Environmental monitoring is a crucial approach that helps environmentalists to evaluate and correct several harms in the environment. It is no doubt that malaria causes over a half million deaths annually. In addition, it makes three million persons fall ill on an annual basis. For many years, DDT has been used to compact the disease by killing mosquitoes. However, research evidence demonstrates that it causes more harm to human beings. Based on research evidence and arguments from various sources, this paper recommends a ban on the use of DDT in controlling malaria.
In the context of environmental health, it is recommended that frequent monitoring should be adopted to help identify and rectify problematic situations that could result in both short-term and long-term negative impacts on human beings (Laureate Education, 2008; EPA, 2013; EPA, 2014). Hölzer and colleagues (2008) state that some chemicals pose much harm to the environment. Thus, frequent biomonitoring is an essential approach to preventing both short-term and long-term effects (LaKind, Barraj, Tran & Aylward, 2008; Moeller, 2011; Suk et al., 2004).
Anopheles female mosquitoes cause malaria, a disease that is exemplified by high mortality and morbidity rates, especially in sub-Sahara Africa. DDT is an organochloride pesticide that has been in use over a long time. It has been used to control malaria by killing mosquitoes. However, this paper recommends that the insecticide should be banned with regard to malaria control.
This paper recommends a ban on DDT due to much harm that it causes to humans and wildlife. Some studies have concentrated on studying the impacts of the chemical on workers who use it to control the breeding of mosquitoes. In a study conducted in Mexico, researchers focused on assessing impacts of the organochloride on personnel who were involved in malaria control (Salazar-García, Gallardo-Díaz, Cerón-Mireles, Loomis & Borja-Aburto, 2004).
It was demonstrated that long exposures to the pesticide resulted in more chances of experiencing birth defects. On the other hand, acute exposure was not correlated with negative effects on the study participants (Salazar-García et al., 2004). Another study that has shown evidence on the negative effects of DDT on human beings was conducted in California. It was a prospective study, which concentrated on evaluating impacts of the insecticide on relatively young women from 1959 to 1967. Specifically, it aimed at establishing correlations with regard to breast cancer. It was demonstrated that women who were exposed to DDT early in their lives showed higher chances of developing breast cancer (Cohn, Wolff, Cirillo & Sholtz, 2007).
Other resources, arguments and facts
Online resources are characterized by some critics who argue that DDT should be banned in relation to malaria control. It is no doubt that malaria kills over 500,000 persons and causes morbidity in over three million individuals on an annual basis. Many critics argue that the long-term and short-term impacts of the pesticide could be more disastrous. The most compelling argument in choosing the position in this paper is the rate at which the chemical makes cells assume abnormal growth rates, which culminate in various forms of cancer (Souder, 2012). Souder (2012) argues that continued use of the insecticide could result in many cancer cases in the near future.
Changes of views
My views with regard to the use of DDT in eliminating malaria have changed as a result of this paper. Initially, I thought that the chemical was safe and affordable. However, I have learned that it is typified by high rates of toxicity to both human beings and wildlife.
In conclusion, it is evident that DDT is not a safe method to control the breeding of mosquitoes that cause malaria. Although the chemical is relatively cheap, it is quite toxic to humans and animals. Thus, this paper has recommended a ban on the use of the insecticide in the control of the disease.
Cohn, B. A., Wolff, M. S., Cirillo, P. M., & Sholtz, R. I. (2007). DDT and breast cancer in young women: new data on the significance of age at exposure. Environmental Health Perspectives, 115(10), 1406-1414.
EPA. (2013). Fish Consumption Advice. Web.
EPA. (2014). The Ambient Air Monitoring program. Web.
Hölzer, J., Midasch, O., Rauchfuss, K., Kraft, M., Reupert, R., Angerer, J.,… & Wilhelm, M. (2008). Biomonitoring of perfluorinated compounds in children and adults exposed to perfluorooctanoate-contaminated drinking water. Environmental health perspectives, 116(5), 651-657.
LaKind, J. S., Barraj, L., Tran, N., & Aylward, L. L. (2008). Environmental chemicals in people: challenges in interpreting biomonitoring information. J Environ Health, 70(23), 61-4.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive producer). (2008). Environmental Health: Environmental Monitoring. Baltimore, MD: Laureate Education, Inc.
Moeller, D. W. (2011). Environmental health (4th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Salazar-García, F., Gallardo-Díaz, E., Cerón-Mireles, P., Loomis, D., & Borja-Aburto, V. H. (2004). Reproductive effects of occupational DDT exposure among male malaria control workers. Environmental health perspectives, 112(5), 542-547.
Souder, W. (2012). Rachael Carson Didn’t Kill Millions of Africans. Web.
Suk, W. A., Avakian, M. D., Carpenter, D., Groopman, J. D., Scammell, M., & Wild, C. P. (2004). Human exposure monitoring and evaluation in the Arctic: the importance of understanding exposures to the development of public health policy. Environmental health perspectives, 112(2), 113-120.