Michael Crichton on DDT

[stephenrblv]

He died of Cancer. Thanks for the opinion but I like my food free of DDT.

[lifewithdeath]

even if ddt stats are true hes right it saved more ppl than killed due to malaria

[edarrell2]

Malaria did not explode when the U.S. stopped using DDT on cotton. Nor did it at any point "explode," after DDT use was slowed. Never.

Bednets are up to twice as effective as DDT, and less than 20% the cost.

Why was Crichton pushing ineffective, expensive methods? 

[russellchannel]

@edarrell2 because he both a tool and a fool.

[edarrell2]

1. Crichton is wrong. There has never been a ban on DDT in Africa nor Asia. DDT use was slowed chiefly because mosquitoes developed resistance to it, and outright immunity.

2. Largely without DDT (but with some constant DDT use -- WHO has ALWAYS used DDT), the death toll from malaria has continued to drop until it is the lowest in human history today.

3. Rachel Carson's methods of integrated pest management is the preferred method used today.

Rachel Carson has saved millions.

[sirdouglasberg]

I totally agree with this guy. The DDT ban is completely racist. Just like a lot of other things we are trying to ban, such as GE crops, Petrochemicals, etc.

[Heteroz]

DDT became ineffective because of a developed resistance within the the mosquito populations. Other pesticides are used.

[russellchannel]

Crichton hasn't read "silent spring" nor does he now what the "ban" is.DDT was NEVER banned for malaria control. They stopped using DDT because of the resistance that was built by over use. DDT was used infrequently in Africa by the time of the publication of silent spring, sorry mister paternalistic white man taking care of those poor brown babies, because it had ceased to work on the mosquito population due to its over use on agricultural plots...which Rachel Carson mentions.

[TheSFODD]

@russellchannel DDT was banned in general due to public worry for species of birds affected by DDT that was the main factor and that is what he is arguing now. Unless you can get your facts straight keep your thoughts to yourself

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD SFODD, please re-read my comment. Malaria was never banned for malaria control - this is factually true. DDT was hardly being used in Africa by the time of the publication of 'Silent Spring" because it had been overused in agriculture and resistant strains had developed, there was no need to ban it for that purpose.because it had stopped working. This is not only factually true, but cited in Silent Spring itself. Educate yourself on this topic, a 10 second google search will het this.

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD This right wing talking point needs to stop. Whatever the rationalization was for the ban (thinning of shells and so on), there was no explosion of Malaria after DDT was banned. And DDT was NEVER banned for Malaria control, ever. The reason why people stopped using DDT in Africa was because it had stopped working because of resistance in the mosquito population after overuse and agricultural runoff. And then people have the chutzpah to talk about getting facts straight.

[TheSFODD]

@russellchannel Knock Knock? Where have you recieved your facts buddy? There in fact was a short intense outbreak of malaria as DDT was banned as a WHOLE it was not a segmental removal. The fact that you flatly deny that there was any consequence of this action speaks depth about your anarchist views you speak out of what seems like pure white supremist paranoia.

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD the Stockholm Convention (the act that banned DDT worldwide), See Part II Annex B that specifically exempts Malaria control (and other disease vector control). Malaria increase through the development of pesticide resistant mosquitos through the overuse of DDT in agriculture. DDT also killed the natural predators of the mosquitos, so the resistant mosquitos were able to breed freely. Resistant mosquitos were documented by 1949, 13 years before "Silent Spring"

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD Further, in the USA. where the ban was more comprehensive (although, again still permissable for disease vector control), there was no explosion in deaths. Of all the Malaria deaths in the United States, the most recent figure I have seen is 5 in one year from USA mosquitos (other deaths are attributed to people who came to the USA or travlled to the USA from more active Malaria-stricken regions and contain DNA identified strains from those places).

[TheSFODD]

@russellchannel I don not believe Chricton was talking about the USA was he? Would you be so blind as to suggest malaria could be a problem in a supreme power state? No he was suggesting the consequence other less fortunate countries suffered as an effective cheap method of contol was unjustly eliminated.

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD Then you really have no point at all. The only place that DDT was banned outside of use as an agricultural pesticide was in the United States. It was never banned for mosquito control in, for instance, Sub-Saharan Africa. Again, I refer you to the Stockholm Convention Part II Appendix B. DDT was NEVER banned for disease vector control ANYWHERE. I mentioned the United States, because eventually you'll get to the "outbreak" of Malaria in the USA after DDT was banned on Cotton crops.

[TheSFODD]

@russellchannel Once again where are you getting you facts?? As of 1970 and 1980 countries began to follow the trend of banning DDT for agricultral uses. Consented that it was not banned for pestilince use but the fact that plants were allowed to be exempt from treatment allowed malaria carriers to breed and grow. The ban then followed into a worldwide policy although few countries refused to cease usage many others could not and as a result malaria went on the rise.

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD Again, you really need to read up on this a bit. DDT was never banned for disease control. Never. Mosquitos don't feed on corn, thank you very much so there's no help for you there. Again, the reason DDT faded out in Africa (as elsewhere) is because of the rise of resistant strains of mosquitos, documented more than a decade prior to the publication of "Silent Spring."

[TheSFODD]

@russellchannel Corn stalks and such were perfect breeding ground for insects due to its humidty and high mouisture enviornment thank you. Also read it yourself my intellectual DDT wasbanned for agricultural use it did not fade out as you put it.

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD Mosquitos do not breed in corn.  Try again.

[TheSFODD]

@russellchannel Try not to be such a stubborn idiot and read my comment again the enviornment the corn stalks provide. The shade, mouisture and humidity all the perfect factors for insect growth. If you read your so called articles like you read my comments youre wasting my time.

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD Let's not go into name calling. Corn stalks are reasonable breeding environments for SOME insets. But Malaria is not transmitted by "some" insects. It is transmitted by mosquitos and mosquitos do not breed in corn, cornstalks or and such. They breed exclusively in standing water.

[TheSFODD]

@russellchannel Do you not believe that corn stalks contain puddles of stagnant water? The method of watering such vast fields often leave perfect breeding grounds for said insects. As a side note i just want to say I respect your intelligence but your argument seems to suggest that there was no consequence of an action and as we all know action lead to results and the results of this act are quite clear.

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD In fact, no I do not think that they do in any significant quantity for purposes of breeding. I assume I don;t need to post a link to a respectable site that details mosquito breeding. re: Consequences.. whether they are clear or not, they aren't clear to Crichton. Drom Chapin's seminal paper:

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD "as early as 1953, they obtained conclusive evidence that Anopheles mosquitoes, like many insect pests, sooner or later became resistant to DDT and other pesticides. Within a few years, in fact, such resistance had been reported in (list of countries). In some cases a single application was sufficient to reduce mortality (that is, increase resistance) among mosquitoes by 80 per cent. ."

[russellchannel]

Respond to this video... "In India...five million people were soon infected; in Sri Lanka, two million people became sick again almost overnight; and in Central America infection rates grew to previously unknown levels[7]. Moreover, unlike earlier outbreaks, this new plague was often carried by mosquitoes which had become resistant to pesticides like DDT and dieldrin and could not be controlled by conventional means" This by 1970 - BEFORE the ban.

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD The facts simply don;t support the conclusion. DDT was never banned for disease vector (mosquito) control. The Malaria rates boomed PRIOR to the agricultural ban. And the consequence of DDT spraying was the development of resistant strains the culling of both non-resistant strains AND the mosquitos prime predators. The overuse of DDT led to the increase in malaria, and done almost entirely by DDT and deet -resistant mosquitos. Crichton is simply wrong.

[TheSFODD]

@russellchannel Chricton has also said in the video that DDT was clearly overused and while the overuse did result in resistant strains the fact it was in use has helped suppress outbreaks. Wht Chricton was so distressed over was that the ban of it did nothing to help the situation.

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD And again, he is wrong. It was never banned for disease vector control.

[TheSFODD]

@russellchannel i think we are just running around in circles at this point. If you just look carefully at your comments as i did with yours i think i have replied to this answer many times.

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD You have replied that it was banned as a whole - yet it was not. It is a simple matter of fact that you have wrong. I can't post a URL in here elst I would post it, all you have to do is google DDT ban WHO and find out for yourself. And in any case, the premise would STILL be wrong. Because by continuing to spray DDT on populations of resistant mosquitos, the WHO, as would Crichton, continue to kill the predators of mosquitos, leaving the resistant mosquitos to breed.

[TheSFODD]

@russellchannel DDT was banned for agriculture + Moist enviornments of fields = Mosquito breeding grounds. Simple formula

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD a) moist fields are not mosquito breeding grounds. 2) if they were, DDT use would be permitted. and C) it DOES NOT MATTER. The WHO ceased using DDT in its eradication program because it was not working...and this happened before ANY ban.

[TheSFODD]

@russellchannel Oh really you mean if it prevented mosquit births it would be permitted? Thats funny cause it was excactly what it was doing before it was banned

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD No it was not. The World Health Organization discontinued the use of DDT in disease vector control because of an explosion in mosquitos in sprayed areas due to resistance. Resistance that had been recorded decades prior. There were massive explosions of resistant mosquitos and malaria in sprayed areas of India and Bangladesh. And this happened years BEFORE any ban.

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD read the history of the WHO eradication program. It'll only take you you a few minutes. Read the wikipedia entry, and if you don;t trust it, follow the links at the bottom of the page to the WHO's own pages. DDT had ceased working years before the ban and there was a huge explosion of resistant mosquitos and malaria in South Asia which was the main reason they stopped the program and the spraying - well in advance of any ban. And Mosquitos do not breed in moist fields.

[TheSFODD]

@russellchannel at this point i can see your argument in a more literal sense. However i also see that neither one is willing to backdown how about we leave on friendly terms? As they say to each his own.

[russellchannel]

@TheSFODD I will leave it with this. Most people who listen to this argument and believe it, believe there was a ban on DDT for disease control - there never was. They believe Malaria "exploded" after this ban, - the only explosion occurred before the ban and in areas where DDT was still under use. They believe that if DDT were "legalized (it has always been legal for disease control, everywhere), it would "solve" the malaria problem,but DDT use left off because of resistance.

[TheSFODD]

@russellchannel Im afraid i cant agree with you im afraid but i respect your intelligence to know that there is a truth behind it.

[FrnnkEducation]

@russellchannel Your face is wrong.... and that's about as intelligent as your argument sounds. California could use ddt for it's bedbug infestation right about now.

[russellchannel]

@FrnnkEducation Except that bedbugs are DDT resistant - just google World Health Organization DDT and bedbugs and you'll get the report.

[Glasya666]

Two things:

1. DDT has never been banned for fighting disease anywhere in the world.

2. Malaria made a huge comeback because the world health organization ended the program to eradicate it. They had practically eliminated malaria around the world, and after the funding ran out they considered the job done even though it still existed in a couple isolated places.

To blame 30 million deaths on a ban on DDT (which never really happened) is simply idiotic.

[samsullithegenius]

I didn't always agree with him, but I miss Crichton even more now than ever. No one could provoke such interesting and enlightening discussion as he could.

[Consequence]

The days of handing civilizations infected blankets of disease are not over.

[MegaPostman77]

The problem with political correctness - it does precisely the opposite of what commonsense would suggest, meaning that the right course of action is rejected and the wrong course of action adopted out of virtue. This is the problem with ENVIRONMENTALISM in general as with most issues in modern life. The politically correct presume that they know better to begin with and those who hold different views are in the minority and therefore WRONG! This is the LOGIC of the politically correct!

[GibIslamkeineChance]

Michael Crichton - hero!

[Lalla770]

Michael Crichton - in the new documentary : 3BillionAndCounting (search on youtube)

The movie is about Malaria and DDT and reveals the truth about DDT to the world. It reveals valuable information from the EPA archives, which the author of the movie will make available to the general public soon via the internet. The evidence that DDT has saved millions of lives and its ban has caused millions of deaths is undeniable.

[xmfclick]

@Lalla770

The song "Rise" from this movie is on the short list for Oscar nominations.

[Glasya666]

@Lalla770 You say it's undeniable? Can you name one place in the world that has banned DDT for fighting disease?

[batmanownsyourass]

I miss this guy.

[Zontertes]

environmentalists are responsible for the deaths of 30,000,000 people.

[wrjamescom]

@Zontertes They'd tell you it's not enough. They see humans as a disease of "mother earth", many will even admit it.  They want to reduce the human population by 90%! Google "reduce human population".

[Zontertes]

@wrjamescom i'm well aware that environmentalists are anti-human. it's nice to know that someone else sees it.

[citizenschallengeYT]

Bambikino what you say is baloney if you look up and read the WIKI article on DDT, or follow some of the links.

But, the fiction writer weaves the political story you 'want' to hear so that's good enough, no matter how much BS it contains.

PS. I don't believe your claim of expertise - have any authoritative links to share?

[elementalfunk]

There is NEVER an easy way out, humans think that they can cure/solve anything with chemicals and medicines. Truth is that nature has her own way that you can't make in a lab, complexities that cannot be reproduced to just quick fix your problem. Natural processes and systems are they only way to solve these problems, problems that are most likely instigated by humans in the first place. I don't think it's ever that simple, with so many unknown variables or repercussions.

[batmanownsyourass]

@elementalfunk Fuck nature. We made it so bananas no longer produce seeds. And that's all bananas mind you. Cloning fruit, take that ya ignorant hippies.

[defexorcist]

DDT is not as harmful to humans as many are led to believe-at least that we know of. Outside of some areas in Africa and Asia, the use of DDT causes ecological damage disproportionate to its benefit. If it is brought back, we will have to muzzle the manufacturers, because they will try to sell in areas that really dont need it (USA) for more profit. Just know that a good chunk of that 30 million has a lot to do with serious human overpopulation characteristic of where malaria is prominent.

[McFizzle108]

but nobody in africa ever used DDT and malaria still rose there. DDT is a carcinigen. just because there was no short term side effects to them eating the substance doesnt mean its not a carcinigen. just because you smoke a pack a day for a year and dont get lung cancer doesnt mean it the chemicals in ciggarettes arent carcinigens. a malaria vaccene costs 50 cents to make. 30,000,000 deaths were not from not using DDT, 30,000,000 deaths came from a lack of funding.

[wrjamescom]

@McFizzle108

Typical crackpot leftist BS claim. It seems every problem is only addressed by throwing more tax dollars at it. Yet you expect us all to believe your claims that DDT is a carcinogen with absolutely no evidence at all, and even with your inability to spell it.

[GeatishBeowulf]

thank you for this, i would've never realized this.

[Bambikino]

What he says is absolutely true (I've read up on DDT and malaria and talked to doctors enough to know the veracity of what he says). It shows the price paid for political correctness. Millions of deaths. And if you catch malaria and it doesn't kill you, it can stay in your system for the rest of you life and flare up on occasion. Reminds me of Lysenko (Google it).

[mikedans55]

@Bambikino There's more to it. He doesn't go into it but the fact is that the reasoning for pushing to take it away so aggressively by these environmental groups (so called!) is actually entirely because of eugenics. They had the intent to have malaria kill all those people and they fought until the bitter end (until they were on the verge of getting massively exposed) to keep the ban in place. Because they wanted as many people to die as possible. Read up on eugenics = it is alive and thriving.

[drbayoms]

@Bambikino

Well thank G_d you can vouch for him, because otherwise............... He is a outstanding writer, and also an arrogant asshole (hey 5 straight A words). He stood in front of these kids and fed them some bullshit wrapped in his own political ideology. After awhile the constant beating of "the man is brainwashing you" drum goes a little too far. We get it Michael you do not REALLY believe in global warning, second hand smoke, DDT, oxygen, molecules, etc.

Thankfully, I do.

[ranirghad]

@drbayoms Thanks for illustrating the difference between science and religion in your own statement. Science is not about BELIEVES. You do / do not BELIEVE in global warming. Science is about KNOWLEDGE. You either KNOW for sure what is going on or you do not. You can BELIEVE in Jesus or Spaghetti monster, you cannot BELIEVE in electricity.

[russellchannel]

@Bambikino no it is not true. you haven't done ANY research or you would know that DDT has NEVER been banned for malaria control - you're simply an idiot

[TMaddaJr1991]

Meh... DDT was banned for a reason. It was harmless on humans, but the eggshell thinning is entirely true. It was proved my mulitple scientists. I love Michael Crichton, but I cannot say that I entirely agree with him on everything. Regardless, R.I.P. Michael Crichton. I am almost done with all of your novels! :D

[dbolton9]

30 million people have died who wouldn't have died had DDT been used, and you say 'Meh'?

Oh the callous indifference of the affluent young.

[TMaddaJr1991]

I am sorry, but you are totaly wrong. Check out areas where DDT is still used. Crichton discussed Africa and how Malaria is aweful there. Well, where Malaria is most deadly is an area that still buys DDT from America.

[Suptiche12]

you have a source on that?

[TMaddaJr1991]

I do... I will ask my teacher where he got the chart tomorrow.

[McFizzle108]

And you truly belive that 30 million people died because we didnt use DDT just because a man with maybe the same political views as you says it? 30 million people died becuase of a desease called malaria not because of a lack of usage of DDT. before DDT was invented, there were more deaths of malaria per capita than there are now per capita. the deaths only rose because the population rose. the actuall percentage of people getting malaria went down.

[0spiker]

@McFizzle108 `

yes 30 million people died of malaria precisely because DDT was not used. How many malaria deaths are there in countries that used DDT? You offer a bit of mush: deaths rose due to population increases but "the actuall(sic) percentage of people getting malaria went down." What explains that decrease? That is an increasing population with fewer cases of malaria. Perhaps the problem is a man holding political views you disagree with said it was true so you needed to oppose it.

[Sonny9257]

Actually the Studies that were conducted on Falcon eggs, were done by a team that fed only chicken meat to the Birds, instead of the entire chicken. Raptors get their Calcium intake from eating the Bones of their prey.

The Entire study has been discredited, but with our MSM hiding the truth about it, makes them just as Guilty as those who have perpetrated this Genocide against the Poorer nations of the world.

Progressives want to kill off all Useless Eaters, and then are coming for you!

NAZI'S

[jrubin68]

Thank god this ignorant propagandist is 6 feet under. May he remain there and may his ideals fade into equal opscurity, for the sake of this Earth.

[cluebattingcage]

You forgot to say "in the name of Mother Gaia, amen".

[daltonagre]

Eugenics now is called ecology.

[AWS12345678910]

PS: State of Fear is a fantastic book, I've just read it. I was abundantly amused by the fate of the Cleb-u-Tard.

[jereuter01]

Crichton was an unsuccessful medical doctor without any scientific credentials whatsoever. He is known for making a living solely from writing fictional books with a scientific slant just to the right of the science fiction tomes on the library bookshelves.  He is an entertainer, nothing more.

[AWS12345678910]

What you've just told me forces me to dismiss your opinion.

I'll assume you have good intentions, and your error is born out of something other than maliciousness.

[mrmadcoil]

Michael Crichton ... attended Harvard University, where he graduated summa cum laude in anthropology. He went on to teach anthropology at Cambridge in England, later returning to Massachusetts to gain an M.D. degree from Harvard Medical School.

Crichton then served (1969-70) as a postdoctoral fellow at the Jonas Salk Institute for Biological Science in La Jolla, California, before taking up writing full time.

You think medicine has nothing to do with science?

Thank you and good night.

[jereuter01]

I didn't say Crighton had no medical credentials. Those credentials alone do not make a scientist. A primary care physician and surgeon/specialist referrals are not scientists. Crichton was a fabulous author of fiction throughout his life including his years pursuing medical degrees. He was a doctor in name only. You can argue safety of DDT & SHS until blue in the face. You are wrong on the basis of recognized science, public laws & well-known (Monsanto) lawsuits. It is what it is...

[mrmadcoil]

You said he had no scientific credentials. Medicine is a science. He has a degree. QED.

As for DDT, I don't care. I'm not dying of malaria.

But really. It's the law? Yeah, that sounds like a great way to settle science. Don't think. IT'S THE LAW!

What was the problem with DDT? Overuse.

No proven hazard to mammals, but it is known to build up if it is continually ingested. (Halflife of 8 years.)

As for monsanto, I've found no reference to any lawsuit regarding DDT.

[jereuter01]

Mr primary care physician and surgeous and other specialists he send me are not scientists. Ultiomately, it is the law and lawsuits whereby everything in this country gets settled whether or not you like it or not. If you cannot find anything on Monsanto you are an internet research moron. 'Nuff said by me. You can have the last word.

[mrmadcoil]

You didn't say he wasn't a scientist, you said he had no scientific credentials. I've demonstrated that he does. Moving on.

As for monsanto, I've found numerous amounts of lawsuits involving them, but not one of the lawsuits concerned DDT. If you think you've found one, go ahead and link to it.

[jereuter01]

Cute that you split such fine hairs...so you agree that he was not a scientist, that's enough for me...there's plenty of folks with music and law degrees who neither play instruments nor practice law. I had to go back a look myself about company name, my apologies it's been awhile since I ran into someone who wanted to argue the dangers of 2ndHS: my apologies try "Montrose Chem lawsuit"

[mrmadcoil]

Yes, the difference between getting a medical degree and not getting one is a pretty fine hair...

Last word is not so last, then? Very well.

The montrose chem lawsuit was about 'scientific concern'(the study whose methods C refers to as unacceptable) and 'changing political climate'. At best this is a legal precedent.

But once again I must remind you of C's position, even though he SPELLS it out. 'DDT is not a carcinogen.' That is his only stance on the subject. The rest is about policy.

[jereuter01]

Sorry, it was DDT I meant to say that it's been a long time....not 2ndHS which there's another video where C goes out on a limb spouting nonsense there too. Bottom line is that DDT and 2ndHS are dangerous!

[ChrisBBozeman]

Well that's an idiotic statement... anything is dangerous if used improperly.

Forks are dangerous if you stab someone in the heart with one. Does that mean we should ban all forks?

[FrnnkFun]

dude, you're stupid. end of story.

" didn't say Crighton had no medical credentials. Those credentials alone do not make a scientist" lol. yeah, and Benjamin Franklin's tabulated achievements didn't qualify him as a scientist, the term scientist meaning "to have knowledge" *shakes head*

[jereuter01]

Fun: The Hon. BF was for sure a bono fide "scientist" because he used the "scientific method" to experiment and his discoveries are well known.

[cmyersnbt]

Ohhhh kkayy.... You wouldn't consider someone who lectured on anthropology, pioneered the use of computers in movies, has a M.D. from Harvard Medical School and did post doc work with Salk a scientist...? Jesus what do you need to see?

[jereuter01]

Nope I would not. What scholarly scientific research did he publish? Nothing. He spent his life writing science fiction...good science fiction too!

[cmyersnbt]

But working as a postdoctoral fellow DOES mean you are doing research science. Idiot. If anyone is interested in confirmation bias - read this jereuter01's posts....

[jereuter01]

A post doctoral fellow is someone who finds a paying position while that someone further studies his chosen field. It does not make that person a scientist. Crichton used his fellowship to enhance his academic credentials while he was moonlighting writing fiction which is what he was really all about all along. Forgive me if I tread on your sensibilities but C was never a scientist. The real issue is DDT and C's cavalier hair splitting misinformation regarding its documented dangers.

[Entropy56]

I sprinkle DDT on my cereal every morning.

[sarahnichole87]

Why are all of these Michael Crichton videos no longer available??

[hector3222]

Wow, great guy

[NerdsVSWorld]

w00t! Go Crichton!

[mjn76]

lol@15. Ouch.

[tkpadilla]

lol@ 15 seconds.... pnwed!

[jungleman68]

solution to this- test it again

[AlbieTom]

Considering that Rachel Carson just made her facts up. I don't understand why people want to ban it. One, no one ever proved it thinned bird eggs, considering that the calipers used weren't sensitive enough to test the difference in thickness. Oh that and bird populations tended to go up, such as Robins and some other species. Just go and read the something from the audobon society from the 60's.

[oreolvrs1987]

studies have shown that if mosquito nets are used correctly the amount of ddt used can be reduced

[oreolvrs1987]

im against a total ban of ddt.i think that it should be used better.huts sprayed with ddt actually repel vmosquitoes that spread so thers a win-win situation.however the chemical has been known to cause a reduction in semen quality and increase risks of premature births being a horomone endocrine disruptor

[54spiritedwill54]

Actually he is a medical doctor, and a trained anthropologist.

[goingemoguy]

Has this guy even read Carson's book? If DDT would be still used today, even more people would be dying of Malaria. According to Darwin's prinicple of evolution, insects would eventually evolve & adapt becoming immune to DDT creating an even more deadlier species after that & then a deadlier one after that & so on. Thus the chemical war can never be won due to adaptation, and all life is caught in its violent crossfire.

[soylentgreenb]

"Has this guy even read Carson's book? If DDT would be still used today, even more people would be dying of Malaria."

DDT is still used today in a fair number of places, rather effectively I might add. Its use has been restricted to dwellings rather than mass spraying of crops and swamps.

[daltonagre]

The DDT's opposition wants really to kill tens of millions of asiatics and black africans.

[lecterer]

Anyway, the bigger problem is, of course, that birth control doesn't work there. Religious conservatives have done a lot of harm in this issue. The overload of population is the core problem behind many, many catastrophes.

[81broncoman]

Stop, just stop. Your talking out of your ass now. So just shut up and then we can get on with our lives. Thank You.

[lecterer]

I don't know what I should think abou DDT but I can tell you one thing: the problem is not that millions of people in developing countries die of malaria or whatever. It's quite opposite. There are too many people in those countries and if those kids hadn't died of malaria they would be starving to death right now. There just isn't enough food for everyone.

[Jitpring]

Utter nonsense, lecterer. You've swallowed the the culture of death's horrid propaganda.

[soylentgreenb]

"There just isn't enough food for everyone."

Oh there's plenty of food. The problem is poor people's abillity to make themselves entitled to it. We could feed many billions more if we did not ferment our grains to feed our cars or rely on grains to produce unhealthy quantities of meat when we already get more than enough from pasture.

Please consider the very strong correlation between miserable living conditions and high birthrates and then tell me again why malaria is a good thing.

[20futarchips19]

Cynical...but true.

[thejobloshow]

I sincerely hope there isn't any pregnant women listening to this.

[mykoolaidstastefunny]

Michael Crichton sucks! Greenpeace sucks! Real Environmentalism ftw!

[theconservativewill]

I don't think environmentelist care if it kills humans, they don't like that it might kill a bird.

[myndenway]

These kids have been so brainwashed already at such a young age, that when they get told the truth from Dr. Crichton, they are dumbfounded and not to sure what to think. Children are very uncritical in their thinking. Whomever gets to them first, gets to program them for life.

[simonsaysgerard]

Amen to that

[cciemail]

let him eat DDT if he thinks it's so good. hey michael, here's a nice DDT sandwich for you, you ignorant bastard

[cmyersnbt]

Actually there was an entomologist who used to do that exact thing when someone would ask about the dangers of DDT. It's never killed a human - you ignorant bastard.

[skip303]

you fool. The WHO agrees with him, as does the New York Times

[beerschoten]

"Dr. Edwards has been pictured on the cover of a national magazine eating DDT out of a box by the spoon full 200 times the claimed safe level of exposure. He has not had any side effect what so ever." If you want to be a real Environmentalist, do your homework.

[cmyersnbt]

DDT has been around for 50 years, and mosquitoes have not yet gotten a resistance - furthermore the irritant stays effective even after resistance occurs.

[2289567]

Even if they gain a resistance they develop an instinct to stay away from DDT so it still winds up being effective against malaria.

[cmyersnbt]

" I'm just suggesting that it will not work for long. "

Really, because during the 30's malaria was a pandemic in the southern U.S.

According to the CDC's 10 top achievements in public health we have vector control (DDT) to thank for its eradication.

[mykoolaidstastefunny]

You're mean! I used to believe that HIV didn't cause AIDS, then converted to the science side! Now I'm a full believer, and you should too!

[dduppie]

Life finds a way, humans find ways faster.

[haldenver]

all these kids have been programmed to hate the guy...look at some of those faces: they hate the idea ( rightly) that what they have been TOLD TO LEARN AS TRUE may not be. If MC had a Hitler-moustache, they would not even listen !!!

[Riggro]

I don't know, the man makes some damn strong points.  it's hard to argue with someone like him but yeah lol look at those kids! lol

[siamdesperado]

IF all Liberals were as intelligent as Crichton (and he is a liberal... in the classic sense) I might become a liberal again.

[alrozz]

I played with DDT from the age of five to twelve-years and the result was Psychosis and ADHAD. The military exposed dependents and soldiers and the final result of this resulted in disability from weak bones breaking especially the lower backs.

[siamdesperado]

Anecdotal evidence. What do you mean 'played with'? A five year old playing with 'electricity' is dangerous. Should we eliminate electricity just for you? How about we just try to educate parents so that unlike YOURS; they make sure their children do not play with dangerous chemicals. As for your claim that 'the military exposed...' please cite your sources.

[alrozz]

The Government will not disclose the fact the DDT was used heavily in then housing areas. You can spray it on a tree and the tree will die. You can spray it in a glass and one year later it still kills what ever bug climbs in it.

[EasyEs]

You played with DDT?! Is there a chance that you played with other industrial chemicals that may have harmed you. Do any papers exist today that can back this up?

Sorry to hear of your condition

[alrozz]

My dependent medical records mysteriously dissapeared.

[cmyersnbt]

Yes, I'm sure - its a big government cover-up. Odd, this pesticide has been is use for how long and none of those are listed as side effects. In fact, its hard to figure how those effects would be possible from a PESTICIDE. I could see cancer, maybe (even though the evidence directly contradicts that possibility).

[rambo26]

Carson's genocide :(

[pbjosh]

If you read silent spring, it was based on DeWitt's study in 1956. She claimed it affected Quail eggs. DeWitt reports that 80% of their eggs hatched, compared with the "control"" birds which hatched 83.9% of their eggs. Carson also omitted mention of DeWitt's report that "control" pheasants hatched only 57 percent of their eggs, while those that were fed high levels of DDT in all of their food for an entire year hatched more than 80% of their eggs.

[edarrell2]

@pbjosh -- You forgot to note, as DeWitt did, that when the quails fed DDT got a good hatch, all the chicks died from DDT poisoning within a few days. Zero fledges.

Carson reported it correctly. Look up the study, or read the analysis at Millard Fillmore's Bathtub.

[julietfiege]

he should eat ddt then.

read silent spring.

[laotsu7777]

this guy is saying it is fine to eat DDT...if your still on board with him after that I don't what kind inteligence you could possibly claim to posess.

[problem49]

He didn't say it was fine, he said it was possible, although I wouldn't recommend trying it on the assurance of a popular fiction writer. I am NOT "on board" with Crichton; he is neither a scientist nor a science researcher. He is simply referencing the qualified research of others when he states dates and statistics. He is also quite wrong when he says that there is no malaria in the U.S.

[cmyersnbt]

Actually he is a medical doctor, and a trained anthropologist.

[problem49]

Thank you, I stand corrected in that respect.

[cmyersnbt]

Also, in 2003, there were 1,278 cases of malaria reported - 10 were caused by mosquitoes in the U.S. The rest had traveled to a part of the world with malaria. Out of the 1278, 7 died - roughly half a percent. In Africa over 10% of those infected die - it is the number one killer of children, mostly under five years old. Over a million a year die.

[problem49]

A great disservice was done to the third world when DDT was banned. It's initial over- application was responsible for a decline in raptor populations, but this was no reason to over-react with a universal ban. Raptors have recovered and are in fact thriving, but so are malarial mosquitos.

[laotsu7777]

you have your facts wrong. I hate to say this is all the result of a PR campaign. your neat little argument is sorely lacking in facts and investigation. The fact is DDT was stopped in Africa in many places due to the mosquitos developing resistence to the DDT. It was working anymore. Do some research you dogmatic fuck.

[problem49]

I have done research and I stand by my statement, foul mouth.

[Danapmu]

Crichton is wrong. The reason malaria is a problem; poverty lack of clean water war politics.

Do you really think because there is not enough DDT in the enviroment we have a problem with malaria?

Malaria was well controlled in countries that understood the causes and had the resourses to stop it well before DDT.

[murphycline]

Look at the death toll in Sri Lanka from malaria when DDT was used and following the ban. Malaria is caused by mosquitoes which arise out of bad,stagnant, water. But bad water in and of itself does not cause malaria; mosquitoes do. DDT kills mosquitos.

[laotsu7777]

the simplicity of your ignorant argument belies the fact that there are decades of research related to the reasons DDT was stopped. Mainly due to resistance built up by mosquitos. It is no secret.  Crighton is buying into a revisionist campaign that has been exposed already.

[beowulfsun]

Its the Risk vs Benefit Ratio Factor.

[macman13]

benefit was winning

[safuna]

Can anybody back up Crichton's claim that banning DDT has caused millions of deaths from malaria?

[Sidewinder77]

Look-up DDT on Wikipedia and search for Malaria Death Clock on Google

[3H071]

FYI, try and avoid Wikipedia if you can. It's got quite a bit of bad baggage with misinformation and in some cases deliberate misinformation.

[laotsu7777]

if that is your source then you are sorley underprepared for any serious discussion on why DDT usage was stopped in Africa. Crighton is a contempory phuedo science capitalist with no real grasp of this subject. This neat little package is for the ignorant.

[caseybritton]

I love Michael Crichton's books. He seems to really think through his ideas, and of course in almost everyone of his books he seems to have massive amounts of research. He made some extremely good points in State of Fear. I wish he conducted more interviews...I 'm alsways interested to hear him speak.