Download to read offline
Multi model project
- 1. T H EF R A U D A N D M I S L E A D I N G E F F E C T S O N B I R D S DEFENDING DDT Cameron Troutman Eng 1060-002 Dr. David Marquard June 30, 2014
- 2. HISTORY OF DDT •Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, or more commonly known as DDT is a pesticide that was used world wide in the beginning of the 1900’s. • Its use first began as a way to combat malaria and to ward off mosquitoes from homes and residential properties. • Along with home use DDT was also administered in breading grounds for mosquitoes, which devastated the malaria parasite in countries all around the world.
- 3. HISTORY CONT. • Afteronly five years, the price of DDT drastically dropped from $1 dollar per pound to just $0.25 cents. • Since DDT was now so cheap many farmers and agriculturalists began to use this pesticide in their fields because of its effectiveness and being inexpensive (Turusov 125).
- 4. THE ARGUMENT The argumentpresented will show a different side of DDT and give a look at the misconceptions that have been attached to this pesticide. Although DDT was banned in the 1940's, there was no accurate scientific evidence that this pesticide had risks on bird's health, their reproductive cycles, or their production of eggs. This argument will dive in head first at what some scholars say negative about DDT and what others argue against them to support the use of DDT.
- 5. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY • Theresearch used for this paper is primarily secondary research sources that includes scholarly journals and accredited websites that are relevant to the topic. • There are nine different sources that were primarily used to gather information on the topic that is presented in the paper. • Some articles like Edwards, Roberts, and Sirkin show ways that DDT should not have been banned and gave reasons to their importance. • Others gave a different side and spoke how DDT was harm but never gave the reason to these except that the chemical had just been present.
- 6. SIGNIFICANCE • DDT wasa tool that influenced the world more than many people realize. • DDT was blamed for causing eggshell thinning and decrease of different species of birds. • DDT was banned from use from someone who looked at the public opinion and not the facts. • The public was misinformed by Rachel Carson’s book that inaccurately shaped the future for DDT and the rest of the world. Carson and the EPA head executive, William Ruckelshaus can both be thanked for the ban of DDT and the agonizing lives that many of those live in third world countries from horrible insect spread diseases.
- 7. CONCLUSION • There arestill many unknown qualities about DDT that have yet to be proven. • DDT may have a link in many of the problems theorized by the environmentalist. • DDT is more than likely in every living thing, but is there a severe health risk because of this? Currently there are no factual answers to this question. • What is known are the benefits that have been associated with DDT but are often overlooked and dismissed because of a book published off of shear opinion.
- 8. CONCLUSION CONT. • DDThas saved millions of lives from malaria and to is still combating this parasite to this day in many developing countries. • Instead of saving lives of people who are dying agonizing deaths from malaria, many of the ones that were in power went with popular believe and chose politics. • The DDT usage in the natural world has yet to be proven to kill birds or have a negative affect on their reproduction • The ruling of banning DDT was unjust and favored the opinion of one person who did not even hear all of the evidence • . DDT has been treated unfairly when it has done nothing for human civilization but help rid of pests and improve the living conditions for all of the lives it has touched.