Steve Milloy’s Green Hell Blog has this post today, on the recently revised policies of the World Health Organization (WHO) regarding the use of DDT.
The WHO Summary Document seems to be self-contradicting. The document states that Malaria causes 1 million deaths per year, and children are 3/4 of those cases. Malaria also imposes heavy economic burdens in terms of costs of treatment and prevention and lost productivity.
Then the WHO document says that spraying with DDT is “highly effective” at controlling Malaria. So if it is highly effective at controlling Malaria, why discontinue its use?
According to WHO, DDT “is potentially harmful to wildlife and to humans, if not applied in accordance with WHO guidelines and recommendations.” In other words, it isn’t harmful. The guidelines of the WHO for the use of DDT are basic common sense.
The document lists as potential effects of DDT as “childhood neurodevelopment, breast cancer in women, male reproductive health (reduced sperm counts and quality) and to diabetes.” At least some of these claims have already been debunked (e.g., sperm count and breast cancer claims).
Remember, these claims deal with potential harm–not documented, conclusive proof of harm. On the other hand, Malaria is a proven killer, and DDT is proven to control Malaria. Why is this even being debated?
I’ll address this question in a later post.
The Wall Street Journal published this story today:
In 2006, after 25 years and 50 million preventable deaths, the World Health Organization reversed course and endorsed widespread use of the insecticide DDT to combat malaria. So much for that. Earlier this month, the U.N. agency quietly reverted to promoting less effective methods for attacking the disease. The result is a victory for politics over public health, and millions of the world’s poor will suffer as a result.
The U.N. now plans to advocate for drastic reductions in the use of DDT, which kills or repels the mosquitoes that spread malaria. The aim “is to achieve a 30% cut in the application of DDT worldwide by 2014 and its total phase-out by the early 2020s, if not sooner,” said WHO and the U.N. Environment Program in a statement on May 6.
The impact of the ban on DDT on the world’s poorest people will be terrible. The Leftist environmental movement, which sees humans as a disease to be eradicated, has pressured the World Health Organization to reconsider its use of DDT to combat Malaria.
The ultimate purpose of the Left is not so much to limit the use of DDT in the world, as it is to reduce the human population around the world, mostly in underdeveloped nations. Their genocidal agenda is evident in several statements from prominent Leftists:
Should we eliminate suffering, diseases? The idea is beautiful, but perhaps not a benefit for long term. We should not allow our dread of diseases to endanger the future of our species… In order to stabilize world population, we need to eliminate 350,000 people a day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it’s just as bad not to say it.
Guess who? Jacques Cousteau, in an interview in the UNESCO Courier, November 1991. There’s more.
When questioned on the propriety of banning DDT, with a view to the possible unintended consequences, Dr. Charles Wurster replied,
So what? People are the cause of all the problems. We have too many of them. We need to get rid of some of them and this is as good a way as any.
There are many other quotes from people like Ted Turner, who once said in an interview with Audubon Magazine,
A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.
Why are we not running these people off the edge of the Continent? It’s time power for these anti-human elitists was brought to an abrupt and complete end.