The Church of Deep Ecology

A prospective follow-up study of cancer mortality in relation to serum DDT.
H Austin, J E Keil, and P Cole
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1349466

Serum DDT and DDE levels were measured in 919 subjects in 1974 and 1975. Two-hundred and nine of the subjects died, including 54 from cancer, during a 10-year prospective follow-up period. There was no relation between either overall mortality or cancer mortality and increasing serum DDT levels. There was weak evidence of a positive relation between respiratory cancer mortality and serum DDT. The literature on DDT and human cancer is reviewed, and it is concluded that the evidence does not support the opinion that DDT is a human carcinogen.

----
that is the study it was citing (4)
not that i care either which way this is going...

 

This is a pretty interesting read from the Junk Science website if anyone is interested:

100 things you should know about DDT

 

I don't know why I'm arguing about this, honestly.

DDT is a hazardous pesticide that has no place in the blood of animals or humans, of which it has been detected and continues to be found in many life forms and walks of life that do affect and change the biological makeup and chemistry of the life form. It's a chemical that doesn't belong at all. There are both proven and disproven links to cancer with its association to being in various life forms and I'll bet that everybody in the modern world has been exposed to DDT in some form or other of organochlorine pesticides and it's probably quite difficult to detect and isolate the amount of exposure of other harmful toxins in relation to the exposure of DDT in order to find any conclusive hard evidence to the results and its correlation to cancer.

"For the subset of women born more than 14 years prior to the introduction of DDT into US agriculture, there was no association between DDT levels and breast cancer. However, for women born more recently—and thus exposed earlier in life—the most p,p-DDT exposed third of women had a fivefold increase in breast cancer incidence over the least exposed third, after correcting for the protective effect of o,p-DDT."
Source

 

But how come you're not speaking out against the other insecticides in use that are far more toxic and much more widely used??

Oh, I guess it's not cool because the environmentalists aren't talking about it.

 

The fact that I probably have DDT in my blood or have been exposed to high levels of it bothers me, because I see no need for it being there. I see no evidence of its safeness in animal life forms - and I have yet to see any.

 

Aristartle- Thank you for actually taking the time to prove exactly how wrong Rat is on this issue. Much appreciated

Rat- Do you believe that we landed on the moon? What's inside Area 51?

 

Actually, I am and I have. I went to City Hall several times with a bunch of people and have done some work spreading the message about the usage of herbicides and pesticides.

London goes 100% pesticide/herbicide use-free this September.

You?

 

What about the things everyone else is exposed to on a daily basis, which is proven to be far more toxic than DDT??

 

I just want to read Gustave Flaubert and give a verbal dissertation between his work and Charles Baudelaire by the beginning of April.

One day at a time, but I'll get there.

Miles to go before I sleep... etc.

I'm just one girl. And I know there are more toxins than DDT out there, lurking in everything we touch, in the teflon in our cookware, etc. It's why I have these awesome cast iron pans. Anyway, I'm so tired and cold tonight. I need to be going to bed. I have to be up early again. Adieu, and good night Matthew.

 

Here's an article posted by these guys - http://www.aeha-quebec.ca/

 

You can check out http://www.toxicnation.ca/ for yourself, if you are interested. I warn you. It's full of hippie spam and mentalists. But I think it's worth a look.

 

I don't know; The church seems pretty cool but I tend to shy away from thinking that we should be totally one with the earth and stuff. The human race won't stop being destructive like it is, and it's probably a shame, but fuck it, I love being in big dirty cities and eating meat and all that good stuff.

Here's something I can groove a little better to:
http://www.luminist.org/

 

Funny we never hear the environmentalists speaking out against fluoridated water, as fluoride (which is a toxic poison used in fertilizer) has proven to lower IQs and cause bone cancer. You can bet if it was the popular thing to do, everyone would be speaking out against it. Because it's not, nobody talks about it and you're looked at as if you have three heads if you dare mention it. DDT is a hot button topic with the environmentalists, and if you're an "intellectual" and don't stand up and vehemently oppose DDT, well, gee, people might think you're weird. Forget the millions of other chemicals people are exposed to on a daily basis. We must stand up against DDT because it's the hip thing to do!

DDT may not be harmless (I never said it was), but it's a lot safer than many of the household chemicals people are exposed to on a regular basis. So what I am simply trying to address is the hype over DDT. Seems a lot of people like to jump on the bandwagon and will not even consider information that doesn't fit into what they already believe. I am also trying to show that the ban on DDT has absolutely NOTHING to do with toxicity or the environment, and it has been admitted by credible and respected organizations, such as the National Academy of Sciences, that DDT has saved hundreds of millions of lives. But I guess that's a bad thing to those who see human life as parasitic (hence the reason for it being banned).

I don't think much about DDT, because it's just one chemical among many I am exposed to everytime I take a breath or a shower. I just think it's funny that everyone gets all up in arms about it when it's nothing compared to what people are eating, drinking and breathing everyday.

I've said my piece.

 

Hun, I'd never say that you were weird for expressing your views. I just don't think de-emphasizing the exposure and risks related to DDT is helpful at all to either argument that it's potentially harmful or that there are other toxins we should be more concerned about.

 

lets call a spin a spin, shall we?

i missed the part where bird answered any of my points.

(or anyone else's. once upon a time random thoughts was something other then a soap box for anti-thought and anti-real hippie values.)

=^^=
.../\...

 

Get real man.

It is stupidity we are up against, not humanity. It is humanity AND the rest of the biosphere which we see as inextricably linked that we are trying to SUSTAIN. If the mechanoids and their fragmentary sciences you come across in support of really cared they would listen to some of the ideas proposed by the holistic sciences. Ecologists are not the humanophobes you seem to suggest, we are trying to save humanity from wiping itself out and every other living creature with us.

 

I don't know what the score is about DDT. I have listened to your side of the argument and I sit on the fence with it. I am open minded.

So far as flouridated water goes, well you don't hear me banging on about it every day, but certainly I am not happy about any chemicals good or bad being added to my water supply. I am not happy about having to breath in pollution from ignorant people who smoke at work, or in the street, or from these fucking Lynx aerosol canisters that some people seem to think its OK to use in public spaces such as swimming pools. There is pretty much fuck all I can do about it.

What I can do though is use biodegradable detergent, cycle to work 10km every day, buy food that is organic and with the lowest food mile count, hell I even bought a solar power battery charger recently.

I do what i can, as i imagine most other environmentalists do.

Stop attacking us for trying to live ecologically.