We don't get it here often either; but DDT was banned worldwide. As to the fire ants, we didn't have them here either until the 1930s (they're believed to have come into Mobile on a cargo ship)
UK Permethrine Source?
- Thread starter Jaeger
- Start date
We don't get it here often either; but DDT was banned worldwide. As to the fire ants, we didn't have them here either until the 1930s (they're believed to have come into Mobile on a cargo ship)
DDT was devastating the entire planet.
Fire ants don't do well in a sodden, rather cool, northern climate….thankfully
though London does have something of an issue in some areas with false scorpions I believe, and parakeets are as familiar a sight as crows elsewhere.
We did have malaria (and cholera) here in the past, but we know the causes of both now, and our climate helps immeasurably to control too.
If midges ever pick up something horrible we'll be in a world of hurt though.
M
Fire ants don't do well in a sodden, rather cool, northern climate….thankfully
though London does have something of an issue in some areas with false scorpions I believe, and parakeets are as familiar a sight as crows elsewhere.We did have malaria (and cholera) here in the past, but we know the causes of both now, and our climate helps immeasurably to control too.
If midges ever pick up something horrible we'll be in a world of hurt though.
M
DDT was devastating the entire planet.
Fire ants don't do well in a sodden, rather cool, northern climate….thankfully
LOL. It's pretty "sodden" here as well, but you're right about the cold.
My view on DDT is that it shouldn't have been completely banned. Granted it should be extremely controlled and it's use limited to areas (such as tropical zones with high malarial rates) on a cost/benefits basis.
Interesting thing in the news I saw after reading this thread. Seems that the distribution of treated mosquito nets in parts of Africa has driven a mutation and hybridization of two types of mosquito which is now resistant to the chemical treatment.
Maybe we're going about this the wrong way.
Maybe we need to speed up our resistance to the blighters.
Is the sickle cell disease not supposed to offer some benefits agin them though ?
M
Maybe we need to speed up our resistance to the blighters.
Is the sickle cell disease not supposed to offer some benefits agin them though ?
M
Not that I've heard. In any case, Sickle Cell Anemia in and of itself usually reduces lifespan to 40 - 60 years even in developed countries. Shorter in the countries where the gene is more prevalent.
The research that helped put a stop to DDT was highly flawed, and the decision influenced by the movie The Silent Spring.
As Santa writes, a controlled use would work. Indeed, there is talk to start using it in countries with a high prevskence if insect bourne diseases, mainly in Africa and South East Asia including China.
As Santa writes, a controlled use would work. Indeed, there is talk to start using it in countries with a high prevskence if insect bourne diseases, mainly in Africa and South East Asia including China.
" In 1954 the protective effect against malaria of sickle-cell trait was described."
Serjeant GR (Dec 2010). "One hundred years of sickle cell disease.". British journal of haematology 151 (5): 425–9. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2141.2010.08419.x. PMID 20955412.
"It is also endemic among Tharu people of Nepal and India; not only among African populations, however, they have a sevenfold lower incidence of malaria despite living in a malaria infested zone."
"Sickle-cell disease occurs more commonly among people whose ancestors lived in tropical and sub-tropical sub-Saharan regions where malaria is or was common. Where malaria is common, carrying a single sickle-cell allele (trait) confers a selective advantage—in other words, being a heterozygote is advantageous. Specifically, humans with one of the two alleles of sickle-cell disease show less severe symptoms when infected with malaria "
Not advocating that everyone ends up with sickle cell, but if one adaptation seems to offer something of value, perhaps another less individually devastating could be developed ?
M
Serjeant GR (Dec 2010). "One hundred years of sickle cell disease.". British journal of haematology 151 (5): 425–9. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2141.2010.08419.x. PMID 20955412.
"It is also endemic among Tharu people of Nepal and India; not only among African populations, however, they have a sevenfold lower incidence of malaria despite living in a malaria infested zone."
"Sickle-cell disease occurs more commonly among people whose ancestors lived in tropical and sub-tropical sub-Saharan regions where malaria is or was common. Where malaria is common, carrying a single sickle-cell allele (trait) confers a selective advantage—in other words, being a heterozygote is advantageous. Specifically, humans with one of the two alleles of sickle-cell disease show less severe symptoms when infected with malaria "
Not advocating that everyone ends up with sickle cell, but if one adaptation seems to offer something of value, perhaps another less individually devastating could be developed ?
M
Thanks for that info Mary. It's still a bit disturbing though; it almost seems as if the answer is gene manipulation? Worse still, a chance for somebody to develop (or attempt to) biological weapons targeting specific ethnic groups.
I just saw this thread and thought I'd contribute some additional information on Permethrin (and all other chemical substances actually).
I work with EU Chemical Regulations and can tell you that the site for getting chemical substance hazard information in the EU is run by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA): the REACH Classification and Labelling (CLP) database - http://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database
This is the EU database of all classified substances in the EU/EEA, many of which have been revised over the last 8 years due to the new REACH and CLP regulations.
There is also the REACH registered substance database (http://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/registered-substances) which details those substances which have been registered and are therefore allowed to be placed on the EU market (manufactured in EU/EEA or imported into EU/EEA) at more than 100 tonnes per year. Lower yearly tonnage substances are due to be registered by June 2018 so may not be on that database yet.
(You may need some chemical background knowledge to understand some of the information in these databases).
The exact uses of every single substance on the REACH database has been assessed in great detail to ensure each particular use is considered safe for humans and the environment. In the example of Permethrin, in order for it to be used as a component in insect repellents in the EU, the specifics of that use would be assessed and only allowed if considered safe. That assessment will have been enough to limit the concentration of Permethrin you can use in a consumer product.
Professional uses and Industrial uses will very likely allow higher concentrations to be used as it is possible to define better control measures for people working in those groups.
Permethrin is not banned in the EU/EEA, (I have a UK client who manufactures the stuff in significant quantities) however, its specific USES may well be limited and defined to such an extent that other products end up being more effective as insect repellents.
Personally I'd rather not use Permethrin on myself or my gear because it is an Environmentally Hazardous Substance and any use of such a substance will find its way into the environment some how.
Rhetorical question: If we all claim to love nature and the environment, can we justify using these types of chemicals to keep mozzies off?
(yes I know ticks etc are a massive problem and cause Lyme disease so maybe a few of us can justify it better than most).
I work with EU Chemical Regulations and can tell you that the site for getting chemical substance hazard information in the EU is run by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA): the REACH Classification and Labelling (CLP) database - http://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database
This is the EU database of all classified substances in the EU/EEA, many of which have been revised over the last 8 years due to the new REACH and CLP regulations.
There is also the REACH registered substance database (http://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/registered-substances) which details those substances which have been registered and are therefore allowed to be placed on the EU market (manufactured in EU/EEA or imported into EU/EEA) at more than 100 tonnes per year. Lower yearly tonnage substances are due to be registered by June 2018 so may not be on that database yet.
(You may need some chemical background knowledge to understand some of the information in these databases).
The exact uses of every single substance on the REACH database has been assessed in great detail to ensure each particular use is considered safe for humans and the environment. In the example of Permethrin, in order for it to be used as a component in insect repellents in the EU, the specifics of that use would be assessed and only allowed if considered safe. That assessment will have been enough to limit the concentration of Permethrin you can use in a consumer product.
Professional uses and Industrial uses will very likely allow higher concentrations to be used as it is possible to define better control measures for people working in those groups.
Permethrin is not banned in the EU/EEA, (I have a UK client who manufactures the stuff in significant quantities) however, its specific USES may well be limited and defined to such an extent that other products end up being more effective as insect repellents.
Personally I'd rather not use Permethrin on myself or my gear because it is an Environmentally Hazardous Substance and any use of such a substance will find its way into the environment some how.
Rhetorical question: If we all claim to love nature and the environment, can we justify using these types of chemicals to keep mozzies off?
(yes I know ticks etc are a massive problem and cause Lyme disease so maybe a few of us can justify it better than most).
Rickwhite, do you have an alternative?
I personally do not use the stuff as I am immune to the toxin, and think the chance of me catching Lyme's a second time is pretty slim ( plus I can recognize the symptoms easily, and treat myself accordingly) but many people here feel the need for the protection.
I personally do not use the stuff as I am immune to the toxin, and think the chance of me catching Lyme's a second time is pretty slim ( plus I can recognize the symptoms easily, and treat myself accordingly) but many people here feel the need for the protection.
Sorry Janne, I'm no expert in the type of products so can't advise on any alternatives. I'm sure there are plenty of people on here who have alternative suggestions and personal preferences
Many of us have been using oldfashioned deterrents like tar/oil mix, but those do not kill the little buggers. Permethrine does kill, that is why it is so good and useful!
Rick, thank you for such a response. Its really good to hear from someone involved in the Chemical Agency. Working within aerospace REACh has been rather a large pain in the posterior at times. I have wondered what the outcome will be in a couple of years when the UK is out of the EU, probably nothing much.
Anyway, regarding what permethrin repels, outside of the tropics it is the ticks rather than mosquitoes and midges that are the main reason for using it. The US Forestry Service did some extensive trials a goodly few years ago now and found that DEET, the standard big-gun mosquito repellent was not particularly effective against ticks and Permethrin was much more so. I know two people who have been bitten by Lyme infected ticks within the last month and have been on antibiotics, but only after quite significant arguments with completely uninformed NHS medical staff who knew nothing about Lyme, its transmission, symptoms, treatment or seriousness. Both had the classic rash and had found the tick attached. The rash is not always present, and given our health system, I would not expect someone with early Lyme symptoms and no rash, even with a tick as evidence, would receive the necessary treatment. Therefore robust protection is the best options and so far, there is nothing close to the effectiveness of Permethrin clothing treatment.
Anyway, regarding what permethrin repels, outside of the tropics it is the ticks rather than mosquitoes and midges that are the main reason for using it. The US Forestry Service did some extensive trials a goodly few years ago now and found that DEET, the standard big-gun mosquito repellent was not particularly effective against ticks and Permethrin was much more so. I know two people who have been bitten by Lyme infected ticks within the last month and have been on antibiotics, but only after quite significant arguments with completely uninformed NHS medical staff who knew nothing about Lyme, its transmission, symptoms, treatment or seriousness. Both had the classic rash and had found the tick attached. The rash is not always present, and given our health system, I would not expect someone with early Lyme symptoms and no rash, even with a tick as evidence, would receive the necessary treatment. Therefore robust protection is the best options and so far, there is nothing close to the effectiveness of Permethrin clothing treatment.
Similar threads
