The DDT Fraud and Other Follies like Global Warming

6/8/07

Rachel Carson wrote what seemed to be a scholarly book on the effect of pesticides on the animal kingdom. Her book [1] was written in a freak show format reminiscent of comic opera and cartoon themes. Using fear and lies to spread around her politics, she had ‘concluded,’ without scientific evidence, that DDT and other synthetic chemicals were harming birds and had contaminated the earth. One of her chapters reads like a Lillian Hellman play and was entitled: “A Fable for Tomorrow” that outlined how “life had been silenced” by the pesticide DDT. The strange movie Threads about nuclear war was almost as amusing.

Amidst criticism of her work, devoid of any scientific methods, research or competent literature searches , President Kennedy set up a whitewash forum to ‘vindicate’ her phony work and validate the hysteria she caused because it became a neat political effort to grunt and grab some more votes. Her work was a fable.

Psycho-Loony frauds are common in quack science, but they can be isolated from reality by a review of sound scientific research and any conflicts noted. They are, however, necessary fodder for the left to incite the public in a vain attempt to attract votes.

Here are but a very few examples of research that refutes what she wrote

Many experiments on caged-birds demonstrate that DDT and its metabolites (DDD and DDE) do not cause serious egg shell thinning, even at levels many hundreds of times greater than wild birds would ever accumulate.

It is interesting that there is NO scientific research that demonstrates that DDT is harmful, yet the hysterical rants, sobbings and maudlin posturing of Rachel Carson was ‘accepted’ by the liberal left [read EcoNazis here] and vindicated by Democrats.

Some pertinent scientific findings:

“Laboratory egg shell thinning required massive doses of DDE far in excess of anything expected in nature, and massive laboratory doses produce much less thinning than is seen in many of the thin-shelled eggs collected in the wild.”-- [Hazeltine, WE. 1974. Statement and affidavit, EPA Hearings on Tussock Moth Control,Portland Oregon, p. 9 (January 14, 1974)]

“Years of carefully controlled feeding experiments involving levels of DDT as high as present in most wild birds resulted in no tremors, mortality, thinning of egg shells nor reproductive interference.”-- [Scott, ML et al. 1975. Poultry Science 54: 350-368 (Egg production, hatch ability and shell quality depend on calcium, and are not effected by DDT and its metabolites)]

“Egg shell thinning is not correlated with pesticide residues.”-- [Krantz WC. 1970 (No correlation between shell-thinning and pesticide residues in eggs) Pesticide Monitoring J 4(3): 136-141; Postupalsky, S. 1971. Canadian Wildlife Service manuscript, April 8, 1971 (No correlation between shell-thinning and DDE in eggs of bald eagles and cormorants); Anon. 1970. Oregon State University Health Sciences Conference, Annual report, p. 94. (Lowest DDT residues associated with thinnest shells in Cooper's hawk, sharp-shinned hawk and goshawk); Claus G and K Bolander. 1977. Ecological Sanity, David McKay Co., N.Y., p. 461. (Feeding thyreprotein causes hens to lay lighter eggs, with heavier, thicker shells)]

“Among brown pelican egg shells examined there was no correlation between DDT residue and shell thickness.”-- [Switzer, B. 1972. Consolidated EPA hearings, Transcript pp. 8212-8336; and Hazeltine, WE. 1972. Why pelican eggshells are thin. Nature 239: 410-412]

“Egg shells of red-tailed hawks were reported to be six percent thicker during years of heavy DDT usage than just before DDT use began. Golden eagle egg shells were 5 percent thicker than those produced before DDT use”. --
[Hickey, JJ and DW Anderson. 1968. Science 162: 271-273]
”
Is there no refutation of these findings?? What do they have except a baleful glubberances and some whining politicos?

NOTHING.

But, the phony work of Carson did cause some major damage in pest control around the world.

A review of her book:

"I noticed many statements that I realized were false." Attracted by Carson's message, Edwards tried to overlook the misstatements or to rationalize them away, but increasingly he could not. "As I neared the middle of the book," he adds, "the feeling grew in my mind that Rachel Carson was really playing loose with the facts."[2]

Sounds like a standard leftist buncombe effort. When do we get some solid evidence on crap like this? Is this what the phony Global Warming is based on?? Note Al Gore wrote a foreword to Silent Spring on reprint and he is the current carnie barker to honk the dangers of GW.

What sour fluff!

rycK

---

[1] http://www.nrdc.org/health/pesticides/hcarson.asp, Silent Spring.

[2] http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55878