If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Fish with Insensative Dioxin Receptor Survive in PCB Polluted Hudson River
Billy wrote:
outsider wrote: 880,000 (quoted above from your source) dying every year is clearly not using every means possible to prevent infection and death. Are you contending that not enough DDT is being sprayed? I certainly contend that. Absolutely. Using DDT on mosquito nets in the tropics and on the inside walls of tropical buildings would spare hundreds of thousands of new infections annually. Instead it is totally banned at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives per year. If so "quantify" how much is needed. That is indeed the hard part. How much to save vast numbers of human lives yet not so much as to breed resistant mosquitos who will deliver malaria anyways. Malaria has resisted the development of any vaccination. Therefore other means should be used to prevent infection. DDT was overused before it was banned. The amount used on mosquito netting and the interior walls of buildings would be tiny compared to the amount used before. But it should not be zero. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Fish with Insensative Dioxin Receptor Survive in PCB PollutedHudson River
On 8/11/2011 2:42 PM, Billy wrote:
In , abusive poster in killfile - hardly made a plunk |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Fish with Insensative Dioxin Receptor Survive in PCB Polluted Hudson River
In article ,
Doug Freyburger wrote: Billy wrote: outsider wrote: 880,000 (quoted above from your source) dying every year is clearly not using every means possible to prevent infection and death. Are you contending that not enough DDT is being sprayed? I certainly contend that. Absolutely. Using DDT on mosquito nets in the tropics and on the inside walls of tropical buildings would spare hundreds of thousands of new infections annually. Instead it is totally banned at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives per year. If so "quantify" how much is needed. That is indeed the hard part. How much to save vast numbers of human lives yet not so much as to breed resistant mosquitos who will deliver malaria anyways. Malaria has resisted the development of any vaccination. Therefore other means should be used to prevent infection. DDT was overused before it was banned. The amount used on mosquito netting and the interior walls of buildings would be tiny compared to the amount used before. But it should not be zero. Did you read the article, Doug? Mosquitos can be controlled in Central America with agricultural practices. In Africa it is more integrated pest management plus insecticides. Do you think that the mosquito can be eradicated, but for some reason the governments don't want to? -- - Billy Both the House and Senate budget plan would cut Social Security and Medicare, while cutting taxes on the wealthy. Kucinich noted that none of the government programs targeted for elimination or severe cutback in House Republican spending plans "appeared on the GAO's list of government programs at high risk of waste, fraud and abuse." http://www.politifact.com/ohio/state...is-kucinich/re p-dennis-kucinich-says-gop-budget-cuts-dont-targ/ [W]e have the situation with the deficit and the debt and spending and jobs. And it's not that difficult to get out of it. The first thing you do is you get rid of corporate welfare. That's hundreds of billions of dollars a year. The second is you tax corporations so that they don't get away with no taxation. - Ralph Nader http://www.democracynow.org/2011/7/19/ralph_naders_solution_to_debt_crisis |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Fish with Insensative Dioxin Receptor Survive in PCB Polluted Hudson River
In article ,
outsider wrote: On 8/11/2011 2:42 PM, Billy wrote: In , abusive poster in killfile - hardly made a plunk Asking for a citation that supports what you post is abusive? It's only abusive to those who think that they can make up reality. So here's your chance to run away. Go on, run. -- - Billy Both the House and Senate budget plan would cut Social Security and Medicare, while cutting taxes on the wealthy. Kucinich noted that none of the government programs targeted for elimination or severe cutback in House Republican spending plans "appeared on the GAO's list of government programs at high risk of waste, fraud and abuse." http://www.politifact.com/ohio/state...is-kucinich/re p-dennis-kucinich-says-gop-budget-cuts-dont-targ/ [W]e have the situation with the deficit and the debt and spending and jobs. And itıs not that difficult to get out of it. The first thing you do is you get rid of corporate welfare. Thatıs hundreds of billions of dollars a year. The second is you tax corporations so that they donıt get away with no taxation. - Ralph Nader http://www.democracynow.org/2011/7/19/ralph_naders_solution_to_debt_crisis |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Fish with Insensative Dioxin Receptor Survive in PCB Polluted Hudson River
In article ,
Doug Freyburger wrote: Billy wrote: outsider wrote: 880,000 (quoted above from your source) dying every year is clearly not using every means possible to prevent infection and death. Are you contending that not enough DDT is being sprayed? I certainly contend that. Absolutely. Using DDT on mosquito nets in the tropics and on the inside walls of tropical buildings would spare hundreds of thousands of new infections annually. Instead it is totally banned at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives per year. If so "quantify" how much is needed. That is indeed the hard part. How much to save vast numbers of human lives yet not so much as to breed resistant mosquitos who will deliver malaria anyways. Malaria has resisted the development of any vaccination. Therefore other means should be used to prevent infection. DDT was overused before it was banned. The amount used on mosquito netting and the interior walls of buildings would be tiny compared to the amount used before. But it should not be zero. You into your Belgium bier again, Doug? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT Environmental impact Degradation of DDT to form DDE (by elimination of HCl, left) and DDD (by reductive dechlorination, right) DDT is a persistent organic pollutant that is extremely hydrophobic and strongly absorbed by soil. Depending on conditions, its soil half life can range from 22 days to 30 years. Routes of loss and degradation include runoff, volatilization, photolysis and aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation. When applied to aquatic ecosystems it is quickly absorbed by organisms and by soil or it evaporates, leaving little DDT dissolved in the water itself. Its breakdown products and metabolites, DDE and DDD, are also highly persistent and have similar chemical and physical properties.[1] DDT and its breakdown products are transported from warmer regions of the world to the Arctic by the phenomenon of global distillation, where they then accumulate in the region's food web.[33] Because of its lipophilic properties, DDT has a high potential to bioaccumulate, especially in predatory birds.[34] DDT, DDE, and DDD magnify through the food chain, with apex predators such as raptor birds concentrating more chemicals than other animals in the same environment. They are very lipophilic and are stored mainly in body fat. DDT and DDE are very resistant to metabolism; in humans, their half-lives are 6 and up to 10 years, respectively. In the United States, these chemicals were detected in almost all human blood samples tested by the Centers for Disease Control in 2005, though their levels have sharply declined since most uses were banned in the US.[35] Estimated dietary intake has also declined,[35] although FDA food tests commonly detect it.[36] Marine macroalgae (seaweed) help reduce soil toxicity by up to 80% within six weeks.[37] Effects on human health Potential mechanisms of action on humans are genotoxicity and endocrine disruption. DDT may be directly genotoxic,[45] but may also induce enzymes to produce other genotoxic intermediates and DNA adducts.[45] It is an endocrine disruptor; The DDT metabolite DDE acts as an antiandrogen (but not as an estrogen). p,p'-DDT, DDT's main component, has little or no androgenic or estrogenic activity.[45] Minor component o,p'-DDT has weak estrogenic activity. [edit] Acute toxicity DDT is classified as "moderately toxic" by the United States National Toxicology Program (NTP)[46] and "moderately hazardous" by the World Health Organization (WHO), based on the rat oral LD50 of 113 mg/kg.[47] DDT has on rare occasions been administered orally as a treatment for barbiturate poisoning.[48] [edit] Chronic toxicity [edit] Diabetes DDT and DDE have been linked to diabetes. A number of studies from the US, Canada, and Sweden have found that the prevalence of the disease in a population increases with serum DDT or DDE levels.[49][50][51][52][53][54] [edit] Developmental and reproductive toxicity DDT and DDE, like other organochlorines, have been shown to have xenoestrogenic activity, meaning they are chemically similar enough to estrogens to trigger hormonal responses in animals. This endocrine disrupting activity has been observed in mice and rat toxicological studies, and available epidemiological evidence indicates that these effects may be occurring in humans as a result of DDT exposure. The US Environmental Protection Agency states that DDT exposure damages the reproductive system and reduces reproductive success. These effects may cause developmental and reproductive toxicity: ? A review article in The Lancet states, "research has shown that exposure to DDT at amounts that would be needed in malaria control might cause preterm birth and early weaning ... toxicological evidence shows endocrine-disrupting properties; human data also indicate possible disruption in semen quality, menstruation, gestational length, and duration of lactation."[23] ? Human epidemiological studies suggest that exposure is a risk factor for premature birth and low birth weight, and may harm a mother's ability to breast feed.[55] Some 21st century researchers argue that these effects may increase infant deaths, offsetting any anti-malarial benefits.[56] A 2008 study, however, failed to confirm the association between exposure and difficulty breastfeeding.[57] ? Several recent studies demonstrate a link between in utero exposure to DDT or DDE and developmental neurotoxicity in humans. For example, a 2006 University of California, Berkeley study suggests that children exposed while in the womb have a greater chance of development problems,[58] and other studies have found that even low levels of DDT or DDE in umbilical cord serum at birth are associated with decreased attention at infancy[59] and decreased cognitive skills at 4 years of age.[60] Similarly, Mexican researchers have linked first trimester DDE exposure to retarded psychomotor development.[61] ? Other studies document decreases in semen quality among men with high exposures (generally from IRS).[62][63][64] ? Studies generally find that high blood DDT or DDE levels do not increase time to pregnancy (TTP.)[65] There is some evidence that the daughters of highly exposed women may have more difficulty getting pregnant (i.e. increased TTP).[66] ? DDT is associated with early pregnancy loss, a type of miscarriage. A prospective cohort study of Chinese textile workers found "a positive, monotonic, exposure-response association between preconception serum total DDT and the risk of subsequent early pregnancy losses."[67] The median serum DDE level of study group was lower than that typically observed in women living in homes sprayed with DDT.[68] ? A Japanese study of congenital hypothyroidism concluded that in utero DDT exposure may affect thyroid hormone levels and "play an important role in the incidence and/or causation of cretinism."[69] Other studies have also found the DDT or DDE interfere with proper thyroid function.[70][71] Other Occupational exposure in agriculture and malaria control has been linked to neurological problems (i.e. Parkinsons)[72] and asthma.[73] Carcinogenicity DDT is suspected to cause cancer. The NTP classifies it as "reasonably anticipated to be a carcinogen," the International Agency for Research on Cancer classifies it as a "possible" human carcinogen, and the EPA classifies DDT, DDE, and DDD as class B2 "probable" carcinogens. These evaluations are based mainly on the results of animal studies.[1][23] There is evidence from epidemiological studies (i.e. studies in human populations) that indicates that DDT causes cancers of the liver,[23][35] pancreas[23][35] and breast.[35] There is mixed evidence that it contributes to leukemia,[35] lymphoma[35][74] and testicular cancer.[23][35][75] Other epidemiological studies suggest that DDT/DDE does not cause multiple myeloma,[23] or cancers of the prostate,[23] endometrium,[23][35] rectum,[23][35] lung,[35] bladder,[35] or stomach.[35] Breast cancer The question of whether DDT or DDE are risk factors of breast cancer has been repeatedly studied. While individual studies conflict, the most recent reviews of all the evidence conclude that pre-puberty exposure increases the risk of subsequent breast cancer.[35][76] Until recently, almost all studies measured DDT or DDE blood levels at the time of breast cancer diagnosis or after. This study design has been criticized, since the levels at diagnosis do not necessarily correspond to levels when her cancer started.[77] Taken as a whole such studies "do not support the hypothesis that exposure to DDT is an important risk factor for breast cancer."[45] The studies of this design have been extensively reviewed.[23][78][79] In contrast, a study published in 2007 strongly associated early exposure (the p,p'- isomer) and breast cancer later in life. Unlike previous studies, this prospective cohort study collected blood samples from young mothers in the 1960s while DDT was still in use, and their breast cancer status was then monitored over the years. In addition to suggesting that the p,p'- isomer is the more significant risk factor, the study also suggests that the timing of exposure is critical. For the subset of women born more than 14 years before agricultural use, there was no association between DDT and breast cancer. However, for younger women--exposed earlier in life--the third who were exposed most to p,p'-DDT had a fivefold increase in breast cancer incidence over the least exposed third, after correcting for the protective effect of o,p'-DDT.[45][80][81] These results are supported by animal studies.[35] Mosquito resistance Resistance [to DDT] has greatly reduced DDT's effectiveness. WHO guidelines require that absence of resistance must be confirmed before using the chemical.[90] Resistance is largely due to agricultural use, in much greater quantities than required for disease prevention. According to one study that attempted to quantify the lives saved by banning agricultural use and thereby slowing the spread of resistance, "it can be estimated that at current rates each kilo of insecticide added to the environment will generate 105 new cases of malaria."[21] ---- http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...o-combat-malar ia In 2007, at least 3,950 tons of DDT were sprayed for mosquito control in Africa and Asia, according to a report by the United Nations Environment Programme. The panel convened in March, 2008, at Alma College in Michigan, near a Superfund site where DDT was produced at a chemical plant. Their goal was "to address the current and legacy implications of DDT production and use," according to their report. Acknowledging that some areas remain dependent on DDT, they recommended monitoring of the spraying to ensure that usage guidelines are followed and improved application techniques. "It is definitely not a matter of letting people die from malaria," de Jager said. We cannot allow people to die from malaria, but we also cannot continue using DDT if we know about the health risks," said Tiaan de Jager, a member of the panel who is a professor at the School of Health Systems & Public Health at the University of Pretoria in South Africa. "Safer alternatives should be tested first and if successful, DDT should be phased out without putting people at risk." ---- Was that the answer to your question, Doug? -- - Billy Both the House and Senate budget plan would cut Social Security and Medicare, while cutting taxes on the wealthy. Kucinich noted that none of the government programs targeted for elimination or severe cutback in House Republican spending plans "appeared on the GAO's list of government programs at high risk of waste, fraud and abuse." http://www.politifact.com/ohio/state...is-kucinich/re p-dennis-kucinich-says-gop-budget-cuts-dont-targ/ [W]e have the situation with the deficit and the debt and spending and jobs. And it's not that difficult to get out of it. The first thing you do is you get rid of corporate welfare. That's hundreds of billions of dollars a year. The second is you tax corporations so that they don't get away with no taxation. - Ralph Nader http://www.democracynow.org/2011/7/19/ralph_naders_solution_to_debt_crisis |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Fish with Insensative Dioxin Receptor Survive in PCB PollutedHudson River
On 8/11/2011 4:11 PM, outsider wrote:
On 8/11/2011 2:42 PM, Billy wrote: In , abusive poster in killfile - hardly made a plunk Yep. That's what happens after little Yapper tells you to *just **** off* - and you don't: *you* out yourself as an abusive poster and end up up in little Yapper's killfile. Here - once again - the evolution of abuse in this thread: On 8/8/2011 11:01 PM, Outsider wrote: We agree to disagree. But do let me know if/when you've actually read something worthwhile about Chaos (internet web pages of the same value as printed material are few) and have some understanding of the topic. On 8/8/2011 3:35 PM, Billy wrote: Your patronizing tone is amusing in that you have offered no proof to support your own opinions, and only offer a book that isn't even written on the subject. Why don't you just give me the quote, and the page number, and then I can show everyone how lame you are. How about that? Hummm? On 8/8/2011 6:58 PM, Outsider wrote: Why don't you just **** off. You have no science to back up your ideas, they come out of a political play book. So go play.... Absolutely hilarious. Bob ASD A-hole Patrol |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Fish with Insensative Dioxin Receptor Survive in PCB PollutedHudson River
On 8/11/2011 5:35 PM, Billy wrote:
In , wrote: On 8/11/2011 2:42 PM, Billy wrote: In , abusive poster in killfile - hardly made a plunk Asking for a citation that supports what you post is abusive? No, but *you forcing him* to tell you to "**** off" was. It's only abusive to those who think that they can make up reality. So here's your chance to run away. Go on, run. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Fish with Insensative Dioxin Receptor Survive in PCB Polluted Hudson River
Billy wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote: Malaria has resisted the development of any vaccination. Therefore other means should be used to prevent infection. Mosquito resistance Resistance [to DDT] has greatly reduced DDT's effectiveness. WHO guidelines require that absence of resistance must be confirmed before using the chemical.[90] Resistance is largely due to agricultural use, in much greater quantities than required for disease prevention. I highlight this part - "Resistance is largely due to agricultural use, in much greater quantities than required for disease prevention". According to one study that attempted to quantify the lives saved by banning agricultural use and thereby slowing the spread of resistance, "it can be estimated that at current rates each kilo of insecticide added to the environment will generate 105 new cases of malaria."[21] Acknowledging that some areas remain dependent on DDT, they recommended monitoring of the spraying to ensure that usage guidelines are followed and improved application techniques. Was that the answer to your question, Doug? Largely. You will note that I cut to the parts relevant to my point - That banning the use of DDT in agriculture remains the right thing to do and that DDT use *in agriculture" is the main cause of developing resistance. DDT should be used on mosquito netting, on indoor walls in the tropical zone, and not in agriculture. This is farther from banned than I thought had been put into practice, closer to banned than apparently actually is in practice. You will note that when the developed world banned DDT the amount of DDE in wildlife began to decline. It's now low enough that predator birds have once again begun to flourish. When I was a kid I nver saw a hawk. Now I see hawks often and when I am on travel some eagles, facons and buzzards. Using DDT at a level for malaria prevention will not change that and the number of lives saved would be a large net positive. But as you quoted it should not be used in agriculture. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Fish with Insensative Dioxin Receptor Survive in PCB Polluted Hudson River
In article , Bob
wrote: On 8/11/2011 5:35 PM, Billy wrote: In , wrote: On 8/11/2011 2:42 PM, Billy wrote: In , abusive poster in killfile - hardly made a plunk Asking for a citation that supports what you post is abusive? No, but *you forcing him* to tell you to "**** off" was. You're right, Bob. I've been a naughty boy ;O) It was unkind of me to expose "out"(house?) to the light of day, as it isn't complimentary to him at all. It's only abusive to those who think that they can make up reality. So here's your chance to run away. Go on, run. And as the Sun pulls away from the dock, and our boat sinks into the harbor, we bid "hasta la vista" to another bonehead. -- - Billy Both the House and Senate budget plan would cut Social Security and Medicare, while cutting taxes on the wealthy. Kucinich noted that none of the government programs targeted for elimination or severe cutback in House Republican spending plans "appeared on the GAO's list of government programs at high risk of waste, fraud and abuse." http://www.politifact.com/ohio/state...is-kucinich/re p-dennis-kucinich-says-gop-budget-cuts-dont-targ/ [W]e have the situation with the deficit and the debt and spending and jobs. And itıs not that difficult to get out of it. The first thing you do is you get rid of corporate welfare. Thatıs hundreds of billions of dollars a year. The second is you tax corporations so that they donıt get away with no taxation. - Ralph Nader http://www.democracynow.org/2011/7/19/ralph_naders_solution_to_debt_crisis |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Fish with Insensative Dioxin Receptor Survive in PCB PollutedHudson River
On 8/6/2011 9:05 PM, Mark Thorson wrote:
jay wrote: Wirgin explains, it was a surprise that they could accumulate such hefty contamination without becoming poisoned. His team now reports that the tomcods protection traces to a single mutation in one gene. The gene is responsible for producing a receptor protein needed to unleash the pollutants toxicity. Great news! Now that we know the gene, we can get it too. Dioxin won't be considered a toxin anymore. As soon as we get past a problem in the current gene therapy methods - inserting the new genes into a random point in the old genes, and therefore in some cells likely to disable a gene that prevents that cell from turning into cancer. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/dec/19/cancer.medicalresearch It's known that inserting the new genes into the cells but not into the old genes is a good way to make sure that the new genes don't last long. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
High Animal Fat Diet, Dioxin, Chloracne | jay[_2_] | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | July 15th, 2008 09:07 PM |
Is it just a river? | Lump Chicken | Weightwatchers | 17 | March 9th, 2006 08:57 PM |
Grains a Good Thing: Bound antioxidant phytochemicals in grains survive intact long enough to reach the colon to prevent cancer | Alan S | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | February 28th, 2006 01:44 AM |
Grains a Good Thing: Bound antioxidant phytochemicals in grains survive intact long enough to reach the colon to prevent cancer | Carmen | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 1 | February 27th, 2006 10:04 PM |
Caloric restriction and increased dopamine receptor signaling. | Tim | General Discussion | 0 | March 15th, 2004 08:41 PM |