Got Bed Bugs? Bedbugger Forums Topic: WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?

persona-non-bugga on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

persona-non-bugga — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 10:38:04 +0000

Hi David Cain, Just a forum note that I learn so much from your posts and I appreciate the expertise you share. My poke at wikipedia wasn't intended as criticism of what you wrote. Like I mentioned, it's a good tool for background info, which is how you offered the link, I believe. I just disagree with others that an opinion forwarded on wikipedia might be accepted as the conclusive authority on a topic. QUOTE: "The testing on modern products as a lot more rigorous than the old days and products that make it to market have to have a higher safety profile than the current ones. This is partly due to chemical structures and reactive groups, saying that you want to compare one insecticide with another without look at the chemical class and structure is like saying you can read a book in Icelandic because you read Stephen King paper back on the way to the office today." I wondered whether some pesticides in use today could pose environmental & health threats analogous to the dangers attributed to DDT - if those pesticides were applied as liberally and indiscriminately as DDT once was. I'm nowhere equipped to compare specific pesticides. I'm just thinking aloud about how a substance's toxicity is a function of dosage - not only its chemistry. Consider the fact that many pesticides in use today still wreak havoc on natural environments, yet they're not verboten as DDT is. When I see inconsistency like that, I feel a twitch. Why not severe regulation for these "harmful" substances. Why a ban on one and not the others? Not really expecting answers here, just thinking aloud. In my mind is the example of the Florida Everglades, which I've visited several times since childhood. The massive farming industry in Florida has been running off pesticide waste into the Everglades for decades. One result over the years has been an unexpected increase in dying wildlife. But beyond the reports of dead snakes & birds - the impact of these pollutants is obvious to anyone who visits. Just behold the acres & acres of cattails, which are indicators of phosphorus pollution and not native to the Everglades. These cattails displace naturally-occurring sawgrass: the habitat for a wide spectrum of marsh wildlife. All this from perfectly-legal pesticide use. Like I said, it makes me wonder. Now, excuse me while I go sprinkle some Florida-grown sugar on my Florida-grown grapefruit.

Nobugsonme on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Nobugsonme — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 02:04:46 +0000

Winston, so bed bugs should be classed a "public health pest" in your opinion? Oops, another thread.

DeathToBBs on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

DeathToBBs — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 21:54:27 +0000

Oh, Bugologist, you amuse me so! First off, I have a right to my opinion and you saying that "I'm angry" and throwing out insults as to say how ridiculous my aruguments are are just so unprofessional. From your profile, I see that you are an entomologist. Did I hit a nerve to make you snap at me like that? Anyway, I'm not an entomologist or work for a university or museum or anything like that. I'm a citizen of USA and have a right to my opinions and have a right to say them as such and have a right to proof. The Wikpedia article mentions mostly malaria and mosquitoes, not bedbugs. It also mentions "The effects of DDT on human health are disputed since studies have yielded conflicting results." See that, CONFLICTING results, not SOLID results. Smoking definitely causes cancer, yet the Big Ones are still manufacturing them. Hmm. You don't see any Rachel Carson books about smoking and forcing to stop the sale of cigarrettes. You said "DDT will never ever be brought back and I know people want to see it as a silver bullet but it won't be. Would it make treatments easier? Yes. Less expensive? Yes. Give people cancer more often? Yes. Cause more health issues? Yes. Oh and possibly ruin the food chain yet again and destroy other animals? Affirmative. All to save some money." Give people cancer more often? NOT! Ya know, even drinking too much water can kill you. Should we outlaw water? All to save some money. Yeah. I would think so. Our country is run by money called economy. If Wall Street were to have a major quirk, they would shut it down in the middle of the day to, as you say, "save some money" and to prevent a depression in this wonderful country that is run by money. It has been done before. People here have spent THOUSANDS of dollars on eradicating bbs. But, it's just money, get on with it, right? How about the few people that have a really bad reaction to the bites. You think they care about "some money" as you say. I don't think DDT is a silver bullet and I know we have to come up with alternatives. But, in the interim, we must use what we know what works to make our citizens live life a little easier. Is that too much to ask? Call me selfish if you will, but I would sacrifice a few birds for the happiness of life of people here in USA. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." Oh yeah. In the future, please do not insult me or attack me or anyone else because not only is that NOT professional, it's the cause of a fight. Everyone has a right to their opinions, as differentiated as they are....everyone.

fightorflight on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

fightorflight — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 20:17:29 +0000

I understand there's a very low likelihood of DDT use becoming legal again, but I would support such a measure for pest control only. I would support it not as a "magic bullet," but as another tool in the arsenal for combatting a pest that is exceedingly difficult to control and can be resistant to the chemicals we are already using. If DDT were used only in building pest control and not as an agricultural pesticide, I don't see how it would concentrate in toxic levels in the food chain. Whew, this is a contentious issue.

Bugless on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Bugless — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:16:09 +0000

Yes, I read the Berenbaum article. I can simply repeat that more research on the effects of DDT on present-day strains of bedbugs (Cimex lectularius) in the US is needed. People develop an emotional vested interest in some facts. They feel uncomfortable when the facts are questioned. Environmental harm is an extremely serious matter. My own expression for it is, "We are wrecking the planet". But the suggested use of DDT by prescription, and only long enough for each user to get rid of of bedbugs and the associated trauma, will contribute next to nothing to environmental harm. If the relatively tiny amount of DDT doesn't work, people will soon realize it and that will be an end to it. If it works, I think the harm will be miniscule compared to other things we are doing to the environment, sometimes for trivial purposes, or just for entertainment purposes. In contrast, bedbug trauma can be a serious psychological problem, or at the very least, extremely disgusting for most people. In fact, the best proof of effectiveness of the prescription method is to try it on a limited basis.

Anonymous on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Anonymous — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 17:30:17 +0000

That PDF is available from several websites, not just Sterifab! DDT is not a product that competes in the US market as you note. I don't see the need to cast a pall of doubt over the research done at UKY. It's not as if this is a new concept, resistance! It's a thoroughly documented consequence of using pesticides. And again, they first noticed bedbugs were becoming resistant to DDT in the late 1940s. Bugless, did you read the Berenbaum article?

Bugless on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Bugless — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 17:15:04 +0000

With regard to the University of Kentucky research report mentioned earlier on this thread, bear in mind that it was referenced on the Sterifab website. Sterifab does not make DDT (no company in the US is allowed to). Sterifab does make a competing product. Do you think Sterifab would draw people's attention to a favorable report on DDT? Not likely. In any case, a single research report means nothing. Scientific research must be repeatable by other scientists, working for different types of organization, with different types of financing, in different places, and even in different nations (to avoid knowing or unknowing patriotic slant in the results). A single scientific report is WORSE than nothing at all if it is regarded as final, proven truth. A scientist may find what he unconsciously wants to find. I'm not saying that U. of Kentucky or its researchers have knowingly issued a false report. I'm simply saying that a single scientific report should not be taken as absolute truth. There may have been an error in the scientific approach taken or unconscious bias in the methods used. Furthermore, some research by other organizations, such as tobacco companies, has been called junk science. Certain interests financed it, and the scientific results "proved" what the financers wanted. I repeat, I am not saying that U. of Kentucky or the researchers there deliberately issued false reports. But remember that a while ago researchers at the University of Utah found that nuclear energy, in the form of a moderate and usable electrical current, could be produced in a device no bigger than a glass of water. It hit the newspaper headlines -- but they were wrong. I used to work as an editor of scientific reports, so I know something about this.

Anonymous on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Anonymous — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 16:43:00 +0000

David, thanks, I completely missed the DDT table the first time I read this. Everyone, please take a look at the table on page 50 of the article linked in David's last post for 2007 DDT results. Romero and colleagues tested DDT on susceptible and pyrethroid-resistant populations: Bed Bug Population, Mortality after 5 days exposure to DDT Laboratory (pyrethroid suseptible) 95% WOR-1 (pyrethroid resistant) 100% DOV-1 (pyrethroid resistant) 30% CIN-1 (pyrethroid resistant) 10% LEX-1 (pyrethroid resistant) 5%

bugbasher on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

bugbasher — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:51:30 +0000

Disregard previous post,I didn't see the move,sorry!

bugbasher on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

bugbasher — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:49:14 +0000

PH, Not an expert,I can only think of a few.1) manual inspection and removal of all items in the infested room 2) hire pco to treat, with all suspect areas treated at the same time. 3) Do NOT isolate the bed,that will spread them out to other areas. I'm sure there are other ways,these are just what I know,but like I said I'm no expert.

Bugologist on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Bugologist — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:30:08 +0000

I don't even think they're manufacturing it here in the states anymore. Now there's a great example of a product taken off the market for no good reason other than the DEP/EPA flexing muscle and making our lives more difficult.

BBcoukHome on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

BBcoukHome — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:29:02 +0000

The ref for DDT resistance I think is part of the pdf file: <a href="http://www.sterifab.com/new_web_page/MAGAZINE_REPRINTS/july%20bed%20bugs.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.sterifab.com/new_web_page/MAGAZINE_REPRINTS/july%20bed%20bugs.pdf</a> I appreciate that wikipedia is only as good as the info put into it, which is why I took the time to read and check the artcile before reading it. The main issue with DDT is the build up in the food chain and the fact that if concentrated enough it causes birds eggs to become weak and they crack as the bird roosts. In the UK this is actually part of the GCSE and A-Level science curriculums and has been since the early 1980's and is cited for the reason why the UK failed to have a sucessful breading pair of eagles for years. The testing on modern products as a lot more rigorous than the old days and products that make it to market have to have a higher safety profile than the current ones. This is partly due to chemical structures and reactive groups, saying that you want to compare one insecticide with another without look at the chemical class and structure is like saying you can read a book in Icelandic because you read Stephen King paper back on the way to the office today. On a serious note I am now actually going to stop posting to any and all threads with a mention of DDT because the risk taht someone will think its a good idea and buy some is just not worth encouraging in any form. David

Anonymous on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Anonymous — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:28:44 +0000

I'm always sad when I see the return of the DDT debate. It's such an energy drain. But I do understand where people are coming from when they express their frustrations and latch on to the idea of DDT. It's a powerful idea. And I think a painful distraction from reality. Still, last time the subject came up, I think Frank linked to this <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/04/AR2005060400130.html">May Berenbaum article about DDT</a>. If you are seriously interested in the subject and not just venting (which is okay, Lord knows) you should read it for it's very balanced and accessible. On the specific issue of bedbugs and resistance to DDT, it might be a great service if someone did track down the research so that this could be put to rest. There are references everywhere to resistance first being noticed as early as the 40s. Maybe someone with access to Usinger's 1966 monograph and/or JR Busvine's 1971 Cross-resistance in arthropods of public health importance (WHO) can quote the relevant passages. As a kindness.

Winston O. Buggy on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Winston O. Buggy — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:07:12 +0000

I will tell you I have not used Ficam for bed bugs for several years however when I did for a short period of time till the registration ran out I would say the results were better than most of the current materials and of a different class which allowed for some rotation. I am talking about Ficam and not Ficam Plus which as you know contains pyrethrum as well. I also understand that Ficam is being used with some degree of success in Australia although obviously not a cure. Perhaps if it was still marketable new research might be done, I know it was not doing a great job on roaches here hence the plus product.

Bugologist on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Bugologist — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 14:57:42 +0000

I don't have permission to do that because I don't know if it's public knowledge. It may have been two scientists trading preliminary results. I'll look into it. I'm intrigued that DDT turns toadstools into smurfs. Now there's a research project. In all seriousness, and this is going to come off kind of harsh but, I'm not sure why we waste our time continually addressing these issues with DDT. DDT isn't coming back. It never will. Regardless if resistence is or isn't in bed bug populations, it isn't going to matter because it isn't coming back. If I can quickly get a reference to the research I will but I think it may have been an off-the-cuff quick experiment because why do a study on it, it isn't coming back. By the way, if you didn't get it yet, DDT isn't coming back....ever. And if you're crazy enough to try and get some on the black market, I don't want anything to do with information exchange about it because bed bugs may be bad, but cancer is worse. Weigh your options.

persona-non-bugga on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

persona-non-bugga — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 14:49:48 +0000

QUOTE: David Cain's link to the wikipedia page about DDT should illustrate why DDT is no longer available and all of the completely serious issues that caused it's demise. wikipedia's cool and all for background info, but you can't cite it as the ultimate word on anything and be credible. Just cuz wikipedia says it's so, doesn't mean the case is closed. All it takes is a faction of committed wiki-editors to contribute a random opinion, such as DDT may turn toadstools into smurfs. And there it'd go in the entry. wikipedia: the best "information" by consensus on the interwebs! Also, if any entomologist would help us out with citations to actual research about DDT and bedbug-resistance, I'd be so grateful. No need to go all academic MLA-style with the citations. But, yeah, saying my friend researched it, so there you go ... kinda meaningless. EDIT: Personally, I don't expect DDT to return to widespread use. It's just too loaded with political symbolism. I hope DDT is allowed to be applied judiciously where the evidence supports it'll be helpful. When it comes to bedbugs, maybe there are more effective pesticides in the development pipeline or that need to be made available. What confuses me, though, are arguments such as those made by bugologist above. Wouldn't all those health & environmental risks be posed by equal dosages of pesticides in use today? So why the special standard for DDT?

pleasehelp on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

pleasehelp — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 13:21:21 +0000

You're right, David - I'll repost...

bed-bugscouk on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

bed-bugscouk — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 13:19:01 +0000

I think the last question constitutes a new thread. David

pleasehelp on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

pleasehelp — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 13:03:02 +0000

David, Winston, Bugologist, others in the know - what techniques can be used to treat infected rooms without spreading the infestation to adjacent areas?

bed-bugscouk on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

bed-bugscouk — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 12:43:20 +0000

Hi, Not Ficam please, great flushing agent lousey bug killer. I make specific mention of it in my myths busting because it is the most commonly misused product in the UK. 1 infected room to whole house in 7 days just give it a go. David

Winston O. Buggy on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Winston O. Buggy — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 11:32:33 +0000

When is DDT coming back? It's not. While I disagree on some of it's alleged evils I think the biggest problem with it in the past was its availability which had untrained folks using it without following label directions. Then again at that time label directions may have left something to be desired. But the fact is that even when it was taken away from the US market it was no longer the recommended product; Malathion was. Perhaps some of the resistance problems we have may stem from DDT use elsewhere. Any way It's not coming back. I would seek more viable alternatives like recently off the market products like Ficam and organo phosphates but only as Federally Restricted Use products for Public Health pests only.

Bugologist on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Bugologist — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 09:50:10 +0000

Impressive post DeathToBB's, have a little anger about the subject? To be honest, I'm not even going to address your post because I would hope most of the people who post here can see how ridiculous your arguments are for bringing DDT back. David Cain's link to the wikipedia page about DDT should illustrate why DDT is no longer available and all of the completely serious issues that caused it's demise. Also, I can't produce the data on DDT and how some bed bugs are resistant to it because I didn't complete the research but I know the people who did and I'd put my life on it that it's true. I know they aren't lying because I know them personally. DDT will never ever be brought back and I know people want to see it as a silver bullet but it won't be. Would it make treatments easier? Yes. Less expensive? Yes. Give people cancer more often? Yes. Cause more health issues? Yes. Oh and possibly ruin the food chain yet again and destroy other animals? Affirmative. All to save some money?

BBcoukHome on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

BBcoukHome — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 05:04:02 +0000

Hopefully never. There has been research to show that a significant bed bug population are completely or 95% resistant to it so firstly you have to questions the idea on efficiency grounds. Then you have to look at Environmental grounds, one of the best balanced documents is: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ddt" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ddt</a> I cant stress enough that the fines for importing restricted products into the country and significantly higher than getting professional treated. I think I saw the figure of $50,000 quoted somewhere. Finally there are the health issues and I dont wish to be rube but it does need pointing out that DDT is a known carcinogen. Yes you may get even worse in a badly synthesised chemical coctail and you certainly have no way of getting a quality control test on it. David

fightorflight on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

fightorflight — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 03:31:15 +0000

Whoa, for real? You know, that Vicodin those nice spammers sell you isn't really Vicodin. I would be wary of any cheap "DDT" that came from China. It might not be DDT, but it could easily be a toxic carcinogen.

DRKSD4848 on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

DRKSD4848 — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 02:49:26 +0000

I had heard through the grapevine that in Manhattan, people who know people are getting bootleg/smuggled in/"black market" DDT...

Bugless on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Bugless — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 23:11:09 +0000

If DDT still works, they'll probably soon be smuggling it into the US, just like they do with drugs. But it should be available like prescription medicine. An earlier poster suggested this -- I forget who and can't find the post, so I can't give them credit by name. A limited amount would be prescribed for a person whose home has been certified to have bedbugs by a licensed PCO. That's like a licensed doctor prescribing medicine. Like medicine, the DDT should be purchased by the inflicted person, not by the PCO. That will prevent monkey business by PCO's applying the stuff lightly, or just applying some other kind of powder. The PCO could then sell the real stuff on the black market. (Of course, most PCO's would not do this, I'm just talking about a few.) The DDT sold this way would come in a spray can or dust applicator sufficient for one treatment of the prescribed number of rooms. The PCO would use the entire amount, and would be required to crush the empty container and give it back to the bedbugged person. Containers of fake DDT could be sold for a low price, but word would get around that it does not work. Used by prescription, DDT would not do noticeable harm to the environment. The problem with DDT as it was used before in the US, was that farmers dumped tons of it on their fields.

Bistec on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Bistec — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 22:39:45 +0000

Is there a way of getting DDT maybe from China?

DeathToBBs on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

DeathToBBs — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 21:37:56 +0000

Oh yeah, one more thing. Since there have been reports of bbs being resistant to the sh.t that is out there now, how come the government does not take these suspend like products off the market? I mean, they clearly do not work. If it did work, then people would not be getting reinfested and this bb problem would not be getting worse every year.

DeathToBBs on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

DeathToBBs — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 21:33:14 +0000

DDT is not coming back due to EPA propaganda. "Experts" saying bugs are resistant to DDT which is not true. If this was the case, then why did they bring back DDT to Africa to try and kill off the mosquitoes that were killing MILLIONS of people and children because of malaria. Since the reintroduction of DDT, a lot of people have been spared from malaria. DDT lasts in the environment for months, it just keeps on killing. It is not harmful to people at all. Just more BS propaganda from our government. DDT is known to thin a bird's egg. Well, this probably has the same effect on bb eggs as well, thereby making the bbs not being able to be born. And, it probably has the same effect on the outer shell of the bb killing it. DDT stays in the environment for months so only 1 or 2 applications are needed. It is cheap to make and doesn't require a lot of physical labor so the exterminators did not charge a lot for this service. There was a class of pesticides that have been removed from the market including carbomates and others that were banned that were cheap to make and very, very effective in killing bugs. The stuff the exterminators have now are sh.t and this sh.t costs a lot so the price gets passed on to you. That's why it costs so much. I mean, these guys have to make a profit too, right? Anyways, they also have to do extensive work in labor so that's another reason to pass the price right on to you. DDT is the cheapest, most effective way to kill bbs and all bugs. I've been reading that bbs are resistant to DDT. Show me the study on that. SHOW ME! Without proof of that, it's just hearsay and word of mouth. I don't buy it!

paulaw0919 on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

paulaw0919 — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 21:16:33 +0000

Don't hold your breath on the DDT issue. It won't be coming back. Plus, there are studies on it in other countries that the bed bugs had built resistance to it as well. When this epidemic gets bad enough there will be something better on the market. Plus I predict Vikane costs to drop a lot in the next year or two. Until then we pay through the nose unfortunately. That's why there's such a stress on finding a PCO that knows what their doing.

Bistec on "WHEN IS DDT COMING BACK?"

Bistec — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 20:02:52 +0000

I am wondering why people have to pay at least up to 2k to treat bed bugs in NYC? Why not introduce DDT back? or some other insecticide to combat this Vampire? Why do PCO charge so much?