It's often claimed by DDT advocates that the 1972 ban on the agricultural use of DDT was made in spite of a report that cleared DDT from harm. Jim Easter has found and posted a copy of the report. It turns out that things aren't exactly as DDT advocates present them.
Deltoid
Jim Easter on Sweeney, Ruckelshaus and DDT
It's often claimed by DDT advocates that the 1972 ban on the agricultural use of DDT was made in spite of a report that cleared DDT from harm. Jim Easter has found and posted a copy of the report. It...
Search
Profile
Tim Lambert (deltoidblog AT gmail.com) is a computer scientist at the University of New South Wales.
Recent Posts
- Robert Manne on Monckton's plan for the Australian media
- February 2012 Open Thread
- More fraud from Pat Michaels
- The Australian's War on Science 76: Dad Jokes
- January 2012 Open Thread
- Better late than never at The Australian
- Merry Christmas
- Keith Kloor's thinking on climate change
- Wegman one of The Scientist's top five science scandals
- The Australian's War on Science 75: Plimer vs Plimer
Recent Comments
- Vince Whirlwind on Robert Manne on Monckton's plan for the Australian media
- Peter on February 2012 Open Thread
- MikeH on February 2012 Open Thread
- Olaus Petri on February 2012 Open Thread
- John on February 2012 Open Thread
- Lotharsson on February 2012 Open Thread
- John on February 2012 Open Thread
- Robert Murphy on Jonas Thread
- chek on Jonas Thread
- Wow on February 2012 Open Thread
Categories
- Ask a ScienceBlogger
- Brignell
- CFCs and ozone
- DDT
- Fumento
- Global Warming
- Gregg Easterbrook is an idiot
- Iraq
- LancetIraq
- Lott
- Milloy
- Open Thread
- Roy Spencer
- Skeptics Circle
- The War on Science
- academia
- astroturf
- bingo
- computers
- creationism
- criminology
- economics
- free speech
- funny
- guns
- maths
- meet up
- meta
- personal
- politics
- quackery
- random
- reviews
- statistics
- stupidity
- surveys
- world
Archives
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
Links
Blogroll
- Angry Bear
- Atmoz
- Backseat driving
- Barista
- Climate denial crock
- Brad Delong
- Brave New Climate
- Bug Girls' Blog
- Climate Change
- Climate Feedback
- Climate Progress
- Climate Shifts
- Climate Sight
- Club Troppo
- Crooked Timber
- David Friedman
- Deep Climate
- Eschaton
- Fafblog
- FiveThirtyEight
- Freakonomics blog
- Greenfyre's
- Gristmill
- Groklaw
- Hot Topic
- Hit and Run
- International Journal of Inactivism
- James' Empty Blog
- John Quiggin
- Jon Swift
- Kevin Drum
- Larvatus Prodeo
- Logical Science
- Making Light
- Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub
- More Grumbine Science
- Nexus 6
- Notes from the Lounge
- Oliver Willis
- Only In It For The Gold
- Open Mind
- Paul Krugman
- Political Animal
- Quark Soup
- Rabett Run
- RealClimate
- Sadly, No!
- TBogg
- The Loom
- The Panda's Thumb
- The Poor Man
- The Reality-based Community
- The Volokh Conspiracy
- Think Progress
- TPM Cafe
- Unqualified Offerings
- Watching the Deniers
- AMK's Journal
- Andrew Norton
- Antony Loewenstein
- ArchPundit
- are you effin' kidding me?
- B and B
- Brian Linse
- Carnaby Fudge
- DeSmogBlog
- Detached Observer
- eRiposte
- Explananda
- Flop Eared Mule
- From a LAN Downunder
- Hoyden About Town
- Infothought
- John Fleck
- The Hard Sell
- Harry Clarke
- Known Unknowns
- Matt T
- Malaria Matters
- Mobjectivist
- Notional Slurry
- Opinion Dominion
- Penguin Unearthed
- Pro Bono Statistics
- Pro-science
- Psyche, Science, and Society
- Rants and Raves
- Say Uncle
- Section 15
- short notes: will brady's ruminations
- Skeptics' Circle
- skippy the bush kangaroo
- Some are Boojums
- Speedkill
- spiceblog
- Stephen Gloor
- stoush.net
- The Bartlett Diaries
- The Ethical Werewolf
- The Huffington Post
- The Myron Ebell Climate
- The Post-Normal Times
- The Virtual Stoa
- This Space For Rent
- Wis[s]e Words
« Open access to scientific papers is bad because it makes them more accessible | Main | Delurk and win! »
Jim Easter on Sweeney, Ruckelshaus and DDT
Category: DDT
Posted on: August 28, 2007 2:10 PM, by Tim Lambert
Comments
Any bets as to how long it will take for Milloy to correct his malaria FAQ?
Posted by: Harald Korneliussen | August 29, 2007 2:58 AM
I'd be Shocked! Shocked to find gambling going on and someone taking that bet, Harald.
Posted by: bug_girl | August 29, 2007 9:33 AM
The FAQ is mostly J. Gordon Edward's work. He collected junk like this for decades. I think Milloy added his his name to make himself look like an expert.
Posted by: Jim Norton | August 29, 2007 11:02 PM
Incidentally, right before this blog's front page loaded, I was thinking about the DDT issue... I was at the Ed Brayton blog, and saw how he keeps raising a fuss about proposals that students be allowed to hear more than one point of view, rather than just his own.
I thought to myself how funny it is that some of those at these "Science Blogs" weblogs claim that intelligent design is false, while at the same time, regularly touting the mass hysteria about DDT, which has been so dated and discredited, that even Ralph Nader has turned against it (despite being an initial founder of the American anti-DDT movement).
Fear and hysteria, based on shaky or questionable claims, is a tactic that those who support greater statist interventionism regularly use... It is wrong when the hawks used it, to push for the Iraq war, and the reduction of individual liberties domestically - but it is also wrong when activists (however noble and sincere they may be) use fear, alarm, and half-truthed hysteria to enact their restrictive policies, which can, in some cases, do a great deal more harm than good.
Posted by: Aakash | August 30, 2007 1:47 AM
Reading Easter's post was a bit of a walk down memory lane, since DDT laid the foundation for modern pesticide hazard assessment in the 1980s, where my career in environmental health started. For me, it's always been a point of amusement how conservative and libertarian voices, in the defense of liberty, screech about the injustice caused by environmental activists "banning" DDT use in agriculture. In the history of the real world, more sober voices were expressing concerns about DDT (Emil Mrak was scarcely a wild-eyed environmental activist), and forces such as insect resistance and alternative insecticides, were bringing an end to DDT use. Environmentalists were a tipping point in bringing the issue to light and initiating litigation, but can scarcely be considered the prime movers in phasing out DDT use in agriculture. This anti-environmentalist dead horse continues to be flogged because those same voices have never been compelled to live in the real world.
Posted by: JLowe | August 30, 2007 4:50 AM
One should endeavor to get one's facts correct. First, Nader was active against abuse of DDT, but he came a bit late to the fight. Calling him a "founder" gives him more credit than due, I think. Second, concern about DDT use is no "hysteria." Anytime deadly poisons or hormone disrupters are used on an industrial scale, concern is wise. DDT kills, and the movement to control DDT use is responsible for saving the lives of millions of people. DDT abuse would have made it wholly useless against malaria vectors had it not been controlled in the early 1970s, plus it would have continued to kill predators of disease-spreading mosquitoes, thereby contributing to malaria's spread. Third, Nader's position hasn't changed much -- he's still opposed to abuse, to broadcast spraying of DDT for any purpose, including alleged malaria control.
If that's too subtle to ring true for you, I urge you to check the facts. You can look them up.
Posted by: Ed Darrell | August 31, 2007 9:59 PM