Bookmark Media1.5 resource : http://toolmanagement.next.ecollege.com/tools/third

Question

Bookmark Media1.5 resource : http://toolmanagement.next.ecollege.com/tools/thirdparty/blti.ed?launch=LS:TPI:TPI_PF:TestLink:LearningStudioLink:PLSCoCoEnvSci30:media.pearsoncmg.com/pls/products/coco/environmental_science_ap/1256896470/presentations/ge_es_01_splash.html?fromLms=true View Science Technology and Society: DDT Activity: http://media.pearsoncmg.com/bc/bc_campbell_biology_7/media/interactivemedia/activities/load.html?50&A Based on this information, form an opinion about whether the use of DDT is ethical. Write a one-page (250-word) response. Make sure that you rationally analyze and explain your position. Be sure to cite any sources you use in APA format.

Explanation / Answer

DDT stands for dichloro dipheny trichloroethane.It was initially used as a pesticide and eventually it was also found to be an effective against insects which caused malaria and typhus.It was used as a pesticide and anti malaria for several years and then ,DDT was banned in U.S and then in the whole world,stating it to be dangerous for humans,so the question arises that,did the manufacturers violate ethical standards?, initially ,No because it didn't violate the ethical standards because the environmental impact it would have was not understood.DDT had served it's purpose as an effective pesticide and helped saves millions of lives.However,the harmful chemical effects of DDT were discovered.

So,what should have actually been done ,instead of completely banning the substance?,The DDT manufacturing and selling should have been put to a limit and restricted for farming but should have been allowed for use against malaria in necessary amounts,even if USA banns the use of DDT ,it should not be blindly followed by the rest of the world.In US,the use of DDT was not for tackling malaria,but as a pesticide. Unlike other parts of the world like Africa and south east Asia , US doesn't face a malaria problem,some regions of Africa and Asia face serious malaria problem,it is here where DDT should find it's use.It happens to be the cheapest,fastest and an effective solution to save millions of lives in these countries.The decision taken by EPA to ban DDT was a right decision,because it has more disadvantages than advantages in America. America no longer faced malaria problem and lives wouldn't cost if DDT was banned,here other less harmful pesticides can be used.So ,is the ability to save lives worth the environmental risk?in my opinion yes,for the time being,as it can be an effective agent in some parts of the world,which don't have the capital to invest in the safest and the most effective agent.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse B
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.