Friday, November 12, 2010

3 Billion and Counting and Me!

This first appeared in the fall 2010 issue of the Ohio Pest Management Association's quarterly newsletter, The Standard.

By Rich Kozlovich

Rachel Louise Carson (May 27, 1907 – April 14, 1964) lived her early years in Springdale, Pennsylvania, near Pittsburgh, and graduated from the Pittsburgh Pennsylvania College for Women (Chatham College) in 1929, later earning a master’s degree in zoology from John Hopkins University. She is the author of “Silent Spring” (her 4th book), published in 1962 and considered by some to be one of the most damaging books of the 20th century.

Her claims in this book about decreases in mammal and avian wildlife as a result of DDT were simply wrong. One of the many claims by Carson was that robins were in danger of extinction as a result of continued use of DDT. The truth was that there were more robins in the DDT era than before. And according to Audubon bird charts, there many have been as many as 47 times more. World renowned Ornithologist Roger Tory Peterson stated that the robin was the most abundant bird in North America around the same time that “Silent Spring” came out.

None of the predictions regarding cancer made by Carson ever came true. She herself died of breast cancer on April 14, 1964, at the age of 56, two years after her book came out. She did not live long enough to see real scientists using real science to shred her claims. Unfortunately, this gave impetus to her unscientific statements.

Considered the mother of the modern environmental movement, her radical naturalism became the standard for the movement. She taught that the environment had done all of the shaping and directing on the Earth and it was an act of arrogance for man to attempt to control nature. She is still lauded in various encyclopedias as a thorough, meticulous, highly qualified scientist. Those that have attacked her are presented as self-serving, large chemical companies.

Although the chemical companies did attack her (rightly so), there were also sincere, dedicated scientists such as Dr. J. Gordon Edwards, who had no ax to grind, philosophically or financially, and was just as concerned as Carson about large corporations and their designs on nature. Dr. Edwards was initially thrilled when her book first appeared. As he read “Silent Spring,” his enthusiasm waned when he realized that there was information in the book that simply wasn’t true. He noted “she was playing fast and loose with the facts.” Dr. Edwards, who considered himself to be an environmentalist, believed that “environmentalism didn’t need fraud to justify itself.”

Over the years, research on Carson’s work has shown this to be so. In spite of all the evidence showing that her work should not have been taken seriously, Carson was posthumously awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1980.
• Carson advocated and promoted ideas that simply are not true.
• She claimed that DDT was a serious carcinogenic agent that with continued use would eventually impact almost 100 percent of the population.
• She claimed that DDT was causing egg shell thinning and as a result the bird population was decreasing.
• She played fast and loose with the facts and made inappropriate citations.
I was born in 1946, and like Carson, I grew up in southwest Pennsylvania. I can understand Carson’s fears for the environment. The effects on the local environment from pollution emanating from coal mines, steel mills and coke ovens in those days would make anyone concerned. Believe me when I tell you that you haven’t seen water pollution until you see a sulfur creek, or air pollution until you have see an old time coke oven. Having seen and experienced all of this, however, is still no excuse for dishonesty.

Approximately five years ago I became aware of a web site,, created by Dr. D. Rutledge Taylor, who was making a feature documentary film (this film was shot in the purest and most respected form of artistic film making called vérité style, meaning no script and with interaction between the filmmaker and subject). The film debunks the lies about DDT, and makes clear once and for all the devastation the America’s ban on DDT caused worldwide. After posting comments on Doc’s web site for a while, he sent me a personal e-mail asking; who are you? We have communicated and shared information ever since. As a result, I was invited to the world premiere of his documentary movie, “3 Billion and Counting,” in New York City on September 17th, and I was pleased to find that I was listed separately in the credits as the Pest Control Consultant. I also finally got to meet the Doc and his producer Helene Udy, who lost a lifelong friend because of her stand regarding this film and its message.

 Dr. D. Rutledge Taylor, Helene Udy and Me.  

The research that went into this film was a massive undertaking. Oftentimes we will read that there were over 9,000 pages of testimony in the DDT hearing presided over by Judge Sweeney. The Doc managed to find the original documents that have been stored all of these years at the National Archives. He knows they were the originals because he cut the wrappings himself – they had never been opened. He will be posting many of these 9,000 pages online along with all of the comments made by Judge Sweeney. . . and I believe that there were 90 pages in that ruling. That testimony makes it very clear that the ban on DDT was not a scientific decision, but a political decision made by the first director of the Environmental Protection Agency, William Ruckelshaus, which he later admitted.

The “stars” in the film included: Doctors Elizabeth Whelan and Gill Ross of the American Council on Science and Health; Dr. Paul Driessen, author of, “Eco-Imperialism, Green Power, Black Death;” Richard Tren, a Director of Africa Fighting Malaria and co-author of, “The Excellent Powder: DDT’s Political and Scientific History;” Dr. Dennis Avery of the Hudson Institute; Roy Innes and a number of his associates from C.O.R.E. (some of whom have suffered from malaria themselves and lost family members to malaria). All participants outline the real story about the devastation caused by the unscientific ban on DDT.

Richard Tren and Me

Dr. Rutledge Taylor dedicated this film to Dr. Edwards, who single-handedly kept hope alive for millions in the third world by having the courage to be the lone voice in the wilderness in favor of keeping DDT, and that it might not fall prey to the POPS treaty.

Dr. Edwards suffered personal attacks for years because of his unbending stand on DDT, lecturing on this subject for the rest of his life, helping prove that all the claims about DDT were lies. Without his efforts, the fate of so many innocent women and children would have been sealed. Dr. Rutledge Taylor states, “It is why I dedicated this film to him/his tireless efforts. . . He simply could/would not stop, as his wife says in the end of the film, "you just don’t give up on something you KNOW is right.” I have much gratitude for this man. To me, HE should get the Nobel Peace Prize.”

What I find ironic is that Dr. Edwards, who can be credited with saving an untold number of lives because of his stand on DDT, is mostly unknown. Yet Rachel Carson is lauded, praised, and even has schools named after her, in spite of the fact that hundreds of millions have suffered or died as a result of her book.

Dr. Edwards was among that group of scientists who drank DDT every day for a year to prove that there would be no detrimental effects. He finally died at the age of 84 from a heart attack while climbing his favorite mountain in Glacier National Park.

In this feature documentary film, Dr. Rutledge Taylor addresses all the claims, from cancer to bird shell thinning and more. Please see it when you get the chance. This is a film that should be seen by every regulator and legislator, along with their staffs. Her pseudo-science ideologies are still taught in high schools this very day! My hope is that this film will rectify that.



  1. Thank you for this article. I went to the site and found a wealth of facts pertaining to the harmlessness of DDT.
    What I do not understand, and maybe you could educate me, is WHY with all this known information, is there no one testing DDT on bed bugs? The only way to find out if it will work, is to try it out. Since all the bunk we were told for 40 years, has now been proven to be bunk, what are we waiting for? You will obviously not get the EPA saying it's OK to use it .. they banned it in the states when we were not even using it for things like bedbugs. I'll bet the farmers (what's left of them) would applaud bringing back the safest and cheapest product, DDT, to help them with insects ruining their crops!

  2. Normally I don't allow any Anonymous comments, but I am making an exception this time in order to answer your questions.

    In order to understand my answer you must understand exactly what resistance is! It is not a mutation or an evolutionary twist. Resistance is "genetic phenomenon" where-in a percentage of a target population already has the resistant gene in their make-up. As time goes by all the non-resistant pests are eliminated and the only ones left breeding in the environment are resistant, so eventually all of their offspring are resistant.

    In days gone by DDT was tested on pests that had become resistant, and it worked once again…but only for a very short while because there was now a solid resistant population that rebounded very quickly.

    Resistance is the pattern in nature. Plants have an arsenal of pesticides they naturally produce to ward off attack by insects, and they need them, because insects develop resistance to what they are using to defend themselves. When that happens they produce other chemicals insects aren't resistant to. Bacteria have developed resistance to many of the antibiotics that we are currently using, and there are some staph infections that are now almost uncontrollable.

    After resistance to DDT developed in bed bugs everyone went to other products, primarily malation, an organophosphate pesticide. We also had carbamates that worked, but we lost both categories to the Food Quality Protection Act. That left us primarily with synthetic pyrethroids; which draws the same kind of immune response that DDT did. It is called cross resistance, and it works both ways. As a result the more resistant to synthetic pyrethroids bed bugs became the more resistant they would become to DDT in spite of the fact that they haven’ t come in contact with it in this nation for over 30 years.

    There has been some work done by one researcher that I know of and his view confirms this. As for farming; there is so much misinformation and emotional baggage about DDT out there that I doubt if that will ever happen. The reason to revoke the ban is because it was an invalid action and it would help the third world tremendously to fight mosquito borne diseases.

  3. Thank you for the Great info here! I, too, have been looking into THE FACTS ABOUT DDT. I'm very impressed with Dr. Rutledge's work! His indepth look at malaria and DDT is a REAL EYE-OPENER; A MUST SEE! It's time TO STOP DENYING THE TRUTH AND BRING DDT BACK. It's the Safest, Cheapest, and Most Effective way TO ERADICATE BLOODSUCKERS.

  4. Glad you did not ignore me because I used Anonymous. It was an "option" and I took it! LOL
    Thanks for your answer.
    I also wondered .. and maybe I am confused .. but I thought I had read at the site that even if an insect is resistant .. it could still be "repelled" by DDT. I think Dr. Taylor was referring to mosquito's .. but could this not apply to bedbugs as well?
    I would surely like to see more education out there surrounding DDT. We have not had the facts for so long, I think most do not know what to believe at this moment. The facts .. which I found at the web site .. surely does help one go in the right direction.

  5. DDT works on mosquitoes in three ways. It kills, it repels and it disorientates them…much the way alcohol will work on a drunk who needs something to hang on to keep from falling down. Mosquitoes will be so disorientated that they will sit on a wall and just stay there. If mosquitoes sit on DDT long enough they will die.

    Resistance doesn’t necessarily mean immunity. Although there are bed bugs that are so resistant to synthetic pyrethroids that for all practical purposes they are immune and there may be mosquitoes that may also fall into this category to DDT.

    Repellency has never been noted in bed bugs to DDT in the past, and it has never come up in the discussions I have had with researchers, and they apparently haven’t noticed it.

    Here are two web sites that list a large number of articles dealing with DDT.

    1. Debunkasaurus, DDT -
    2. Ohio Pest Management Associations, Insight on the Issues -


  6. Having seen the 3 Billion and Counting movie, I must say the question that is bugging me most is why DDT manufacturing plants not being built right now to help these people? Any views on this anyone?

  7. OneLightHouse,

    Today…Wednesday, March 2, 2011, Roger Bate and Richard Tren posted an article entitled, “UN Falsehoods Cost Lives”. Here is an excerpt from that article that I think can really explain what goes on.

    “After a Chinese producer of DDT shut down in the run-up to the 2008 Beijing Olympics, DDT is now only produced by a state-owned company in India that is not particularly adept at influencing public health policy. There is little prospect that a new DDT producer will start production when the UN has publicly vowed to shut down DDT use in less than 10 years. African mothers and their vulnerable children have no voice. While a few bold ministers of health from Namibia, Guyana, and elsewhere have spoken out defending their right to use DDT, their appeals are drowned out and dominated by Northern interests, who have given environmental activists within UNEP and GEF considerable power and millions of dollars.”

    “One might think insecticide companies would defend DDT, recognizing that important principles of sound science and evidence-based public health policies are at stake. Yet in their myopic way, industry lobby group CropLife International is lining up behind UNEP and pushing for an early elimination of DDT, claiming of course that their own products are suitable alternatives.”

    The chemical pesticide manufacturers were as responsible for the demise of DDT as the activists, Richard Nixon and the EPA. They are also bear a share of responsibility for its continued discommendation. A few years ago the top guy at Bayer, who is against DDT’s return, admitted that the return of DDT would impact them financially.

    Rich K.