Environmental Health Issue on DDT Exposure - Article Example

Environmental Health Issue on DDT Exposure Abstract Malaria is a contagious disease that is thought to cost the world several billions of dollars every year. Although it has been a broad social burden to all governments for decades, the disease is highly endemic in African countries. The major portion of their health budget is being spent on fighting malaria. The notorious chemical, Dichloro-Diphenyl-Trichloroethane (DDT) was widely used in Europe and North America to suppress mosquito-born disease especially malaria at the time of World War I I. Since 1945, DDT gained exceeding popularity both in malaria control activities and in agricultural practices (DDT: An Introduction). Efficacy of the substance was cherished by the international organizations like WHO in their malaria control program until its evil facet was unveiled by one of the US Fish and Wildlife staff Rachel Carson (Bethel,2005 p.73). Although DDT was banned, due to several reasons many countries still use it in their malaria control program. Use of a deadly chemical like DDT, for whatever good purpose it might be, tends one to doubt the collective moral perception of the world. Environmental Health Issue on DDT Exposure Introduction Malaria is one of the overwhelming epidemics that have been tormenting the world for several decades. An array of factors such as incessant wars, over-crowding, natural calamities such as hurricanes and typhoons, drought, wildfire, heat waves, volcanoes, and earthquakes accelerate the spread of the disease. Eradication of this epidemic is highly associated with effective mosquito control. The introduction of the ‘miracle pesticide’ DDT gained remarkable advancement in controlling malaria despite its deadly polluting characteristic. Although malaria is a significant public health issue in many parts of the world, the use of DDT can not be appreciated as a proper method to combat malaria. This paper, with the support of relevant studies and examples, tends to point out the fallacy of using DDT in Malaria Eradication Program. Significance of malaria as a health issue Irrespective of the geographical difference, the awesome epidemic has caused severe socio-economic impact on inhabitants of every continent. In terms of mortality malaria holds major position. It has been reported that in the 1922-23 malaria affected more than 10 million people and caused about 60,000 deaths in the Soviet Union. Likewise 100 million people were estimated to have affected and 1 million died in India in 1908 (Najera, Kouznestsov & Delacollette). Although the world has succeeded to control the disease to a great extent, in many parts of the world it persists as a relevant health issue. For instance, malaria kills more than a million people every year in Africa (Bethel, 2005). Malaria is a communicable disease that is transmitted by mosquitoes. Therefore effective mosquito control could be the inevitable remedy for the prevention of the spread. Although many developed countries have successfully eradicated malaria, the alarming statistics of malaria attack in African countries reminds the need of further collaborated effort. According to the WHO’s World Malaria report, ‘half of the world’s population is at risk of malaria’ (WHO, GMP). People having other illness and low immunity and those with unhygienic living condition are found vulnerable to malaria. It reveals the importance of environmental methods in combating malaria other than using a toxic substance against it. All about a miracle insecticide It was after 1945, DDT appeared to be highly helpful in agricultural use (DDT: An Introduction) for fighting various pests and insects including mosquitoes and plague flea. Since, the invention of the chemical gained Nobel Prize for Paul Muller in 1948, little investigation had been done on the consequences of its domestic and agricultural use. Obviously, Malaria Eradication Program, headed by the US Public Health Service after 1945 brought considerable results; for example, ‘in Greece, the annual number of malaria cases dropped from 2 million to about 50,000 within 3 years’ (Bethel, 73). DDT has been widely accepted for its cheap cost, high effectiveness, and a comparatively low acute toxicity to human beings. Since 1945 the substance had been used on a large scale until Rachel Carson wrote about the hidden consequences of DDT exposure in her book silent spring (Bethel). It was the turning point where the substance became a debatable subject. Impact on environment Carson introduced the concept of conservationism according to which every living being in nature is interconnected and therefore if any one is tampered it would affect the eco-balance (Bethel, 2005, p.73). Volumes have been written on this issue and many studies could unearth alarming evidences of impacts of DDT on environment and human health. Investigation proved that the microscopic remnants of the chemical could be transmitted to long distance and the bio-magnified DDT would contaminate food chain, water, and air forever (McGinn, 2002). In addition, DDT could cause adverse effect on wildlife as a whole. How DDT works on organism might vary. According to one study, DDT works on insects through their sense organ i.e. their legs by causing nerve lesion when they pick up the substance (DR. Curran, 1946). Studies conducted on animals have proven that it is a persistent environmental pollutant. “DDT is bio transformed to numerous lipophilic and persistent metabolites that are found in human tissues and in wild mammals, birds, and fish.” (Lindhe, Lund, Bergman & Brandt, 2001). Impact on human health Although DDT exposure does not cause immediate toxicity to human beings, it has been proven to have a slow-poisoning effect which would affect the nervous system. Furthermore, it is believed to damage the reproductive system which results in birth abnormality and impotence. A study conducted to trace the role of DDT as a cause to breast cancer, reveals that DDT exposure at a younger age could make the women more vulnerable to cancer (Cohn, Wolff, Cirillo & Sholtz, 2007). Another study conducted among the males proves that occupational exposure to DDT could also affect the reproductive health of men causing reduced semen volume and sperm count, and decline in fertility. (Salasar-Gracia F., Gallardo-Diaz, E., Ceron-Mireles, P., & Borja-Aburto, V., 2004,). ‘Among the 75 percent of pregnancies studied (that occurred after the father was exposed to DDT through his occupational activities in the malaria control program), 55 children were born with birth defects’. (Salasar-Gracia F, et al., 2004). DDT Elimination Programs The adverse effect of DDT exposure was brought to light by many researchers that led to the ban on using the miracle insecticide. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) banned DDT in 1972 (DDT: An Introduction). Organizations like WHO reviewed their malaria control program in which DDT had been used on a large scale. Further, in 1998, a collaborative effort was initiated between WHO, World Bank, UNICEF and the UNDP which was intended to concentrate on house hold and community based activities (McGinn, 2002). The Stockholm Convention held in 2004 was a landmark in the elimination of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) including DDT. However, considering the severity of malaria and due to the absence of a substitute, the use of DDT has been permitted for limited public purpose. (Martin A K.,2008). Alternatives and their effects DDT played a significant role in the malaria eradication program better than any other methods could do. Obviously, after the ban of DDT dramatic increase in the malaria infection had been reported from several parts of the world. Several alternatives like Malathion, Temophos, used motor oil, and Deltamethrin have been introduced to substitute DDT. However, the efficacy of these alternatives has been questioned and many of them are of high cost (Goklany, 2001, p.16). WHO’s Global Malaria Program has advised the use of insecticide treated mosquito nets (ITNs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) provided that it is practiced according to the proper guidelines(WHO,GMP). However, low cost and chemical efficacy of DDT still influence many of the third world countries to continue the use of this chemical in their malaria control program. A holistic approach to malaria All the above mentioned advantages do not necessarily mean that DDT is the sole instrument to deal with malaria eradication. What the Stockholm Convention envisages, (total elimination of DDT by 2017) can be achieved only by inventing new substitutes to DDT. Collective effort is essential for this experiment because it is a multi-faceted global issue. Instead of focusing solely on mosquito elimination, a holistic approach is necessary to combat malaria. Significance of environmental control methods like filling ditches and larviciding (Bisco M L., Mutero C M., & KramerR A.(2004) with echo-friendly substances needs to be highlighted in the program. In addition to mosquito control, experiments for inventing new drugs/vaccine have to be initiated globally. Since mosquitoes’ resistance to DDT had been already been reported (McGinn, 2002), the repeated use of the chemical would cause unpredictable harm to environment. Hence, the world needs to get rid of two evils i.e. DDT and Malaria. The world can no longer bear DDT to fight malaria because it is a proven fatal mistake. As mentioned earlier, environmental methods are to be given priority in the eradication program. It includes improving sanitation facilities, treating vector with eco-friendly substances, conducting further malaria research, learning more about the biological characteristics of mosquito etc. In addition, awareness program and campaign would give people knowledge about the deadliness of the disease. CDC’s malaria research program is attempting to improve the understanding of malaria and seeking better methods to fight the disease (Malaria, CDC). The world has invented drugs for almost every disease, and therefore an effective substitute to DDT or a perfect vaccine to fight malaria can be invented if experienced manpower is collaborated. Conclusion In fact malaria is an exceedingly important global health issue that needs international level joint effort. However, all measures taken to control the disease should be echo-friendly. Deadly substance like DDT must not be a weapon of choice any more to fight malaria. Time is up to convince the entire world that the organic pollutant, in the long run, would bring adversity to the earth. Many of the living beings are already at the verge of extinction and it would plunge the world into serious ecological imbalance and to subsequent catastrophe. References Bethell T. (2005). The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science. Illustrated, Regency Publishing. Bisco M L., Mutero C M., & KramerR A.(2004). Status of DDT Use for Malaria Control in Etiopía, Uganda, Kenya and South Africa. IWMI. Cohn, Wolff, Cirillo & Sholtz. (2007). DDT and Breast Cancer in Young Women: New Data on The Significance of Age at Exposure. Enviornmental Health Perspectives 115(10). Retrieved Oct.3,2009, from http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2007/10260/abstract.html DR. Curran. (1946, Feb). How DDT Really Works: Wonder Insecticide has Limits, and You had Better Know Them. Popular Science, 148 (2). DDT: An Introduction. Cruising Chemistry. Retrieved October 3, 2009, from http://www.chem.duke.edu/~jds/cruise_chem/pest/pest1.html Goklany I M. (2001). The Precautionary Principle: A Critical Appraisal of Environmental Risk Assessment. Cato Institute. Lindhe, Lund, Bergman & Brandt. (2001). Irreversible Binding and Adrenocorticolytic Activity of the DDT Metabolite 3-Methylsulfonyl – DDE Examined in Tissue-Slice Culture. Environmental Health Perspectives (109). Martin A K.(2008). The Regulation of DDT: A Choice between Evils. VanderBilt Journal of Transnational Law. (41). Malaria. CDC official website, retrieved October 3, 2009, from http://www.cdc.gov/MALARIA/cdcactivities/index.htm McGinn P. (2002, May). Malaria, Mosquitoes and DDT: The Toxic War against a Global Dieses. World Watch (15). Najera, Kouznestsov & Delacollette. Malaria Epidemic Detection and Control Forcasting and Prevention. World Health Organization. Retrieved October 3, 2009 from http://apps.who.int/malaria/docs/najera_epidemics/naj1.htm#p1.1 Salasar-Gracia F., Gallardo-Diaz, E., Ceron-Mireles, P., & Borja-Aburto, V. (2004). Reproductive Effect of Occupational DDT Exposure among Male Malaria Control Workers. Enviornmental Health Perspectives, 112 (5), 542-547. Retrieved October 3, 2009, from http://www.ehponline.org/members/2004/6759/6759.pdf WHO Global Malaria Program (GMP). Official Website. Retrieved October 3, 2009, from http://apps.who.int/malaria/ Read More