The DDT Controversy

The use of DDT continues to be a contentious issue today. There is no better issue demonstrating the need for balance between the good and bad outcomes from science on society than the one surrounding DDT. Thomas Easton’ book, Taking Sides, Clashing Views in Science, Technology, and Society addresses the positive and negative effects of the use of DDT by the chemical industry. The application of science to benefit society is clearly evident in the use of DDT to eradicate disease. Up to World War II more soldiers died from disease than enemy fire. The incident of malaria and other diseases were reduced dramatically from hundreds of thousands of deaths to few numbers due directly to the use of DDT. Whether DDT is helpful or harmful became, and still is, debated. In Easton’s book Ann Platt McGinn argues, in the May/June 2002 World Watch, to continue the ban on DDT and is an advocate for alternate controls of malaria and other diseases by using means that are less environmentally harmful. Donald Roberts argues in a statement before the U. S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, that scientific evidence does not support the continued ban of DDT. He indicates that the environmental hazards of DDT have been misrepresented by anti-pesticide activists. Further, the use of DDT can prevent what some consider a global humanitarian disaster from malaria.