Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
DDT
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
===United States ban=== By October 1945, DDT was available for public sale in the United States, used both as an agricultural pesticide and as a household insecticide.<ref name="Distillations"/> Although its use was promoted by government and the agricultural industry, US scientists such as FDA pharmacologist [[Herbert O. Calvery]] expressed concern over possible hazards associated with DDT as early as 1944.<ref name="Davis">{{cite book|last1=Davis|first1=Frederick Rowe|title=Banned : a history of pesticides and the science of toxicology|date=2014|publisher=Yale University Press|location=[S.l.]|isbn=978-0300205176|page=26|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kuIdBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA26|access-date=25 July 2017|archive-date=July 31, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200731130621/https://books.google.com/books?id=kuIdBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA26|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=EPA1975/><ref name="Distillations"/> In 1947, [[Bradbury Robinson]], a physician and nutritionist practicing in [[St. Louis, Michigan]], warned of the dangers of using the pesticide DDT in agriculture. DDT had been researched and manufactured in St. Louis by the [[Michigan Chemical Corporation]], later purchased by [[Velsicol Chemical Corporation]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.velsicol.com/|title=Leading Chemical Company β Manufacture, Distribution & Sales|website=Velsicol Chemical, LLC|access-date=October 23, 2017|archive-date=October 16, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171016054516/http://www.velsicol.com/|url-status=live}}</ref> and had become an important part of the local economy.<ref name= STLH>{{cite web|url=http://www.stlouismi.com/1/stlouis/history_by_decades.asp|title=History by Decades|website=www.stlouismi.com|access-date=October 23, 2017|archive-date=November 18, 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061118003950/http://www.stlouismi.com/1/stlouis/history_by_decades.asp|url-status=live}}</ref> Citing research performed by [[Michigan State University]]<ref>American Potato Journal, June 1947, volume 24, issue 6, pp. 183β187. Results of spraying and dusting potatoes in Michigan in 1946.</ref> in 1946, Robinson, a past president of the local Conservation Club,<ref>"Conservation Club, St. Louis, Has Program", ''Lansing State Journal'' (Lansing, Michigan), p. 14, March 2, 1931.</ref> opined that: {{blockquote|perhaps the greatest danger from D.D.T. is that its extensive use in farm areas is most likely to upset the natural balances, not only killing beneficial insects in great number but by bringing about the death of fish, birds, and other forms of wild life either by their feeding on insects killed by D.D.T. or directly by ingesting the poison.<ref>{{cite report | title = A Nutritionist Ponders the D.D.T. Problem | first = Bradbury | last = Robinson | author-link = Bradbury Robinson | name-list-style = vanc | location = St. Louis, Michigan | work = Private Publication | date = 1947}}</ref>}} As its production and use increased, public response was mixed. At the same time that DDT was hailed as part of the "world of tomorrow", concerns were expressed about its potential to kill harmless and beneficial insects (particularly [[pollinators]]), birds, fish, and eventually humans. The issue of toxicity was complicated, partly because DDT's effects varied from species to species, and partly because consecutive exposures could accumulate, causing damage comparable to large doses. A number of states attempted to regulate DDT.<ref name="Distillations">{{cite journal |last1=Conis |first1=Elena |title=Beyond Silent Spring: An Alternate History of DDT |journal=[[Distillations (magazine)|Distillations]] |date=2017 |volume=2 |issue=4 |pages=16β23 |url=https://www.sciencehistory.org/distillations/magazine/beyond-silent-spring-an-alternate-history-of-ddt |access-date=20 March 2018 |archive-date=November 22, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191122192729/https://www.sciencehistory.org/distillations/magazine/beyond-silent-spring-an-alternate-history-of-ddt |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=EHC009>{{EHC-ref | id = 009 | name=DDT and its derivatives | date = 1979 | isbn = 92-4-154069-9 }}</ref> In the 1950s the federal government began tightening regulations governing its use.<ref name=EPA1975/> These events received little attention. Women like Dorothy Colson and Mamie Ella Plyler of [[Claxton, Georgia]], gathered evidence about DDT's effects and wrote to the Georgia Department of Public Health, the National Health Council in New York City, and other organizations.<ref name="Conis">{{cite news|last1=Conis|first1=Elena|name-list-style=vanc|title=DDT Disbelievers: Health and the New Economic Poisons in Georgia after World War II|url=https://southernspaces.org/2016/ddt-disbelievers-health-and-new-economic-poisons-georgia-after-world-war-ii|access-date=25 July 2017|work=Southern Spaces|date=October 28, 2016|archive-date=August 6, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170806021326/https://southernspaces.org/2016/ddt-disbelievers-health-and-new-economic-poisons-georgia-after-world-war-ii|url-status=live}}</ref> In 1957 ''[[The New York Times]]'' reported an unsuccessful struggle to restrict DDT use in [[Nassau County, New York]], and the issue came to the attention of the popular naturalist-author [[Rachel Carson]] when a friend, [[Olga Huckins]], wrote to her including an article she had written in the Boston Globe about the devastation of her local bird population after DDT spraying.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Knox |first=Robert |date=2012 |title=Duxbury celebrates Rachel Carson's 'Silent Spring' |url=https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/regionals/south/2012/05/23/duxbury-celebrates-local-nature-lover-voice-rachel-carson-silent-spring/uhxGAO38m3kHbDMlYQfPqO/story.html |access-date=2023-12-16 |website=BostonGlobe.com |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Johnson |first=Jenn |date=2018-02-22 |title=Her Heart's Home {{!}} Timeless New England |url=https://newengland.com/yankee/magazine/her-hearts-home-timeless-new-england/ |access-date=2023-12-16 |website=New England |language=en}}</ref> [[William Shawn]], editor of ''[[The New Yorker]]'', urged her to write a piece on the subject, which developed into her 1962 book ''[[Silent Spring]]''. The book argued that [[pesticide]]s, including DDT, were poisoning both wildlife and the environment and were endangering human health.<ref name="Lear"/> ''Silent Spring'' was a best seller, and public reaction to it launched the modern [[environmentalism|environmental movement]] in the United States. The year after it appeared, [[John F. Kennedy|President John F. Kennedy]] ordered his Science Advisory Committee to investigate Carson's claims. The committee's report "add[ed] up to a fairly thorough-going vindication of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring thesis", in the words of the journal ''[[Science (journal)|Science]]'',<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Greenberg DS | title = Pesticides: White House Advisory Body Issues Report Recommending Steps to Reduce Hazard to Public | journal = Science | volume = 140 | issue = 3569 | pages = 878β879 | date = May 1963 | pmid = 17810673 | doi = 10.1126/science.140.3569.878 | bibcode = 1963Sci...140..878G }}</ref> and recommended a phaseout of "persistent toxic pesticides".<ref name="Michaels2008">{{cite book |last=Michaels |first=David | name-list-style = vanc | title = Doubt is Their Product: How Industry's Assault on Science Threatens Your Health|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=New York|year=2008|isbn=978-0-19-530067-3|title-link=Doubt is Their Product }}</ref> In 1965, the U.S. military removed DDT from the military supply system due in part to the development of resistance by body lice to DDT; it was replaced by [[lindane]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=Technical Guide No. 6 β Delousing Procedures for the Control of Louse-borne Disease During Contingency Operations |publisher=[[United States Department of Defense]] Armed Forces Pest Management Board Information Services Division|date= November 2011|url= https://perma.cc/HY4A-ENXM }}</ref> In the mid-1960s, DDT became a prime target of the burgeoning [[environmental movement]], as concern about DDT and its effects began to rise in local communities. In 1966, a fish kill in [[Suffolk County, New York]], was linked to a 5,000-gallon DDT dump by the county's mosquito commission, leading a group of scientists and lawyers to file a lawsuit to stop the county's further use of DDT.{{r|n=CARTERLJ19671222|r={{cite journal | author-last=Carter |author-first=Luther J. | journal=Science | title=Environmental Pollution: Scientists Go to Court | volume=158 | issue=3808 | pages=1552β1556 | publisher=American Association for the Advancement of Science | date=22 December 1967 | url=https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.158.3808.1552 | doi=10.1126/science.158.3808.1552 |pmid=6060359 |bibcode=1967Sci...158.1552C | access-date=26 October 2024}}}} A year later, the group, led by [[Victor Yannacone]] and [[Charles Frederick Wurster|Charles Wurster]], founded the [[Environmental Defense Fund]] (EDF), along with scientists [[Art Cooley]] and [[Dennis Puleston]], and brought a string of lawsuits against DDT and other persistent pesticides in [[Michigan]] and [[Wisconsin]].{{r|n=PRIMACKJR_VONHIPPELF1974|r={{cite book | author-last1=Primack |author-first1=J. R. | author-last2=Von Hippel |author-first2=Frank | date= 1974 | title=Advice and Dissent: Scientists in the Political Arena | chapter=The Battle Over Persistent Pesticides: From Rachel Carson to the Environmental Defense Fund | publisher=Basic Books | pages=128β142 | chapter-url=https://sgs.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/2019-10/Advice-and-Dissent-Chapter10.pdf | isbn=978-0-465-00090-6}}}}<ref>{{cite magazine|title=Sue the Bastards |url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,910111-2,00.html |magazine=[[Time (magazine)|Time]] |date=October 18, 1971 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120119181231/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,910111-2,00.html |archive-date=January 19, 2012 |url-status=dead |df=mdy }}</ref> Around the same time, evidence was mounting further about DDT causing catastrophic declines in wildlife reproduction, especially in birds of prey like [[peregrine falcons]], [[bald eagles]], [[ospreys]], and [[brown pelicans]], whose eggshells became so thin that they often cracked before hatching.{{r|n=HENKINH_MERTAM_STAPLESJM1971|r={{cite book | author-last1=Henkin |author-first1=Harmon | author-last2=Merta |author-first2=Martin | author-last3=Staples |author-first3=James M. | date=1971 | title=The Environment, the Establishment, and the Law | publisher=Houghton Mifflin | isbn=978-0-395-11070-6}}}} Toxicologists like [[David Peakall]] were measuring [[Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene|DDE]] levels in the eggs of [[peregrine falcons]] and [[California condor]]s and finding that increased levels corresponded with thinner shells.<ref>{{cite journal|first1=David B.|last1=Peakall|first2=lloyd F.|last2=Kiff | name-list-style = vanc |title=Eggshell thinning and dde residue levels among peregrine falcons falco peregrinus: a global perspective|publisher=Wiley Online Library|date=April 1979|doi= 10.1111/j.1474-919X.1979.tb04962.x|volume=121|issue = 2|journal=Ibis|pages=200β204}}</ref> Compounding the effect was DDTβs persistence in the environment, as it was unable to dissolve in water, and ended up accumulating in animal fat and disrupting hormone metabolism across a wide range of species.{{r|n=DUNLAPTR1978|r={{cite journal | author-last=Dunlap |author-first=Thomas R. | journal=Wisconsin Magazine of History | title=DDT on Trial: The Wisconsin Hearing, 1968-1969 | volume=62 | issue=1 | pages=3β24 | date= 1978 | url=https://content.wisconsinhistory.org/digital/collection/wmh/id/33630 | issn=1943-7366 | access-date=11 December 2024}}}} In response to an EDF suit, the U.S. District Court of Appeals in 1971 ordered the [[United States Environmental Protection Agency|EPA]] to begin the de-registration procedure for DDT. After an initial six-month review process, [[William Ruckelshaus]], the Agency's first [[Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency|Administrator]] rejected an immediate suspension of DDT's registration, citing studies from the EPA's internal staff stating that DDT was not an imminent danger.<ref name=EPA1975/> However, these findings were criticized, as they were performed mostly by [[economic entomologist]]s inherited from the [[United States Department of Agriculture]], who many environmentalists felt were biased towards [[agribusiness]] and understated concerns about human health and wildlife. The decision thus created controversy.<ref name=Dunlap/> The EPA held seven months of hearings in 1971β1972, with scientists giving evidence for and against DDT. In the summer of 1972, Ruckelshaus announced the cancellation of most uses of DDT{{snd}} exempting public health uses under some conditions.<ref name=EPA1975/> Again, this caused controversy. Immediately after the announcement, both the EDF and the DDT manufacturers filed suit against EPA. Many in the agricultural community were concerned that food production would be severely impacted, while proponents of pesticides warned of increased breakouts of insect-borne diseases and questioned the accuracy of giving animals high amounts of pesticides for cancer potential.<ref name=":0">Susan Wayland and Penelope Fenner-Crisp. [http://www.epaalumni.org/hcp/pesticides.pdf "Reducing Pesticide Risks: A Half Century of Progress"]. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190412070256/https://www.epaalumni.org/hcp/pesticides.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161022222635/http://www.epaalumni.org/hcp/pesticides.pdf |archive-date=2016-10-22 |url-status=live |date=April 12, 2019 }}. EPA Alumni Association. March 2016.</ref> Industry sought to overturn the ban, while the EDF wanted a comprehensive ban. The cases were consolidated, and in 1973 the [[United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit]] ruled that the EPA had acted properly in banning DDT.<ref name=EPA1975/> During the late 1970s, the EPA also began banning organochlorines, pesticides that were chemically similar to DDT. These included aldrin, dieldrin, chlordane, heptachlor, toxaphene, and mirex.<ref name=":0" /> Some uses of DDT continued under the public health exemption. For example, in June 1979, the California Department of Health Services was permitted to use DDT to suppress [[flea]] vectors of [[bubonic plague]].<ref name="urlAEI β Short Publications β The Rise, Fall, Rise, and Imminent Fall of DDT">{{cite web |url=http://www.aei.org/outlook/27063 |publisher=AEI |title=The Rise, Fall, Rise, and Imminent Fall of DDT |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110102120306/http://www.aei.org/outlook/27063 |archive-date=January 2, 2011 |url-status=dead |df=mdy }}</ref> DDT continued to be produced in the United States for foreign markets until 1985, when over 300 tons were exported.<ref name="ATSDRc5"/>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
DDT
(section)
Add topic