May 14, 2022·edited May 14, 2022Liked by Jo Waller
I took the Salk vaccine in the early 1960s. They lined the children all up and we were given a sugar cube. I never heard of any reactions at the time, but I was probably 7 years old. I also remember WWII bombers, maybe B24s, dumping DDT laced chunks of corn trying to push back the invading fire ants that were offloaded in Mobile from S. America. I also remember riding bikes with my brothers and neighbor children behind the mosquito fogger trucks right up in the fog. The fog was an oil based DDT. Almost all of us have lived into our 60s with no noticeable reactions from the DDT. Analysis from sediments in Yazoo river sediments downstream in the 1990s from the Mississippi delta farming areas showed that the remaining DDT was bound to the sediments and was not bio-available.
Base on personal experience, DDT is not the boogie man that it had been made out to be.
May 13, 2022·edited May 13, 2022Liked by Jo Waller
"based on available data"... You read that right, it hasn't been studied! Another one that emerged the last two years is "there's no evidence for ..." That used to mean it has been studied and there's no evidence for it, but now means it hasn't been studied.
I took the Salk vaccine in the early 1960s. They lined the children all up and we were given a sugar cube. I never heard of any reactions at the time, but I was probably 7 years old. I also remember WWII bombers, maybe B24s, dumping DDT laced chunks of corn trying to push back the invading fire ants that were offloaded in Mobile from S. America. I also remember riding bikes with my brothers and neighbor children behind the mosquito fogger trucks right up in the fog. The fog was an oil based DDT. Almost all of us have lived into our 60s with no noticeable reactions from the DDT. Analysis from sediments in Yazoo river sediments downstream in the 1990s from the Mississippi delta farming areas showed that the remaining DDT was bound to the sediments and was not bio-available.
Base on personal experience, DDT is not the boogie man that it had been made out to be.
"based on available data"... You read that right, it hasn't been studied! Another one that emerged the last two years is "there's no evidence for ..." That used to mean it has been studied and there's no evidence for it, but now means it hasn't been studied.
I guess, it was Schwab, who declared it around 1981:
"First, we kill the elderly, then the stupid."
Everything's on schedule.