic indeed, and most unfortunate. Science is not perfect, but its methodology does mean it is self-correcting over time–unlike partisan ‘templates’. Many thanks for setting these points out.
Your “reference” is a posting by a “scientist” on another web site. No published study is cited by you or your reference. Before you go off on Rush for his “ignorance” I suggest you do alittle more homework of your own. Yes, DDT us has been legally allowed for years. Of course the WHO would not fund it and the Euro’s opening opposed its use as well. So please keep your Silent Spring rationalizations out of your posts or it may start to look like you are just another leftist astroturf “science” site.
If youy actually find any of the data in this piece wrong, why don’t you point it out? Must the WHO fund something for it to be used? Is it possible the contention that DDT is still being used in the most malaria-prone places on the planet is correct and mosquitos are building up a resistance to it? Or are you just carping because you’ve bought into Limbaugh’s line?
The fact is that DDT has been endorsed not only by the WHO but the Sierra Club and Environmental Defense, which was originally founded by scientists concerned about DDT. Countries that used DDT were in danger of funds being withheld from them by The USA, WHO, UN and other organizations. DDT is still the most effective and least expensive way to effectively stop malaria. The demonization of DDT has caused millions of unnecessary deaths over the last 40+ years.