Following are links to some interesting opinion pieces:
1. Lessons From the Lavender Boys
Denis Avery’s Hudson Institute
Thursday October 26, 2006
Researchers have finally found the first confirmed gender-bending consumer products: natural lavender oil, natural tea tree oil, and natural soybeans. The findings strongly say consumers should stop worrying over insignificant traces of man-made chemicals and be more wary of unregulated natural products.
Read the complete article: http://www.cgfi.org/cgficommentary/lessons-from-the-lavender-boys
2. The heroes and villains in the Great Climate Debate
Monika Sarder
Thursday October 26, 2006
More than any other documentary in the last decade, An Inconvenient Truth featuring Al Gore’s slide show purporting to put forward the unadulterated facts on climate change, has galvanised mainstream political interest. Actors, British moguls and undergraduates have all jumped on the bandwagon, with the most recent development being a court challenge to a Hunter Valley coal mine development by a Newcastle student.
The documentary highlights the problems that emerge when a scientific issue is hijacked by political interests. Increasingly high profile public figures are strongly weighing in and proposing purely political solutions with limited reference to the changing state of science. Public discussion of the science is critical if we are to formulate consensus and a national response to the issue. However it is important that the evidence is not presented in a distorted way. Read the complete article: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=5066
3. Anti-DDT Movement Killing African Babies
Fiona Kobusingye-Boynes
Tuesday October 17, 2006
At long last, the World Health Organization and Uganda’s Health Ministry are again emphasizing DDT and other insecticides to control a disease that kills 110,000 Ugandans every year.
But instead of applauding the decision, anti-pesticide activists are attacking it with scare stories and lies. Every day that Paul Saoke, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Pesticide Action Network, and their allies keep our health officials from ending malaria, another 300 babies and mothers go to their graves. It’s like sending a jetliner filled with children and mothers crashing into the Rwenzori Mountains every day. Read the complete article: http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=24388
And Pinxi had the following advice when she sent in the link to the following article: “No matter what you post they’ll end up debating climate science anyway – sumo wrestlers circling each other. It would be interesting if the usual commenters discussed AGW without arguing the finer details of the science in a futile quest for a certain position. Science flags an issue as potentially significant and science should continue to inform policy, but the policy-making process on an issue such as AGW has many considerations, of which science is only one. Now that AGW concerns are leading to a host of actions to mitigate and adapt, and now that AGW impacts are being bound up with other issues such as energy supply, water, food security, economic opportunities and international relations, we should be discussing those potential actions and their impacts, not just the narrow science.”
4. Unholy trinity set to drag us into the abyss
Ian Dunlop
Monday October 16, 2006
We are about to experience the convergence of three of the great issues confronting humanity. Climate change, the peaking of oil supply and water shortage are coming together in a manner which will profoundly alter our way of life, our institutions and our ability to prosper on this planet. Each is a major issue, but their convergence has received minimal attention. Read the complete article: http://www.smh.com.au/news/scorchedearth/unholy-trinity-set-to-drag-us-into-the-abyss/2006/10/15/1160850808623.html
5. Black and white lies
William J. Lines
Saturday October 14, 2006
AT a rainforest symposium in Cairns in 1987, Ian Lowe, head of science policy at Griffith University, argued that “there are general principles of resource management [that hunter-gatherer] societies embody, and from which we can learn if we have the perceptiveness and the humility to do so”.
Read the complete article: http://theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20575396-28737,00.html
And brace yourself for this next week:
6. Tackle climate change or face deep recession, world’s leaders warned
James Randerson,
Thursday October 26, 2006
Climate change could tilt the world’s economy into the worst global recession in recent history, a report will warn next week. Sir Nicholas Stern, a former chief economist with the World Bank, will warn that governments need to tackle the problem head-on by cutting emissions or face economic ruin. The findings, due to be released on Monday, Read the complete article here:
http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,1931542,00.html
——————————-
Most of the above links were sent in from readers of this blog, if you keep sending them I might try and make this a regular Friday thing.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
OLO item 2 and a few others around looks like part of a campaign to me. Must be an election looming hey
I see a 40000000000 post thread coming up. A few contentious topics there.
I’m dropping Pinxi a line. Or at least make her march up the back on demos with Rog and Louis. I mean what is policy eh ? Is it really a profession. Can policy can you drunk or make you really happy? Will a policy take you home? If she hasn’t done a square root or logarithm in the last 24 hours she shouldn’t be here.
Well it’s obvious isn’t it. AGW is seriously on. This blog is the last holdout of contrarian strength. If Kyoto is not signed the world WILL perish in hell-fire. You will all be consumed by the apocalypse – or condemned to to living in burning sulphur, DDT and broken glass – yes you guessed it – Schiller’s barn. Or even worse endlessly reading Louis’s memoirs. “I was a teenage denialist”.
I get it, Luke is one of these quasi religious mother earth disciples called earth chartists (I mean, what else could explain such fanaticsm);
“We stand at a critical moment in Earth’s history, a time when humanity must choose its future. As the world becomes increasingly interdependent and fragile, the future at once holds great peril and great promise. To move forward, we must recognise that in the midst of a magnificent diversity of cultures and life forms, we are one human family and one Earth community with a common destiny.
We must join together to bring forth a sustainable global society founded on respect for nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of peace. Towards this end, it is imperative that we, the peoples of Earth, declare our responsibility to one another, to the greater community of life, and to future generations.”
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/relig/enc/stories/s749862.htm
Gosh Jennifer,
I have to wonder about this format.
1. Of course natural things are dangerous. What an embarrassment to the Greenies.
2. Gore’s an idiot failure, and idiot failures typically seek solace with the Greenies, see, e.g., Pusztai, Schmeiser, et. al.
3. Few will be surprised that Pinxi and friends would like to divert discussions of African death and disease into discussions of the larger policy implications. Which don’t involve the lives of Africans which Europeans regard as disposable.
4. The notion of “[c]limate change, the peaking of oil supply and water shortage” coming together in some mysterious concatenation smacks of conspiracy theory or a deliberate heightening of alarmism. The world has always been short on oil and water, and the climate has always been in flux. So let’s move on to *real* news.
5. If you want to see the latest version of a hunting-gathering society, visit
http://freegan.info/
and you will find the images of finding nutritious vegetables amongst offal and waste quite charming.
6. Of course climate change could destroy the world’s economy. The thing is, proposals to combat climate change are guaranteed to wreck economies. So, do you want to do something guaranteed to wreck economies, or just be flexible in response to the climate–as humans always have?
P.S. this format is not manageable.
The Chief Seattle speech issue was explored in 1985 by archivist Jerry L. Clark http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1985/spring/chief-seattle.html
“..Noble thoughts based on a lie lose their nobility. The dubious and murky origins of Chief Seattle’s alleged “Unanswered Challenge” renders it useless as supporting evidence. The historical record suggests that the compliant and passive individual named Seattle is not recognizable in the image of the defiant and angry man whose words reverberate in our time.”
I cried when I read it Rog – you do understand and feel like us after all.
You’re all wrong. This format is immaterial. It doesnt matter what Jen posts, she could post about her pinky toenail, and you’ll all debate intricate details of climate science regardless and someone will chuck in irrelevant socialist accusations because it’s the done thing.
I want you to discuss (nice, like) the holy trinity (no. 4) and the recent aussie news headlines that lack of action on climate change will actually ruin the economy. All the naysayers – that reducing GHG emissions will ruin the economy – got any substantial, balanced evidence for this? (Can this forum have an intelligent exchange on climate change action?)
But for accidents of history AGW could have been the right wing thing and GMO the greenies thing.
Not much in it. What influential activists got there first.
Life on Earth. Recently evolved apes talking on the Internet about possibility of changing the planet’s atmosphere and implications.
Jen has a pink toenail – wow !
Anyway Pinx what about the adiabatic lapse rate at 800Mb height. Eh eh – now that’s got ya hasn’t it.
Pinx is in his or her personal microclimate, which is redolent of cannabis.
On the DDT issue, one of the most persistent of the myths about the ecological damage caused by DDT has been that it causes thinned egg shells in raptors.
See the following link for a fact-based heads-up on the issue.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,202447,00.html
Cathy
“Humanity seems to have an insistent need for an impending disaster to give focus to life. Perhaps this characteristic evolved in the eras of struggle to survive and it became inate. Wherever it came from, that characteristic is now interfering in the process of spreading unprecedented prosperity around the globe. To verify this assertion, visit any reputable book shop. In the non-fiction shelves you will find endless rows of books about impending or historic disasters, but very few expressing optimism about the future of humankind. Even scientists have joined the pseeimists and regard predictions as inevitable and impossible to divert. In large measure, this is a consequence of the ‘fourth estate’, because as everyone knows, good news does not sell newspapers (or tv news and current affairs programmes)”
{David Robertson 2006, International Economics and confusing politics}
I just started reading this book and this is the opening paragraph……an awful lot of truth in it it seems to me!?
By the way Ian Castles and David Tribe…David Robertson sends his regards…..and Ian I suggested he might like to read some of this blog before your meeting next month.
What the author’s site receiving funds to argue for tobacco companies about their products not causing cancer.
Do we have something on DDT and egg shells that not from a big shill? And I don’t know much about the issue but note his article ended in the predictable conspiracy theory. I reckon if we did some research I have a sneaky feeling that the article is b/s. So I’ll have to find out by some other more reputable means I guess.
And a quick 2 minute hike through Google Scholar reveals:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0021-8901(197512)12%3A3%3C781%3ADEITAK%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X#abstract
DDE residues in kestrel eggs collected from the Ithaca, New York area averaged 35, 42, 33 and 37 ppm for the years 1969, 1970, 1971 and 1972, respectively. (2) Based on Ratcliffe’s Index, eggshells of the local population averaged 10% thinner than pre-DDT eggshells. (3) A dose-response relationship is established for dietary DDE and eggshell-thinning in a captive kestrel population. (4) Statistical analysis revealed that the correlative relationship between DDE in the egg and eggshell-thinning is the same for both captive experimental birds and the wild population. (5) A discussion of organochlorines, eggshell-thinning and the decline of several populations of North American raptors concludes that a causal relationship exists between the ingestion of prey highly contaminated with DDE and the consequent eggshell-thinning and eggshell breakage. The breeding failure that follows and subsequent population declines of several raptor populations proceeds in a straightforward, logical and well-documented sequence.
Lots lots more.
I reckon Milloy is simply full of it ! The big whiff of astro-turf being laid.
Cathy says:
“On the DDT issue, one of the most persistent of the myths about the ecological damage caused by DDT has been that it causes thinned egg shells in raptors.”
Cathy, if you type “DDT egg shells” into Google Scholar and spend a few minutes perusing the 2,270 citations you will soon note that the linkage between DDT and egg shell thinning is as well established as anything ever could be in science.
Milloy has a well-known and completely undisguised agenda that has nothing to do with the “fact-based science” you are constantly on about.
You must be extraordinarily gullible.
“Do we have something on DDT and egg shells that not from a big shill?”
Yes. Everything you wanted to know about DDT:
http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc83.htm#SectionNumber:6.2
The effect vary by species, It is the dose that makes the poison. No one is proposing we start using DDT for agriculture or in the large quantities of times past.
So Luke, do you support the use of DDT for control of malaria by spraying “in tiny amounts once or twice a year on inside walls of homes”?
“Googlo, ergo sum” – I google therefore I am
Lets have less of this shilly shally nonsense
http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/sn_arc98/4_25_98/fob2.htm
Oh looky here, I found another, written by a chemistry professor too
http://dwb.unl.edu/Teacher/NSF/C06/C06Links/www.altgreen.com.au/Chemicals/ddt.html
Greg F – malaria – yes support. Greg has given us a report of more susbstance.
And I had not said anything about agriculture or malaria. Talking egg shells and Cathy’s post.
Rog – just done what Cathy has done – a vast literature ignored. Shows Rog that you haven’t a foggy about science – might as well post what some bloke down the pub told you. Might even had a joke in it.
Now you guys are making the story here not us – Steve and I are saying – just a mo – there actually seems to be a vast literature here undiscussed. So Milloy as is big shonk – well that took a whole 30 seconds to work out.
Only way now to move forward is we’ll need some review of that literature which appears to be most considerable.
Maybe an independent, non shill, scholarly person has done so.
Meanwhile – Cathy has done like she does with climate change – served up a large feed of bolsh. A typical anti-greenie bashing story dressed up in egge shells. Black flag and fined 10 points.
Toby makes a good point.
There was a lot of discussion around whether or not to allow the Book of St. John the Divine, also known as Revelation, into the canonical set that comprises the Christian bible. There’s also Ragnarok and other similar things.
It seems that True Believers need an eschaton to define a view of history. Likely, this mirrors the individual knowledge of impending death, which as far as I know, makes humans unique in this biome.
Which further suggests that individuals wish to see their impending demise reflected in the architecture of nature, making theories regarding the demise of the planet or the heat-death of the universe somewhat appealing.
For some, it enables a vision of an End which swallows all whom they have hated in life, and brings all into a common grave free of strife.
It’s not difficult to see such visions of eternal quietude in the missives of activists who seek to remove all dynamism from the world and preserve it as something on the brink of a mauseleum.
In the main, their preference is to make the Earth a living museum, changeless and mummified, just as the Egyptians managed their corpses in hope of an idealized result.
The worship of Gaia has brought many strange notions to the fore, and Toby has put his finger on something important.
So Luke, how exactly does DDE affect eggshells?
“Altogether, the available evidence does not yield strong support for the hypothesis that the 1960s decline of the California Condor was primarily a result of DDE contamination. Although DDE may have caused some of the shell thinning of the 1960s and 1980s, the absence of good evidence for reproductive problems in the 1960s (or 1980s) and the strong evidence for excessive mortality problems in the 1980s are more consistent with other (mortality) factors predominating in the decline.”
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1046/j.1474-919X.2003.00132.x/full/
Well my scan of the literature says the opposite. Looks convincing from the cage studies. You b/s artists are full of it. More right wing spin and rampant astro-turfing to suit your own selfish money grubbing agendas. I bet you’ve got a few tins of “good stuff” still out the back.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Shiller righteously refuses to acknowledge the negative impact that US subsidies have on farmers in other countries incl australia, while hypocritically criticising EU CAP and still having the arrogant gall to chime in on aussie agric. Anyone who expresses concern for social justice is accused of being a totalitarian socialist. Anyone who questions his rigid outdated view gets accused of smoking cannabis. Yeah, right. Blowing smoke rings too. But US-centric totalitarian controls are OK. US tax-payer funded market inefficiencies are OK as long as they protect your centralised interests. Americans wonder why they’re so unpopular? What does God have to say on the matter? What are his plans for the gulf stream? Running late for bible class…
1. DDT. A single pesticide that pests can build up resistance too relatively easily isn’t the saviour that’s it made out to be. The only reason DDT is still effective as a pesticide today is because it was banned for agricultural purposes (it’s not banned for malaria control). Oh, and it thins egg shells as well.
2. Stern Review. Biggest economic study yet on climate change. Good to see, if the early reports are correct, that climate change mitigation is not as expensive as the denialists always made out.
I’m assuming some one here will say you can’t do economic models because it’s not scientific, too chaotic, blah…blah. The reaction to the Stern review will be enlightening.
One more time Luke, how exactly does DDE affect eggshells?
Nexus, DDT is also a repellant.
I think Rogue that you guys have been perpetrating a major con on this whole issue. The biochemical mechanisms are self evident.
Given DDT’s ability to cause insect resistance that lingers for decades and a known bioaccumulant I’m surprised your supporting such primitive technology. Surely the greenies are spot on here and you guys are protectionists of chemical companies that flog the stuff. Do you have shares in them Rogue?
Judging by your past performance you are easily fooled.
The fact is that insects can build up resistance to any insecticide including pyrethroids, which are being pushed in agriculture.
The primary use of DDT for malarial control is as a REPELLANT.
First Google Scholar result re DDT and egg shell thinning abstract:
“The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) population in North America declined greatly after World War II due primarily to the eggshell thinning effects of p,p’-DDE, a biodegradation product of DDT. After the banning of DDT in the United States and Canada during the early 1970s, the bald eagle population started to increase. However, this population recovery has not been uniform. Eagles nesting along the shorelines of the North American Great Lakes and rivers open to spawning runs of anadromous fishes from the Great Lakes still exhibit impaired reproduction. We have explored both ecological and toxicological factors that would limit reproduction of bald eagles in the Great Lakes region. Based on our studies, the most critical factors influencing eagle populations are concentrations of environmental toxicants. While there might be some continuing effects of DDE, total PCBs and most importantly 2,3,7,8-tetrachlordibenzo-p-dioxin equivalents (TCDD-EQ) in fishes from the Great Lakes and rivers open to spawning runs of anadromous fishes from the Great Lakes currently represent a significant hazard to bald eagles living along these shorelines or near these rivers and are most likely related to the impaired reproduction in bald eagles living there.”
The second abstract:
“Dietary polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), DDT and related compounds, in well controlled experiments, produced no detrimental effects upon egg shell quality in Single Comb White Leghorm chickens or in Japanese quail. PCBs caused some decrease in egg production and a drastic reduction in hatchability in chickens, but not in Japanese quail. Inorganic mercury as HgSO4 or HgCl2, at dietary levels up to 200 p.p.m. of Hg, had only small effects, if any, upon egg production, hatchability, shell quality, morbidity and mortality. However, methyl mercury chloride at levels which provided 10 or 20 mg. of Hg per kg. of diet caused severe effects upon egg weight, egg production, fertility, hatchability, egg shell strength, morbidity and mortality. The results of these experiments demonstrate that the decrease in egg shell quality which has occurred in eggs of White Leghorn hens over the past three decades is not due to contamination of commercial feeds with DDT or its derivatives, or with PCBs. The extent to which environmental contamination with methyl mercury is responsible for decreased egg shell strength in commercial laying hens, and possible synergistic relationships between methyl mercury, DDT, DDE and PCBs in reducing egg production, hatchability and shell strength, remain to be determined.”
The third abstract says:
“Dieldrin and DDT: Effects on Sparrow Hawk Eggshells and Reproduction
Richard D. Porter 1 and Stanley N. Wiemeyer 1
1 Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, Maryland 20810
Patterns of reproductive failure in declining populations of several European and North American raptorial species were duplicated experimentally with captive American sparrow hawks Falco sparvcrius that were given a diet containing two commonly used organochlorine insecticides. Major effects on reproduction were increased egg disappearance, increased egg destruction by parent birds, and reduced eggshell thickness.”
And so on it goes.
A few minutes spent perusing the abstracts shows that DDT has differential effects on egg shell strenghth and that various other contaminants also result in egg shell thinning, including methyl mercury.
If it is true that the egg shells of various species were thinning prior to DDT contamination it may well be the result of a range of other contaminants.
As per usual, Cathy and Rog have cherry picked and misconstrued a couple of googled items and demonstrated the hysteria and tunnel vision that characterises the new field of Right-Wing Science.
No, you are the cherry picker.
If you accept an abstract on Google as being the definitive truth then why do you question evidence of egg shell thinning prior to DDT?
Here is an abstract from Google scholar, is this true? –
” Poult Sci. 1975 Mar;54(2):350-68. Related Articles, Links
Effects of PCBs, DDT, and mercury compounds upon egg production, hatchability and shell quality in chickens and Japanese quail.
Scott ML, Zimmermann JR, Marinsky S, Mullenhoff PA, Rumsey GL, Rice RW.
Dietary polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), DDT and related compounds, in well controlled experiments, produced no detrimental effects upon egg shell quality in Single Comb White Leghorm chickens or in Japanese quail. PCBs caused some decrease in egg production and a drastic reduction in hatchability in chickens, but not in Japanese quail. Inorganic mercury as HgSO4 or HgCl2, at dietary levels up to 200 p.p.m. of Hg, had only small effects, if any, upon egg production, hatchability, shell quality, morbidity and mortality. However, methyl mercury chloride at levels which provided 10 or 20 mg. of Hg per kg. of diet caused severe effects upon egg weight, egg production, fertility, hatchability, egg shell strength, morbidity and mortality. The results of these experiments demonstrate that the decrease in egg shell quality which has occurred in eggs of White Leghorn hens over the past three decades is not due to contamination of commercial feeds with DDT or its derivatives, or with PCBs. The extent to which environmental contamination with methyl mercury is responsible for decreased egg shell strength in commercial laying hens, and possible synergistic relationships between methyl mercury, DDT, DDE and PCBs in reducing egg production, hatchability and shell strength, remain to be determined.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=809763&dopt=Citation
Key sentence “DDT and related compounds, in well controlled experiments, produced no detrimental effects upon egg shell quality”
No Rogue you’re the cherry picker – chooks are a well know exception. You guys are desperate and woefully dishonest. Keep focussed pls. It’s time you fessed up and admitted you’re clueless.
Hilarious, Rog. You have just reproduced the same abstract as I. The abstract clearly supports my contention. It demonstrates that other pollutants including in meythyl mercury thin egg shells. It also demonstrates that DDT alone doesn’t apear to affcet egg shell thickness in the two species studied, Single Comb White Leghorm chickens or in Japanese quail. It finishes by saying:
“The extent to which environmental contamination with methyl mercury is responsible for decreased egg shell strength in commercial laying hens, and possible synergistic relationships between methyl mercury, DDT, DDE and PCBs in reducing egg production, hatchability and shell strength, remain to be determined.”
Now I ‘m wondering which of you clever linker buffs have actually worked in chemicals? The easy bit is looking up somebody else’s research. Dealing with all this stuff is quite another thing.
Very few people in this country are expert enough to comment particularly on the medical side.
I dont know about hilarious, more like pathetic, cant you read?
You quoted it as evidence of “the hysteria and tunnel vision that characterises the new field of Right-Wing Science” yet it clearly and unambiguously states that DDT was not responsible for egg shell thinning in the test subjects.
What was your contention Steve Munn, apart from demonstrating hysteria and tunnel vision?
Well Rogue I think supporting the Milloy article and not a fullsome review of the science simply reflects the moral bankruptcy of the far right anti-science agenda. Why do you support it.
Yes Gavin actually have done a bit with agricultural chemicals.
Obviously putting wild birds into cages and testing them under lab conditions would be difficult so observations are made and hypotheses drawn from those observations.
Theories need to be tested;
Nature 240, 162 – 163 (17 November 1972); doi:10.1038/240162a0
Eggshell Thinning and DDE
B. C. SWITZER*, F. H. WOLFE* & V. LEWIN†
*Department of Food Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta
†Department of Zoology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta
Blus, Gish, Belisle and Prouty allege that DDE causes eggshell thinning in brown pelicans and that the relationship is logarithmic1. In support of their conclusion that a cause and effect relationship between DDE and shell thinning exists, they offer as evidence Wiemeyer and Porter’s2 work with kestrels. A critical review, however, shows that Wiemeyer and Porter have not shown DDE causes shell thinning; on the contrary, the thinnest eggshells in both years of that study were laid by the control group. The control birds laid eggs with shells ranging in thickness from 130 µm−210 µm in both years, while the DDE-treated birds laid eggs ranging in thickness from 165 µm−203 µm and 153 µm−185 µm for the respective years of the study. Blus et al. also state that DDE levels reported in Wiemeyer and Porter’s experimental kestrels approximate environmental levels found in wild falcons. Such a claim is not borne out by Cade et al. 3 who have performed extensive tissue analysis, and a comparison shows that the levels in the experimental kestrels exceed levels accumulated in wild falcons by a factor of about two. Despite this, Wiemeyer and Porter only report mean shell thinning of 9.7%, considerably less than the 17% and 35% shell thinning reported by Blus et al. in the South Carolina and California brown pelican colonies. To support their conclusions, the authors state that concentrations of residues in the female determine shell thickness, a claim which is unreferenced, largely hypothetical, and without consideration of contradictory experimental evidence.
References
1. Blus, L. J., Gish, C. D., Belisle, A. A., and Prouty, R. M., Nature, 235, 376 (1972).
2. Wiemeyer, S. N., and Porter, R. D., Nature, 227, 737 (1970).
3. Cade, T. J., White, C. M., and Hough, J. R., Condor, 70, 170 (1968).
4. James, P. E., and Retzer, H. J., Poultry Sci., 46, 1200 (1967).
5. Walker, H. M., and Lev, J., Elementary Statistical Methods (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1958).
Luke, I am not supporting the milloy article, I have not yet read it!
Is that your only contribution?
Rog – far too much link link – why don’t you explain in your own words.
Luke: Thanks for answering my query in the affirmative, but what about cathy, rog, schiller etc?
It’s been my experience that unless you are tasked with the responsibility for other people and creatures lives one can be so flippant about taking risks. Doing risk assessment otherwise can carry a high degree of personal bias.
Organochlorines, Heavy Metals, and the Biology of North American Accipiters
Noel F. R. Snyder, Helen A. Snyder, Jeffrey L. Lincer, Richard T. Reynolds
BioScience, Vol. 23, No. 5 (May, 1973), pp. 300-305
doi:10.2307/1296439
Analyses of eggs of three species of North American accipitrine hawks for organochlorines and heavy metals indicate that contamination with DDE may be the primary cause of recent population declines of two of the species, Cooper’s hawk and sharp-shinned hawk.
Maybe, maybe Luke, all these maybes…
http://www.bsc-eoc.org/download/BAEA2005.pdf
Southern Ontario Bald Eagle
Monitoring Program
2005 Final Report
“…Although Canada and the US severely restricted the use of DDT in the 1970s, the effects lingered on for many more years….
“…it seems that the p,p’DDE levels have remained relatively unchanged since the 1990-1996 sampling period (geometric mean of 22.4ug/kg)….
CONCLUSIONS
The Southern Ontario Bald Eagle Monitoring program has successfully monitored the steady increase of southern Ontario Bald Eagle productivity over the last 25 years. Since the program began in the 1980’s the population has increased from only a few nesting pairs, to a record productivity level in 2005 (1.73 versus 1.48 in 2004) across 29 successful nests. The number of productive nests fledging two young has also increased (up to 13 nests from 11 in 2003), and was complimented by a steady number of nests fledging triplets (n=5).
Since I have long been interested in hazardous chemicals I know where to start without using overseas info or links directly. After fifty years I can say we need look no further than home. Any one who is not using the APVMA etc now is a fool. The reason I have to say this is because of the B/S that goes on within and outside the chemical industry. Who bothered look up DDT at home in this thread?
http://www.nicnas.gov.au/Chemicals_In_Australia.asp
http://www.apvma.gov.au/
White Bellied Sea Eagle in Victoria –
“Although the significance of other threats to the species is unknown, they may include direct or indirect poisoning during control programs for foxes and rabbits, deliberate shooting, eggshell thinning because of the past use of DDT, and food chain contamination by heavy metals. Current 1080 baiting operations undertaken by the Department of Primary Industries (DPI) and other land managers attempt to minimise risks to non-target species, and since raptors are not highly susceptible to 1080 poison, this threat may not be high. Contamination of food sources by poisons, such as mercury, needs investigation since this has been found to cause declines in other species of Sea-Eagle overseas”.
Technical surveys for food residues in this country begin under JASANZ treaty and other such MOU’s. Believe me our standards are as rigid as any place in the world. That’s because serious engineering went into this process a long way back under NATA supervision amongst other things. We pioneered the peer review process back in the 1940’s
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/newsroom/foodsurveillancenewsletter/autumnwinter2003.cfm
Gavin, what has any of that to do with DDT and eggshells?
It appears that APVMA form decisions from evidence placed before them. That includes “using overseas info”.
There is nothing on their site that is particularly relevant to DDT and/or eggshells.
However, if the definition of a fool is not using APVMA then I’m no fool (you may well be though)
rog says “It appears that APVMA form decisions from evidence placed before them. That includes “using overseas info” and yes he is so right.
I knew that before I posted it and wondered who would take trouble to google their way through to find out. However the key to understanding my position on things like our use of DDT actually depends sometimes on letting other professionals who I should normally trust to make the odd judgment for me. “APVMA form decisions from evidence placed before them” as rog discovered.
Also I can occasionally ask a tech directly whilst querying either their info or their background on a particular item. The question of trust re DDT is very much at issue here hey.
Read on rog about all our organochlorides and where they are permitted one by one.
Thanks so much Jen – just back from Ballina where my dearly beloved convinced me to part with considerable hard earned to purchase TEA TREE OIL products guaranteed to keep the midgies here on the banks of Oxley Creek at bay!
Now I have to tell her I will also soon need to purchase a support garment….
I was happier in my ignorance.
PS – maybe we’d have been better off with DDT?
As I thought, all the lefty blowhards were all wind. What do they call them in the trade “DPI dickheads”
Despite umpteen opportunities no evidence at all of DDT thinning egg shells.
Just lots theories and lots of group googling which somehow forms “the consensus”
Plenty of evidence of bias and just down right whingeing. Luke, you should be taken out the back and belted with a fresh mullet for all the claptrap you go on with.
So the public service left you behind, why continue to project the emotion of your stifled ambitions onto others? get over it.
Quit yer belly ackin’
Gavin,
word of advice
retire means withdraw not get new tyres.
Luke will explain
I think our little self made man has done his nana. And has been done like a dinner. We’ll rest now lest he really tells us what he thinks. Good to see the 4 x 2 has been reduced to a mullet though.
Some good weekend reading, Jennifer. Monika Sarder’s bit is a good and reasoned input at a time when the AGW campaign is reaching a stage of almost national hysteria.
I note that the Editor of Science commented that never befor has there been such scientific unanimity as there is on AGW,(or words to that effect). Also, recently, Ian Lowe made the statement that there were only five AGW skeptics left in the whole world. Shows how much he is out of touch with reality. However, even if they were both right, it should be of great comfort to us, because Consensus Science does not have a very good record of being right. Either factually or ethically.
Take poor Galileo; not only was he persecuted by the church, but he was roundly condemned by the great majority of his confreres.
The most shameful period for ‘consensus science’ was it’s adoption and promotion of Eugenics towards the end of the nineteenth centuary. Hitler later got hold of that one and the rest is history!
Consensus science also backed and promoted ‘Piltdown Man’, and savagely condemned any of it’s own who raised any doubts. Of course it was later proved to be the greatest scientific fraud of all time.. That is until the IPCC’s ‘Hockey Stick ‘ came along and took the title. And so the list goes on.
Professor Bob Carter brilliantly compared the AGW campaign to Lysenkoism. Without a doubt it is the biggest manifestation of Political Correctness to date.
Good to see you’re still backing them Sid. Don’t go too hard now or you’ll do Schillsy out of a job. Hitler and Eugenics – woo hoo.
Anyway I think I might make this egg shell thing a special study. It’s really fascinating.
Science, Vol 218, Issue 4578, 1232-1235
Copyright © 1982 by American Association for the Advancement of Science
Ban of DDT and subsequent recovery of Reproduction in bald eagles
JW Grier
Reproduction of bald eagles in northwestern Ontario declined from 1.26 young per breeding area in 1966 to a low of 0.46 in 1974 and then increased to 1.12 in 1981. Residues of DDE in addled eggs showed a significant inverse relation, confirming the effects of this toxicant on bald eagle reproduction at the population level and the effectiveness of the ban on DDT. The recovery from DDE contamination in bald eagles appears to be occurring much more rapidly than predicted.
I figured Lukes status by the response to Louis Hissinks ‘people’ segment
There was a man doing work.
http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/001682.html
Luke didnt have a good word to say, it was a bucketful of bile.
Envy, the colour of green.
Science, Vol 202, Issue 4365, 333-335
Copyright © 1978 by American Association for the Advancement of Science
Productivity of ospreys in Connecticut–Long Island increases as DDE residues decline
PR Spitzer, RW Risebrough, W Walker 2nd, R Hernandez, A Poole, D Puleston, and IC Nisbet
Nesting success of ospreys (Pandion haliaetus) breeding in the Connecticut–Long Island area has increased since 1973 and is now approaching the levels recorded prior to the 1950’s. Simultaneously, DDE and dieldrin residues have declined in unhatched eggs. Levels of polychorinated biphenyls have shown no changes over the period 1969 to 1976. The increase in productivity is attributed primarily to lower levels of DDE contamination. Detrimental effects in the past on ospreys in the Connecticut River estuary are attributed to local contamination with dieldrin.
Nature 229, 571 (19 February 1971);
DDE reduces Medullary Bone Formation in Birds
MARK I. OESTREICHER, DEBORAH H. SHUMAN & CHARLES F. WURSTER
Department of Biological Sciences, State University of New York, Stony Brook, New York 11790
DURING the past two decades residues of certain chlorinated hydrocarbons, especially DDT, have caused declines in the populations of various carnivorous birds in the North Temperate Zone by reducing their reproductive success1–3. Contaminated birds lay eggs with abnormally thin, insufficiently calcified shells, so that there is increased egg breakage and embryonic death4–9. Although adult mortality, abnormal behaviour, delayed ovulation and nesting, egg eating, and failure to lay eggs also sometimes result from such contamination1–3,8–11, the thin eggshell phenomenon is the chief cause of the declines in population3,6,8.
Not peer reviewed Luke, you should know better, you are the one to demand peer review mais non
Work ? the bloke in the foreground was star gazing while driller was working.
Really scrambling now Luke, 1971 was over 35 years ago, about your prime time eh?
Oh no – they’re peer reviewed mate. And we’re just getting started. This is fascinating. A whole new field of contrarian dragon slaying. Wow !
Might get into the mechanism of the chemistry next. I like chemistry you know.
You were in the 70s with your stuff so thought it only appropriate.
Its disappointing when someone like Luke, who is/was one to demand absolute scientific rigour in all analysis, discards these requirements when offering an argument that supports his own opinion.
rog: why do you want DDT?
I was just over at Nexus 6 – quite a good read.
http://n3xus6.blogspot.com/
and having a giggle on the Bolt biffing when I saw this little gem.
http://www.copernicus.org/EGU/cp/cpd/2/1001/cpd-2-1001.pdf
Apparently it is warmer than it’s ever been in the last 1000 years. Might have to dust off that old Hockey Stick paper collection again.
and for a real jaw drop saw elswhere .. ..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,1932760,00.html
The thermohaline circulation stopped chug-a-lugging along for 10 days in 2004. Wow !
Apparently the Nexus 6 was a top of the line replicant in Blade Runner (great movie Rog – see with Deer Hunter and Deliverance – take 4 x 2 and popcorn). Hopefully not an omen though as they only had a 4 year life span.
Phil, I saw Blade Runner so many years ago I forgot it, but I’ll be back!
Gavin, I dont specifically want DDT and I dont know why I should want it. AVPMA can give no reason.
I do specifically want methidathion and when the wind drops I will use it and do it with AVPMA appoval, this monday or tuesday and you can all go and gets toughed.
Rog sez:
“I dont know about hilarious, more like pathetic, cant you read?
You quoted it as evidence of “the hysteria and tunnel vision that characterises the new field of Right-Wing Science” yet it clearly and unambiguously states that DDT was not responsible for egg shell thinning in the test subjects.”
Yes, dopey, I realise that. But it obviously only applies to the two test species and, as the abstract notes, says nothing about possible synergies involving DDT. By God you are thick. I can’t be bothered continuing this.
Well you will find that a relief and you must be thankful for that.
The ultimate in AGW peer reviewing.-
The IPCC commissioned Dr.Mann to review his own ‘Hockey Stick’.
Great if HSC kids could mark their own papers!
More info pls Sid – a Hockey Stick fight is always worth it – of course Pinxi will be disgusted that we haven’t progressed.
And Rog – I think you have been a bit horrid and unkind tonight. If you weren’t so bolshy a discourse might flow across the ether.
Someone needs to establish a model regarding the use of DDT to control malaria.
The model would explain how many deaths we are willing to countenance to prevent the arguable thinning of eggshells.
True to form, the Greenies are willing to countenance as many dead Africans as it takes to prevent thin eggshells.
Perhaps a compromise could be reached, whereby instead of 2.7 million deaths, we reduce the possibility of eggshell thinning by half and correspondingly have only 1.35 million dead annually.
If we could plug in a few other numbers, we could ascertain with some precision how many birds the average African is worth.
Then I can start printing bumper stickers that say, “Kill an African, Save X Bird(s).”
Schiller, DDT is not banned for malaria control, only for agriculture. As such, it remains more effective for malaria control.
Maybe I’ll print a bumper sticker, “Save 1 or 2 crops before resistance kicks in, kill X Africans + X birds”.
Well Luke, Dr Michael Mann was Lead Author of his work ‘Historical Record of Temperatures and Climate Change’ which included the infamous ‘Hockey Stick’, which was commissioned by the IPCC. But get this, he was also Lead Author of the IPCC Chapter which reviewed that very work. How’s that for transparency and peer reviewing! Great publicity and prominence was accorded these studies in the IPCC-TAR, as conclusive proof of AGW. The IPCC even adopted the Hockey Stick as it’s background logo until it was proved a fraud.
Outrage followed with countless qualified peers condemning the work, and the review process. The whole thing became known as ‘Sciencegate’in America. But the IPCC showed no remorse and refused to apologise, or take part in any investigation. And of course the left/liberal press kept its silence.
Sid, perhaps read this:
http://www.copernicus.org/EGU/cp/cpd/2/1001/cpd-2-1001.pdf
Then apologise for being wrong.
Schiller – pray tell what raptors in North America have to do with malarial control in Africa. Wouldn’t be laying some astroturf would ya?
Who says the Hockey Stick is wrong. His stats was criticised and if he had used the recommended reviewers he would have attained the same answer. Anyway more confirmation here in new work –
http://www.copernicus.org/EGU/cp/cpd/2/1001/cpd-2-1001.pdf
the wilful ignorance, inverted logic & denial above is astonishing. rog gets presented with a range of scientific and expert sources on the DDT-eggshell connection and he refuses to acknowledge them, just throws up brainless & fowl distractions. Shiller uses the worn old cliche by deliberately conflating bans on agric use with malarial use in a pathetic greenie bashing drive yet again. You’d be more successful if you put forward relevant & accurate facts, but your believers aren’t into the evidence, right? Who’s really interested in the science here? Just compare penile measurements and be done.
Luke and Pinxi,
Believe it or not, the Greenies are against indoor residual spraying for control of malaria. And yes, they take this position because they believe it will persist in the environment and make eggshells thin in Africa. They also take this position because persistence will lead to detectable levels in exports and Europeans won’t buy it.
The Stern review is released very close to Halloween – must be something to do with ‘Trick or Treat.’
Recommended Reviewers!
The AGW ‘Scientific Peer Review Club’.- ‘You scratch my back, and I’ll scratch yours.’
Greenpeace, WWF and Sierra Club have changed their policy to allow DDT and the EU will not ban product containing DDT if it falls under allowable levels.
Shiller I recall reading an interview with the head of a prominent environmental NGO (it might have been WWF) where the interviewer was surprised that the head said that where using DDT can save human lives then it should be used.
So yet again another inaccurate generalisation about “the Greenies” from you Shiller. I think rog’s on the money in saying these NGO’s have a moderate position on DDT (gee twice in a row I’ve agreed with rog, but he’s a soft touch on wildlife).
That was late last year and it was a Greenpeacer, policy on the run. Where is GP policy on DDT?
However WWF still maintain that they want it banned, but just not yet?
http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/what_we_do/toxics/problems/ddt/index.cfm
Schiller says:
“Perhaps a compromise could be reached, whereby instead of 2.7 million deaths, we reduce the possibility of eggshell thinning by half and correspondingly have only 1.35 million dead annually.
If we could plug in a few other numbers, we could ascertain with some precision how many birds the average African is worth.”
Typically brainless comment, Schiller, for two reasons. Firstly, the agricultural use of DDT sppeds up the development of DDT resistant insects. As you are probably aware, many mosquitos are already DDT resistant and we can thank DDT spruikers like you for that.
Secondly, if you wipe out insect eating birds then you effectively destroy a valuable biological control agent. This article gives you some idea of the consequences of wiping out biological control agents. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/reptiles/snakes_saving.html
Stern Review Released. Massive world reaction. Shills, all is lost.
Key scientific points:
An overwhelming body of scientific evidence now clearly indicates that climate change is a serious and urgent issue. The Earth’s climate is rapidly changing, mainly as a result of increases in greenhouse gases caused by human activities.
Most climate models show that a doubling of pre-industrial levels of greenhouse gases is very likely to commit the Earth to a rise of between 2 – 5°C in global mean temperatures. This level of greenhouse gases will probably be reached between 2030 and 2060. A warming of 5°C on a global scale would be far outside the experience of human civilisation and comparable to the difference between temperatures during the last ice age and today. Several new studies suggest up to a 20% chance that warming could be greater than 5°C.
If annual greenhouse gas emissions remained at the current level, concentrations would be more than treble pre-industrial levels by 2100, committing the world to 3 – 10°C warming, based on the latest climate projections.
Some impacts of climate change itself may amplify warming further by triggering the release of additional greenhouse gases. This creates a real risk of even higher temperature changes.
• Higher temperatures cause plants and soils to soak up less carbon from the atmosphere and cause permafrost to thaw, potentially releasing large quantities of methane.
• Analysis of warming events in the distant past indicates that such feedbacks could amplify warming by an additional 1 – 2°C by the end of the century.
Warming is very likely to intensify the water cycle, reinforcing existing patterns of water scarcity and abundance and increasing the risk of droughts and floods.
Rainfall is likely to increase at high latitudes, while regions with Mediterranean-like climates in both hemispheres will experience significant reductions in rainfall. Preliminary estimates suggest that the fraction of land area in extreme drought at any one time will increase from 1% to 30% by the end of this century. In other regions, warmer air and warmer oceans are likely to drive more intense storms, particularly hurricanes and typhoons.
As the world warms, the risk of abrupt and large-scale changes in the climate system will rise.
• Changes in the distribution of heat around the world are likely to disrupt ocean and atmospheric circulations, leading to large and possibly abrupt shifts in regional weather patterns.
• If the Greenland or West Antarctic Ice Sheets began to melt irreversibly, the rate of sea level rise could more than double, committing the world to an eventual sea level rise of 5 – 12 m over several centuries.
The body of evidence and the growing quantitative assessment of risks are now sufficient to give clear and strong guidance to economists and policy-makers in shaping a response.
So steve m,
You are either saying DDT will save no Africans whatsoever, or that the the lives saved does not justify the environmental impact.
If you are claiming the former, you are wrong. If you are claiming the latter, you are morally wrong.
shiller we’re not brainless idiots over in these parts so pls don’t waste time with simplistic abstractions and misleading generalisations
Typical Ford driver.
Luke and Pinxi,
Admit it. You are in a corner, and you are being forced to admit that you prefer birds over Africans.
yep sure, cornered by furphies and inaccuracies, wedged firmly between a fake foam rock and a bag of fairyfloss.
Schiller – not at all – your argument gets the Dodo Bird award for 2006.
I think you are neither a strategist nor a tactician. You are certainly an eccentric crackpot. You don’t really care about the plight of Africans. What you care about a stupid far right agenda with recommending that we “adore” a 1940s agricultural chemical simply because the green movement has linked it with environmental bioaccuumlation, food chain concentration and rampant insect resistance. We have already said above that we accept its ue as a repellant for malarial control.
However DDT can all sorts of cross resistance mechanisms that lead to resistance in synthetic pyrethroids, organophosphates and carbamates. If you want to worry about killing people then cause insect resistance in all sorts of side insect species which have either medical or agricultural implications. So if industry can come up with better compounds that don’t bioaccumulate then we should do so. What about syngerists? But insecticides are very expensive to now produce and market – treat them like gold and use them very wisely.
North American farmers have a dreadful track record as the worst Integrated Pest Managers in the world. Your use of chemicals at home if profligate and in the third world it’s reckless. Why – the almight dollar – you don’t give a rats arse about Africans Schiller.
I think you comment is both duplicitous and stupid. You’re just an old sophist for the far right.
Luke,
Lovely diatribe. And your fundamental point is the same as mine: that Greenies do, in fact, value birds and insects more highly than humans, and that Greenies, in fact, quickly stoop to convoluted proclamations about North Americans and “cross resistance mechanisms” in order to mask the loathsome moral decrepitude that lurks behind the mask of genteel benignity.
I am content to describe my point, while you illustrate it to perfection.
Schiller.
Sophist !
Well Luke,
it is my impression that you are a frumious bandersnatch. Which, as you will notice, is as scholarly and incisive an observation as yours.
Crusty curmudgeon !
This article says nothing about bald eagles and their conclusions? It only talks about oil and hair products!