Millions have died to placate the environmental movement's religious tenet that DDT is bad. It turns out DDT isn't the danger it was said to be. At the time in the early 1970s something like 9,000 pages of testimony on DDT were produced which conclusively showed it not to be a major risk. The benefits of using it against mosquitoes spreading disease clearly outweighed its potential drawbacks. I remember hearing of a guy drinking a glass of DDT straight like I do vodka. But some environmental greenie weenie at the EPA (begun by Nixon!)with a funny name, something like William Knucklehouse, disregarded the report, if that's a word, and banned the substance in 1972. Feelings over facts, that's the liberal way. They emote. It was the alar of its day. And what a disaster that has been! Yet the greenie weenies still haven't learned. For example I remember reading a Time Mag article recently on the 50 worst inventions and DDT was one of 'em. The UN, specifically the World Health Organization, has taken it off its banned substances; yet many gov'ts still won't permit its use. Source: WHO Endorses DDT to Combat Malaria in Africa Another source: without DDT malaria is a big problem: spiked-science | Article | Without DDT, malaria bites back While some liberals worry about Sikhs being called "f---ing ragheads" by mean people, I'm more concerned about sickness and death. The left has been utterly unrepentent, naive, and completely uninterested in reviewing a momentous decision several decades ago that demonstrably has taken millions of lives. Thanks to _Silent Spring_ by Rachel Carson. I guess ideas really do have consequences as Richard Weaver argued in his book of the same title.