Got Bed Bugs? Bedbugger Forums » Bed Bug Treatment
New documentary proves DDT is safe....the end of bed bugs is coming!
(46 posts)-
ShiningLight
newbite
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 7offline
Posted 2 years ago
Mon Sep 13 2010 17:39:35
#
Login to Send PM
Bed bugs can be beaten. This is to inform you of a new documentary film that could help save millions of African lives and wipe out bed bugs too! It premieres Friday (9/17) at the Quad Cinema, W.13 St. (It screens at Laemmle, Sunset 5 in West Hollywood, California. 9/24) Please go and see the film, and encourage others to do so. The trailer can be seen here: .www.3billionandcounting.com/trailer.php
In Africa, every day, 3000 women and children die from Malaria. Drugs and bed-nets don't work well. But a cheap and effective prevention, DDT, has been BANNED by the US government. An inspiring new documentary film by Dr Rutledge, opening September 17th in New York, reveals evidence that has been kept hidden for years. DDT is SAFE. Malaria is PREVENTABLE. Why have governments conspired to let it continue? The premiere of "3 Billion and Counting" is at the Quad Cinema, 34 W.13 Street on 9/17 at 8:45 pm. Tell your friends, your family, anyone who might care enough to want to do something about this dreadful situation. ONLY when enough people learn the TRUTH can the deaths from Malaria be stopped. This is an empowering, optimistic movie which CAN change the lives of millions IF seen by millions.
Thank you for reading this. Let us hope that others do, and that this terrible genocide can be ended.
Dr Susan Dornan
"3 Billion and Counting", opens 9/17/2010, 8:45 pm, Quad Cinema, 34 W.13 Street, New York. Phone 212-255-2243. http://www.movietickets.com/house_detail.asp?house_id=216
LINKS:
Press release: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/3-billion-and-counting-opens-in-new-york-at-the-quad-cinema-102170689.html
Website: .3billionandcounting.com/
YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/3BillionAndCounting
Blog: .3billionandcounting.wordpress.com/
Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?id=100000514205040&pid=120237#!/3BillionAndCounting?ref=search
Quad Cinema, New York: http://www.quadcinema.com/coming-soon (scroll down the page)
Book tickets at the Quad: http://www.movietickets.com/house_detail.asp?house_id=216
Laemele Theater, Hollywood: http://www.laemmle.com/viewmovie.php?mid=656
-
oldtimer
Joined: Jan '08
Posts: 1,170offline
Posted 2 years ago
Mon Sep 13 2010 17:48:42
#
Login to Send PM
Hi,
Its very much a shame that the bedbugs saw this one coming and already decided to become resistant to it.
http://newyorkvsbedbugs.org/2008/05/15/ddt-resistance-once-more-with-tables-and-sources/
I am sure others will chime in with many of the other links and papers and In fact I would even vote for a sticky on the subject of why DDT is not the answer. I would advise you to think of insecticides as very much like antibiotics. When you overuse and abuse you will always lead to resistance and failure, Dr Darwin taught us this basic principle in the 1880's. We are now able to elucidate the actual genetic and biochemical basis of this but the solution is not to try and bring back an old chemical or to speed through the development of a new one.
To keep your tools sharp they must be used in a more educated and professional way.
If you are New York based I will happily debate this issue with you directly on 19th September.
David Cain
Bed Bugs Limited -
spideyjg
oldtimer
Joined: Jul '08
Posts: 3,201offline
Posted 2 years ago
Mon Sep 13 2010 18:30:27
#
Login to Send PM
Second on the sticky like BBvsNY has.
Seems the film is pushing for revival due to malaria and not BBs but betcha they will claim it will cure BBs in the film.
The evidence is clear that DDT is now useless for BBs so don't try to use the pipe dream of a magic BB bullet to try and bring it back.
Jim
-
oldtimer
Joined: May '07
Posts: 1,969offline
Posted 2 years ago
Mon Sep 13 2010 20:19:00
#
Login to Send PM
DDT does have a low acute toxicity for humans... The military utilized DDT impregnated uniforms with direct skin contact to control Malaria when DDT was still effective decades ago.
There are effective drugs to control Malaria, but not enough funding to make them widely available in the third world countries that need them.
As David and Jim have already pointed out... Bed bugs have proven to be highly resistant to DDT in modern studies that utilize bed bugs caught in the field.
A green sticky is a great idea.
-
cilecto
oldtimer
Joined: Aug '08
Posts: 3,850offline
Posted 2 years ago
Mon Sep 13 2010 21:17:04
#
Login to Send PM
DDT was "banned by the US government". Is there a malaria problem in the US? Is malaria only a problem in countries that don't use DDT? Is DDT 100% effective today against malaria causing mosquitoes? If DDT were unleashed tomorrow, would there be no more malaria deaths…or would they continue because it's not as effective as implied or because some governments and NGOs can't effectively deliver it (or any other solution)?
Consider this from a recent Newsweek:
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/08/conservatives-blame-environmentalists-for-bedbugs.html
The Politics of Bedbugs
Conservatives say that the ban on DDT is to blame for the recent resurgence in bedbugs.Some memes never die, as long as there are bloggers to keep them alive. Each summer, the first faint hum of a mosquito at the window screen reminds some right-wing think-tanker to blame the Environmental Protection Agency for banning DDT…
In fact, DDT is still being used, mostly in Africa and Asia, to control malaria, something even some environmentalists have reluctantly endorsed. But it remains a touchstone in the never-ending struggle over government regulation—one of the first and most visible instances of a chemical banned over its long-term environmental effects…So it was probably inevitable that the latest plague to be visited on innocent Americans’ hides—bedbugs—would be enlisted in the campaign to bring back DDT.
This represents an unusually pure example of right-wing ideology, because it is almost completely divorced from any real-world considerations of either environmentalism or entomology. …
But long before the United States banned most uses of it in 1972, DDT had lost its effectiveness against bedbugs—which, like many fast-breeding insects, are extremely adept at evolving resistance to pesticides. “Bloggers talk about bringing back DDT,” says Bob Rosenberg, director of government affairs for the National Pest Management Association, “but we had stopped using it even before 1972.”
So, you're not offering anything to bedbug victims and I wonder if you've got anything for those who fight malaria.
-
BBGen0cide
member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 210offline
Posted 2 years ago
Mon Sep 13 2010 23:11:38
#
Login to Send PM
Last I read, bed bugs evolved and are not effected by DDT like they once were, and that DDT is used in other parts of the world and has not put a dent in the bed bug problem.
-
cilecto
oldtimer
Joined: Aug '08
Posts: 3,850offline
Posted 2 years ago
Tue Sep 14 2010 8:32:20
#
Login to Send PM
> Green stickey (Doug, Spidey)
Seconded, but understand that this is at minimum the second thread that the promoters of "3 Billion and Counting" have started in two weeks. They need to start fresh threads as the old ones quickly fill up with rebuttals and debunks. They will keep doing this as long as they have an agenda to promote.
"Three billion" is a big number to lay at the feet of environmentalists, but my understanding (from the film's press) is that's the estimate of how many people have died of malaria, worldwide, since the beginning of time. I'd like to understand how many of these were before DDT, how many while DDT was "in vogue" and how many since its discontinuation.
-
ShiningLight
newbite
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 7offline
Posted 2 years ago
Tue Sep 14 2010 13:19:10
#
Login to Send PM
BBcoukHome - 19 hours ago »
Hi,
Its very much a shame that the bedbugs saw this one coming and already decided to become resistant to it.
http://newyorkvsbedbugs.org/2008/05/15/ddt-resistance-once-more-with-tables-and-sources/
I am sure others will chime in with many of the other links and papers and In fact I would even vote for a sticky on the subject of why DDT is not the answer. I would advise you to think of insecticides as very much like antibiotics. When you overuse and abuse you will always lead to resistance and failure, Dr Darwin taught us this basic principle in the 1880's. We are now able to elucidate the actual genetic and biochemical basis of this but the solution is not to try and bring back an old chemical or to speed through the development of a new one.
To keep your tools sharp they must be used in a more educated and professional way.
If you are New York based I will happily debate this issue with you directly on 19th September.
David Cain
Bed Bugs LimitedSorry for the delay in responding - one question. Do you know for a fact that the bedbugs currently infesting NY are resistant to DDT? And you would be very welcome to go to the documentary opening 17 September at the Quad cinema. Your "take" on the documentary would be welcome.
-
ShiningLight
newbite
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 7offline
Posted 2 years ago
Tue Sep 14 2010 13:26:59
#
Login to Send PM
DougSummersMS - 17 hours ago »
DDT does have a low acute toxicity for humans... The military utilized DDT impregnated uniforms with direct skin contact to control Malaria when DDT was still effective decades ago.
There are effective drugs to control Malaria, but not enough funding to make them widely available in the third world countries that need them.
As David and Jim have already pointed out... Bed bugs have proven to be highly resistant to DDT in modern studies that utilize bed bugs caught in the field.
A green sticky is a great idea.Thank you for your comment. DDT has a triple effect on mosquitoes - kill effect, repellant, and disorientation. Although resistance can and has developed in the past, there is no evidence of mosquitoes becoming "resistant" to the repellant effect. I welcome evidence to the contrary.
-
ShiningLight
newbite
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 7offline
Posted 2 years ago
Tue Sep 14 2010 13:32:34
#
Login to Send PM
cilecto - 4 hours ago »
> Green stickey (Doug, Spidey)
Seconded, but understand that this is at minimum the second thread that the promoters of "3 Billion and Counting" have started in two weeks. They need to start fresh threads as the old ones quickly fill up with rebuttals and debunks. They will keep doing this as long as they have an agenda to promote.
"Three billion" is a big number to lay at the feet of environmentalists, but my understanding (from the film's press) is that's the estimate of how many people have died of malaria, worldwide, since the beginning of time. I'd like to understand how many of these were before DDT, how many while DDT was "in vogue" and how many since its discontinuation.The "agenda" if there is one is to show that DDT is not the baddie it has been made out to be, that malaria can be cheaply and effectively dealt with and that there is no peer reviewed, scientific basis for banning DDT.
-
oldtimer
Joined: Apr '07
Posts: 6,718offline
Posted 2 years ago
Tue Sep 14 2010 14:15:48
#
Login to Send PM
ShiningLight - 50 minutes ago »
Sorry for the delay in responding - one question. Do you know for a fact that the bedbugs currently infesting NY are resistant to DDT? And you would be very welcome to go to the documentary opening 17 September at the Quad cinema. Your "take" on the documentary would be welcome.The linked research is US research so I think its fair to say yes DDT resistance is a US and highly likley NY issue.
I actually know an awful lot about DDT use for mosquitoes in developing countries and the debate you should be having is why anti malaria drugs are so expensive as the logistics of getting good chemical control in developing countries is more about access to spray equipement and training than what products are being used.
My sources on that subject are senior CDC workers who are active in developing countries supporting communities on the ground.
Sadly I am not in NY till late on the 18th and given the incidences of bedbugs in cinemas in NY I am not likley to want to go an investigate first hand as I have greater priorities with my time such as helping as many people as I can in the limited time I have available. Much appreciated for the offer though, if you collect any samples from the screening do bring them along to the get together on the Sunday though.
David
-
your host
Joined: Mar '07
Posts: 13,692offline
Posted 2 years ago
Tue Sep 14 2010 17:02:22
#
Login to Send PM
ShiningLight - 3 hours ago »
cilecto - 4 hours ago »
> Green stickey (Doug, Spidey)
Seconded, but understand that this is at minimum the second thread that the promoters of "3 Billion and Counting" have started in two weeks. They need to start fresh threads as the old ones quickly fill up with rebuttals and debunks. They will keep doing this as long as they have an agenda to promote.The "agenda" if there is one is to show that DDT is not the baddie it has been made out to be, that malaria can be cheaply and effectively dealt with and that there is no peer reviewed, scientific basis for banning DDT.
Your agenda
1) that DDT is not bad,
2) that Malaria can be dealt with using DDT and it should be allowed... is for the most part irrelevant to our agenda here, which is discussing bed bugs, including how to kill bed bugs.
We have nothing to gain from a movement to make DDT legal, since bed bugs first showed resistance to it in Hawaii in the 1940s.
One of the other campaigns to advertise this film on this website on the forums did not attract any responses but was deleted as off-topic/advertising.
-
WGarrow
junior member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 103offline
Posted 2 years ago
Tue Sep 14 2010 20:20:58
#
Login to Send PM
The topic of DDT is irrelevant and moot. Whether it would work for bed bugs or not doesn't matter. The government will never EVER allow it. Even if millions of citizens united and got the EPA to reconsider, the environmentalists would tie it up in the courts for years and decades. It just isn't going to happen.
-
spideyjg
oldtimer
Joined: Jul '08
Posts: 3,201offline
Posted 2 years ago
Tue Sep 14 2010 23:10:43
#
Login to Send PM
WGarrow - 2 hours ago »
The topic of DDT is irrelevant and moot. Whether it would work for bed bugs or not doesn't matter. The government will never EVER allow it. Even if millions of citizens united and got the EPA to reconsider, the environmentalists would tie it up in the courts for years and decades. It just isn't going to happen.See that is the point of the Newsweek article that it is a pawn in a pissing contest bereft of science to prove efficacy.
For the sake of argument let's say the DDT fans win out, they get it back, and see zero results on BBs. Who are they going to piss at then?
Jim
-
your host
Joined: Mar '07
Posts: 13,692offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 2:01:51
#
Login to Send PM
spideyjg - 2 hours ago »
For the sake of argument let's say the DDT fans win out, they get it back, and see zero results on BBs. Who are they going to piss at then?
JimJim,
I'd be happy to see bed bug researchers test whether DDT currently works on bed bugs.
But I don't think it will happen.
-
spideyjg
oldtimer
Joined: Jul '08
Posts: 3,201offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 2:20:45
#
Login to Send PM
Nobugsonme - 14 minutes ago »
Jim,
I'd be happy to see bed bug researchers test whether DDT currently works on bed bugs.
But I don't think it will happen.Well resistance started in the 40s, DDT usage stopped around '72, resistance still there in the 90's. I don't think further testing is warranted but if a new study would reduce the "DDT is the BB cure all" chorus, test away.
Jim
-
cilecto
oldtimer
Joined: Aug '08
Posts: 3,850offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 7:35:52
#
Login to Send PM
spideyjg - 5 hours ago »
Nobugsonme - 14 minutes ago »
Jim,
I'd be happy to see bed bug researchers test whether DDT currently works on bed bugs.
But I don't think it will happen.Well resistance started in the 40s, DDT usage stopped around '72, resistance still there in the 90's. I don't think further testing is warranted but if a new study would reduce the "DDT is the BB cure all" chorus, test away.
JimNewsweek:
"Nor is there any reason to think it would work better today; according to Jody Gangloff-Kaufmann, an urban entomologist at Cornell, among a wide variety of pesticides tested against bedbugs within the last two years, DDT performed the worst. "ShiningLight:
"Malaria can be dealt with with DDT and it should be allowed"
Newsweek:
"In fact, DDT is still being used, mostly in Africa and Asia, to control malaria, something even some environmentalists have reluctantly endorsed. " (Note: The issue is that USAID will not subsidize its use by other governments, which are free to acquire and use it if they please.)The research is being done. The chorus will just change key or hope that you don't notice. The DDT issue is a "stalking horse" in a larger campaign to discredit environmentalism and free all industry of the burdens imposed in the 60s and 70s. ShiningLight has sidestepped the "big" questions, ie. What's the real number of people dying in the lesser developed world specifically due to the fact that DDT is banned from use (not research) in the US and not by local governments'/NGOs' inability to deliver whatever services are needed, DDT or otherwise (why be precise when you can be sensational and trumpet "3,000,000,000"?). Instead, while dangling the "bait" of "the end of bedbugs" (with no substance backing that up in the rest of her post) she taunts us by asking if "we're sure that DDT won't help us". We have our hands full and can't afford to be recruited as pawns in a campaign that offers us little and whose sponsors probably don't really care much about our well-being.
-
your host
Joined: Mar '07
Posts: 13,692offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 14:39:34
#
Login to Send PM
spideyjg - 5 hours ago »
Well resistance started in the 40s, DDT usage stopped around '72, resistance still there in the 90's. I don't think further testing is warranted but if a new study would reduce the "DDT is the BB cure all" chorus, test away.
JimThat was actually the point I was trying to make, Jim, but wasn't doing so clearly enough. It would be nice to shut down the calls for DDT for bed bugs.
Ci, thanks for the Newsweek soundbite. I stand corrected that the research has been redone and the resistance issue proven to still be a concern today. Some of the media is already there with the DDT resistance issue. In a year or two, hopefully the rest will catch up.
-
ShiningLight
newbite
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 7offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 15:55:20
#
Login to Send PM
cilecto - 8 hours ago »
spideyjg - 5 hours ago »
Nobugsonme - 14 minutes ago »
Jim,
I'd be happy to see bed bug researchers test whether DDT currently works on bed bugs.
But I don't think it will happen.Well resistance started in the 40s, DDT usage stopped around '72, resistance still there in the 90's. I don't think further testing is warranted but if a new study would reduce the "DDT is the BB cure all" chorus, test away.
JimNewsweek:
"Nor is there any reason to think it would work better today; according to Jody Gangloff-Kaufmann, an urban entomologist at Cornell, among a wide variety of pesticides tested against bedbugs within the last two years, DDT performed the worst. "
ShiningLight:
"Malaria can be dealt with with DDT and it should be allowed"
Newsweek:
"In fact, DDT is still being used, mostly in Africa and Asia, to control malaria, something even some environmentalists have reluctantly endorsed. " (Note: The issue is that USAID will not subsidize its use by other governments, which are free to acquire and use it if they please.)
The research is being done. The chorus will just change key or hope that you don't notice. The DDT issue is a "stalking horse" in a larger campaign to discredit environmentalism and free all industry of the burdens imposed in the 60s and 70s. ShiningLight has sidestepped the "big" questions, ie. What's the real number of people dying in the lesser developed world specifically due to the fact that DDT is banned from use (not research) in the US and not by local governments'/NGOs' inability to deliver whatever services are needed, DDT or otherwise (why be precise when you can be sensational and trumpet "3,000,000,000"?). Instead, while dangling the "bait" of "the end of bedbugs" (with no substance backing that up in the rest of her post) she taunts us by asking if "we're sure that DDT won't help us". We have our hands full and can't afford to be recruited as pawns in a campaign that offers us little and whose sponsors probably don't really care much about our well-being.In response: a short video from Dr Rutledge Taylor :
[+] Embed the video Get the Flash Video And as figures seem to be required, here are some from an article by Dr. Elizabeth M. Whelan, president of the American Council on Science and Health- "In Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), DDT spraying had reduced malaria cases from 2.8 million in 1948 to 17 in 1963. After spraying stopped, malaria cases rose sharply, reaching 2.5 million over the next decade."
The full article can be read here:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/246562/deadly-war-against-ddt-elizabeth-m-whelan -
oldtimer
Joined: Apr '07
Posts: 6,718offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 16:44:46
#
Login to Send PM
Hi,
I dont think you will find anyone around here who objects to DDT use for Malaria in developing countries but:
- This is a bedbug related board not a malaria so this subject is off base
- Bedbugs have been proven to be resistant to DDT so it will not help with bedbug cases
Finally if that is Dr Rutledge in that YouTube footage please let me know what brand of crackers he got his PhD from as I know at least one other it would save 3+ years of study to get one.
Your arguements are week and ill informed and I get the feeling that this thread is like having a battle of whits with an unarmed person.
I may have a film crew from the Uk following me over the weekend, if they do make it to NY I will drop by the cinema to illustrate the film as a poor example of hysteria and irrelevance with regards bedbugs.
Stick to the Malaria issue where you will get support and stop trying to support the scallies out there that are selling illegal DDT.
David
-
oldtimer
Joined: Mar '08
Posts: 2,540offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 16:47:11
#
Login to Send PM
DDT is like our president. Most people thought he was going to be effective, and now look at the results.
Sorry .... I couldn't help myself
-
cilecto
oldtimer
Joined: Aug '08
Posts: 3,850offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 17:14:24
#
Login to Send PM
KillerQueen - 26 minutes ago »
DDT is like our president. Most people thought he was going to be effective, and now look at the results.
Sorry .... I couldn't help myself Gosh, I was about to gift wrap some Milanoes…
-
ItchyinAstoria
newbite
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 18offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 17:19:59
#
Login to Send PM
The fact is that pesticides to kill mosquitoes would be HUGELY important in saving lives -- in addition to malaria, dengue fever is on the rise as well. (And there is no drug to treat dengue, nor a vaccine to prevent it. Getting it more than once makes you sicker, not immune. Way to go, pests...)But if bedbugs became resistant to DDT, mosquitoes will eventually too. Some probably are already, since some of the ones around today are probably descended from mosquitoes that were exposed to DDT. We need new technology, and to continue to invest and develop that technology, the same way there is R&D for new drugs, there needs to be R&D for vector control.
-
WGarrow
junior member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 103offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 17:20:28
#
Login to Send PM
KillerQueen - 31 minutes ago »
DDT is like our president. Most people thought he was going to be effective, and now look at the results.
Sorry .... I couldn't help myself But the alternatives have already proven to be ineffective!!! (vote Libertarian lol)
-
oldtimer
Joined: Apr '07
Posts: 6,718offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 17:30:39
#
Login to Send PM
Bring back Regan and cut the tax on jelly beans.
I was always worried that the Bush's would press the big red button to see what would happen and then blame the button for jumping up at their fingers.
David
-
old timer
Joined: May '07
Posts: 978offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 17:49:54
#
Login to Send PM
Oh please don't go down the politricks road, all of you old timers know only too well how easy it is to derail this train from time to time, you have no idea how hard it is for me to be so PC. But to the point already stated by nobugs and others, while DDT may have been maligned by bad science which has cost millions of lives, it will not effect the problem at hand which is bed bugs. Revieving OPs or carbamtes might, but having those actives back in the hands of the general public is scary and even for professionals it would have to be federally restricted and probably non residential which is where it is needed most. Too many "environmental activists" have made there bones on demonizing these materials, which could assist but I agree would need very strict control and as far as the carbamates result in resistance issues themselves within a few years. I mean how many people are misusing half the stuff out there in desperation, lack of understanding or just plain stupidity.
Dam if its not one soap box its another, Sic semper cimex! sorry john. Oh and no help from the Mother England we can mess things up ourselves. -
WGarrow
junior member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 103offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 17:56:54
#
Login to Send PM
This isn't about politics, but a very clever pun is always appreciated!
-
oldtimer
Joined: Apr '07
Posts: 6,718offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 18:35:14
#
Login to Send PM
Hi Winston,
Remind me to chat with you about carbomates when I see you. The spray and prey merchants in the UK have most likley blunted that tool for you already. I had to deal with a 5 times applied property yesterday and there were still active bedbugs. If the manufacturers own staff cant get it right with the product they make there is little hope for the run of the mill PCO's.
The carpets were crispy and aftert he home owner did a decon clean they had chemical burns all up their arms, not a pleasent site to deal with.
David
-
old timer
Joined: May '07
Posts: 978offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 19:30:53
#
Login to Send PM
Actually I'm partial to the Ficam (bendiocarb) WP or dust formulations, the S or EC formulations I believe are much more problematic on many levels. But alas misguided regulators scooped it away a few years before the reemergence of bed bugs as an urban pest
-
your host
Joined: Mar '07
Posts: 13,692offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 20:03:13
#
Login to Send PM
bed-bugscouk - 3 hours ago »
Finally if that is Dr Rutledge in that YouTube footage please let me know what brand of crackers he got his PhD from as I know at least one other it would save 3+ years of study to get one.
Your arguements are week and ill informed and I get the feeling that this thread is like having a battle of wits with an unarmed person.According to some spam the promoters of the film left on a Bollywood website (ahem), Dr. D. Rutledge Taylor is a physician.
-
your host
Joined: Mar '07
Posts: 13,692offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 20:05:37
#
Login to Send PM
bed-bugscouk - 3 hours ago »
I may have a film crew from the Uk following me over the weekend, if they do make it to NY I will drop by the cinema to illustrate the film as a poor example of hysteria and irrelevance with regards bedbugs.Oops!
-
oldtimer
Joined: Jan '08
Posts: 1,170offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 20:58:54
#
Login to Send PM
nobugsonme - 3 hours ago »
Dr. D. Rutledge Taylor is a physician.Well long term readers may already be well aware of the opinions of the advanced knowledge that medical professional have on diagnosing
scabies,dermatitispsoriasisallergiesbraciating euratacariabedbug bites.
I shall not divert this into a late night rant about the inaccuracies of bite diagnostics and will return to my experimentation on the role of leeches in the reduction of the symptoms of bedbug bites.
David
Not sure if I am a smilie fan
-
your host
Joined: Mar '07
Posts: 13,692offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 21:39:55
#
Login to Send PM
Not sure if I am a smilie fan
I don't think I am.
I am happy to keep or remove them based on user feedback -- more exists on this thread.
-
cilecto
oldtimer
Joined: Aug '08
Posts: 3,850offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 23:12:01
#
Login to Send PM
Nobugsonme - 3 hours ago <a href="http://bedbugger.com/forum/topic/new-documentary-proves-ddt-is-safethe-end-of-bed-bugs-is-coming#post-
According to some spam the promoters of the film left on a Bollywood website (ahem), Dr. D. Rutledge Taylor is a physician.He seems to have a following in LA, dates singer Deborah Gibson and is behind a sleep aid called "night kap".
http://www.nightkap.com/ -
cilecto
oldtimer
Joined: Aug '08
Posts: 3,850offline
Posted 2 years ago
Wed Sep 15 2010 23:14:37
#
Login to Send PM
Rutledge and Taylor are also names of Declaration of Independence signers/streets in Brooklyn's Williamsburg section.
-
oldtimer
Joined: Mar '08
Posts: 2,540offline
Posted 2 years ago
Thu Sep 16 2010 0:27:14
#
Login to Send PM
Now Now!!! Its just a joke kids. Truth is, I'm not a fan of government no matter what side of the table you sit on.
-
your host
Joined: Mar '07
Posts: 13,692offline
Posted 2 years ago
Thu Sep 16 2010 0:34:11
#
Login to Send PM
KillerQueen - 6 minutes ago »
Truth is, I'm not a fan of government no matter what side of the table you sit on.What if there are mint milanos on the table?
-
oldtimer
Joined: Mar '08
Posts: 2,540offline
Posted 2 years ago
Thu Sep 16 2010 1:34:36
#
Login to Send PM
Double Stuffed Oreos .. got me tonight.
-
bugnut
senior member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 528offline
Posted 2 years ago
Thu Sep 16 2010 9:05:18
#
Login to Send PM
Killer -
Do you ever eat homemade cookies? All those store bought ones are full of chemicals! Not that you don't have your share of exposure to chemicals. Do you glow in the dark?
BTW how do you think Ron Paul would have handled the BB issue? I am sure McCain would not have needed to tent the west wing (who was going to visit anyway?)
-
Jacksfullofaces
member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 163offline
Posted 2 years ago
Thu Sep 16 2010 9:31:59
#
Login to Send PM
Well long term readers may already be well aware of the opinions of the advanced knowledge that medical professional have on diagnosing scabies, dermatitis psoriasis allergies braciating euratacaria bedbug bites.
My doctor doesn't have this problem. Au contraire his difficulty is convincing his patients that their skin issues are due to bedbug bites.
Jacks -
oldtimer
Joined: Jan '08
Posts: 1,170offline
Posted 2 years ago
Thu Sep 16 2010 17:24:35
#
Login to Send PM
Jacksfullofaces - 7 hours ago »
My doctor doesn't have this problem. Au contraire his difficulty is convincing his patients that their skin issues are due to bedbug bites.
JacksYes there is always the exception to prove the rule. In fact we had a visitor at the facility the other day. Bitten in a London hostel on the first night he took a trip to an NHS walk in centre where they not only diagnosed immediately as bedbugs they then directed him to our website and decon facility. Two loads in the PackTite later his holiday resumed with added reading materials on how to avoid bedbugs when travelling.
David
-
ShiningLight
newbite
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 7offline
Posted 2 years ago
Thu Sep 16 2010 18:06:35
#
Login to Send PM
So...are any of you willing to take on the challenge of seeing this new documentary? It opens tomorrow, and if you happen to be in NY why not go along and see it for yourselves.....then, we can have a more informed discussion. OK? Gaultlet thrown down..Any takers?
-
cilecto
oldtimer
Joined: Aug '08
Posts: 3,850offline
Posted 2 years ago
Thu Sep 16 2010 18:32:52
#
Login to Send PM
Put it on YouTube.
-
buggyinsocal
oldtimer
Joined: Jun '08
Posts: 2,440offline
Posted 2 years ago
Thu Sep 16 2010 19:21:14
#
Login to Send PM
Ah, the old false dichotomy chestnut.
For those of you who missed out on this in your second semester of first-year composition classes, or those of you who placed out of comp and missed it, I will explain.
The false dichotomy is one of the classic logical fallacies. Logical fallacies are often indulged in by politicians, advertisements, and other arguers who are more concerned with persuading people to a cause and less concerned about things like scruples and accuracy when it comes to getting people to their side of the issue.
The false dichotomy takes a complex situation and reduces it down to an either/or.
For example, when then President Bush said that countries were either with or against the United States in its so-called War on Terror, he was using a false dichotomy by implying that every country either had to fight terrorism the way the US government wanted to, or it was sympathizing with the terrorists and was therefore complicit in terrorism. There are several other possible positions on the issue, but it was presented as an either or.
The OP's remark suggests that anyone who isn't interested in seeing the film must be a coward.
As far as logical fallacies go, that's a very deft stroke. It manages to pull off an ad hominem, a red herring, and a false dichotomy all in one:
Ad hominem attacks call into question the character of the person rather than the quality of the argument itself. Red herring arguments introduce off topic distractions to try to bamboozle the readers or viewers into agreeing (Hey, wait, no, I'm not afraid!), and the false dichotomy part is the part where the OP's comment suggests that if we don't go see the film, it's because we're afraid.
Never mind that some of us 1)already have weekend plans 2)live too far away and 3)don't want to attend a screening that will likely get us spammed with more info dumps full of dubious evidence at best.
Trifecta!
However, this is not a trifecta that makes me more inclined to be sympathetic to the content being advanced. I, wild and crazy person that I am, tend to respond best to logically sound arguments that treat me with respect, which the comment above is decidedly not.
(Can I get a regular virtual Milano for typing all that up?)
-
cilecto
oldtimer
Joined: Aug '08
Posts: 3,850offline
Posted 2 years ago
Thu Sep 16 2010 19:44:40
#
Login to Send PM
Buggy, you deserve a lifetime of VMs.
-
ShiningLight
newbite
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 7offline
Posted 2 years ago
Fri Sep 17 2010 15:08:13
#
Login to Send PM
buggyinsocal - 19 hours ago »
Ah, the old false dichotomy chestnut.
For those of you who missed out on this in your second semester of first-year composition classes, or those of you who placed out of comp and missed it, I will explain.
The false dichotomy is one of the classic logical fallacies. Logical fallacies are often indulged in by politicians, advertisements, and other arguers who are more concerned with persuading people to a cause and less concerned about things like scruples and accuracy when it comes to getting people to their side of the issue.
The false dichotomy takes a complex situation and reduces it down to an either/or.
For example, when then President Bush said that countries were either with or against the United States in its so-called War on Terror, he was using a false dichotomy by implying that every country either had to fight terrorism the way the US government wanted to, or it was sympathizing with the terrorists and was therefore complicit in terrorism. There are several other possible positions on the issue, but it was presented as an either or.
The OP's remark suggests that anyone who isn't interested in seeing the film must be a coward.
As far as logical fallacies go, that's a very deft stroke. It manages to pull off an ad hominem, a red herring, and a false dichotomy all in one:
Ad hominem attacks call into question the character of the person rather than the quality of the argument itself. Red herring arguments introduce off topic distractions to try to bamboozle the readers or viewers into agreeing (Hey, wait, no, I'm not afraid!), and the false dichotomy part is the part where the OP's comment suggests that if we don't go see the film, it's because we're afraid.
Never mind that some of us 1)already have weekend plans 2)live too far away and 3)don't want to attend a screening that will likely get us spammed with more info dumps full of dubious evidence at best.
Trifecta!
However, this is not a trifecta that makes me more inclined to be sympathetic to the content being advanced. I, wild and crazy person that I am, tend to respond best to logically sound arguments that treat me with respect, which the comment above is decidedly not.
(Can I get a regular virtual Milano for typing all that up?)Firstly, let me assure you that no disrepect was intended. I was simply trying to flush out ONE professional pest exterminator from this forum who lived in NY and who would be willing to actually see the documentary and provide an honest review - either positive or negative on this forum. Is that too much too ask for? Perhaps.
PS. Thank you for the new word - trifecta. Hadn't come across it before.
Reply
You must log in to post.
