THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume IX, Issue # 85, May 14, 2007
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
PRO-MALARIA FORCES RESURFACE AT WHO:
Proposals to Ban Life-Saving Chemicals Would Cost Countless Lives
By Paul K. Driessen & Cyril Boynes, Jr.
POLITICAL ENVIRONMENTALISM VERSUS HUMAN HEALTH: THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION'S DISEASE
PREVENTION POLICIES ARE UNDER ASSAULT BY POLITICAL ENVIRONMENTALISTS & THE ANTI-INSECTICIDE MOVEMENT --
ANTI-PESTICIDE ACTIVISTS & CO-CONSPIRATORS SEEK TO REVERSE THE 2006 DECISION TO RESTORE DDT TO WHO'S
MALARIA-FIGHTING ARSENAL
FULL STORY:
The World Health Organization intends to phase out chemotherapy drugs, due to concerns about their health effects,
WHO Public Health and Environment Director Dr. Maria Neira announced recently. Those effects include anemia, diarrhea,
reduced resistance to infection, potential birth defects and hair loss.
“These drugs save lives, but they are dangerous,” she stated. “WHO is determined to end their use, motivate researchers
to develop safer cancer treatments, and emphasize acceptable alternatives, like broccoli.”
Imagine the shock and outrage that would follow such an announcement. Europe and the United States would demand her
ouster and threaten to slash WHO’s budget, if it tried such a thing.
But, of course Dr. Neira and WHO made no such proposal. Instead, she and her co-conspirators are promoting something
even more irresponsible – and deadly. They want to reverse the September, 2006, decision to restore DDT to the World
Health Organization’s malaria-fighting arsenal.
“WHO is concerned about health effects associated with DDT,” she said during a recent conference in Dakar, Senegal. Her
position, not the September decision, represents WHO’s position regarding DDT for malaria control and its commitment to
phasing the chemical out, she asserted.
Dr. Arata Kochi, Director of WHO’s Malaria Division, made his decision based on decades of evidence, and because he
recognized that no other chemical in existence, at any price, does what DDT does.
Sprayed just once or twice a year on the walls of houses, this powerful repellant keeps most mosquitoes from entering;
irritates those that do come in, so they don't bite; and kills any that land. Used this way, DDT can reduce malaria rates by
75% – and it is perfectly safe for people and the environment.
In effect, DDT places a huge bednet over the entire house. From dusk to dawn, it protects the inhabitants, whether they are
sleeping or doing housework and homework.
The US Agency for International Development also reversed its policies and redeployed DDT. And European Commission
President Jose Manuel Barroso wrote that the European Union recognizes and supports the right of countries to use DDT,
under Stockholm Convention and WHO guidelines.
Fed up with the sickness and death, African countries are again using DDT and other sprays, not just to stabilize or “roll
back” malaria, but to eradicate it.
Dr. Neira and her colleagues, however, appear wedded to the disastrous policies that kept malaria at unconscionable levels:
400 million cases and up to 2 million deaths a year – half of them children. They continue to oppose insecticides, especially
DDT, and insist that bednets, drugs, education, and other “acceptable,” non-chemical interventions will suffice.
These other interventions are also essential. But they are not enough to end malaria’s reign of terror.
The nasty effects of chemo drugs are real. The alleged risks of using DDT are pure speculation. They are trumpeted by radical
groups like Pesticide Action Network, who insist: Some researchers think DDT could be inhibiting lactation and might be
related to premature births, low birth weights, and slow reflexes in babies.
These risks are unproven and trivial, compared to the undeniable risks that DDT can prevent.
“Millions cannot work or go to school for weeks every year because of malaria,” Uganda’s Fiona Kobusingye points out.
“Countless people die. Mothers have anemia, premature births
and tiny babies because of it. Parents and children get severe
permanent brain damage from it. And many people die from
HIV/AIDS and other diseases that are made worse by malaria.”
Anti-pesticide activists claim Mexico “greatly reduced malaria without using DDT,” by employing politically correct
alternatives to insecticides. They deliberately ignore two critical points.
According to the Pan American Health Organization, Mexico had
a mere 3,400 cases of malaria in 2004. In Kenya that year, 34,000
people died from malaria! In Nigeria, 58,000 parents and children
died; in Uganda, 100,000.
Mexico’s real weapon is drugs. To treat those 3,400 cases, it
dispensed 10.3 million Chloroquine, Amodiaquine and
Primaquine tablets! These powerful drugs can cause genetic
mutations and physical defects in fetuses. They also carry high
risks that the malaria parasites will become resistant to the drugs.
To say this is preferable to DDT is preposterous. It is medical malpractice.
No wonder people have called anti-insecticide policies “eco-imperialism,” “eco-manslaughter,” “neo-colonialism” and “racist
experiments” on the world’s poor.
No wonder they ask whether anti-insecticide policies are driven in part by neo-Malthusian eugenics theorists like Paul Ehrlich,
who wrote in The Population Bomb that “exported death control,” in the form of DDT and other technologies that
prevent disease and death, is a major cause of “over-population.”
Club of Rome Founder Alexander King said, “My chief quarrel with DDT, in hindsight, is that it greatly added to the
population problem.” And oceanographer Jacques Cousteau told Novelle Observateur, “In order to stabilize world
populations, we must eliminate 350,000 people a day.”
Whether such obscene attitudes are at the root of anti-insecticide policies is somewhat beside the point, however. The reality is
that those policies perpetuate disease, poverty, and death.
“We continue to squander resources on half-measures, when we could use proven, effective tools,” says, African Union
Disease Control Coordinator John Kabayo.
“Bed nets are meaningless in societies that have no beds. To
totally and predictably eradicate malaria, we need a combination
of tools and strategies, applied in a dedicated program of
systematic military-style operations. Bed nets on their own will,
at best, only divert resources and prolong the misery perpetrated
by this needless disease.”
Under the Stockholm Convention, whether to use insecticides or spatial repellants like DDT is a decision for health ministers
in countries that face endemic and epidemic malaria. Bureaucrats in malaria-free Geneva offices have no right to deny them to
malaria victims.
WHO legitimately worries about obesity, cancer, and smoking. But malaria is one of the world’s most critical healthcare issues.
It should also be one of the easiest to control, and even eradicate.
WHO Director-General Dr. Margaret Chan needs to give her unqualified support to Dr. Kochi – and let Dr. Neira know she
must put people’s lives first, and stop undermining agency policies, or find other employment. Returning to the lethal policies
of recent years would be unforgivable.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Science, Ethics, & Human Health:
Human Health & Public Policy
Policy Issues Relating to Energy, Environment,
& Natural Resources
The United Nations, Its Agencies, U.S. National Interests
Paul K. Driessen is Senior Policy Advisor for the Congress of Racial Equality, the Committee for A Constructive Tomorrow, and the
Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise. Driessen is author of Eco-Imperialism: Green Power, Black Death, which can be
obtained at www.Eco-Imperialism.com. Email: pdriessen@cox.net --- Telephone:
(703) 698-6171
Cyril Boynes, Jr., is CORE’s Director of International Affairs and Honorary Consul General of Bunyoro-Kitara Kingdom of Uganda
to the Americas.
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume IX, 2007
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity