I read a book once where some asshat tried to persuade people DDT was still better than Malaria and the we should continue using it. He also was a climate change denier, so yeah. Guy was a fucking idiot or just paid very well to lie.
Paul Offit is a well-known scientific skeptic and vaccine advocate. To the best of my knowledge, not a climate change denier. I think his criticisms of Rachel Carson are a bit over the top and unfair, but the point here is that many scientists disagree with her findings. This isn't as clear-cut as climate change.
For what its worth, Carson's work, right or wrong, led to the creation of the EPA in the US, and raised our collective awareness of the environmental impact of pesticides. This is a good thing, regardless of whether her specific conclusions about DDT were right or wrong. The counter-argument about whether or not the DDT ban was responsible for millions of people dying is that mosquitos were developing DDT resistance, and continued use would have had diminishing returns anyway. Nonetheless, this remains a hot debate within the scientific community.
I'm definitely going to have to take a closer look at this one before the book is published. Interesting thing about Paul; I've interviewed him before (this piece: https://bodyforwife.com/get-your-fucking-flu-shot/) and really liked him but did he ever disappoint when Covid showed up. He really took the side of "this isn't going to be that bad / lock downs are far worse / don't let this affect your life" kind of shit. And I don't know if he ever came around but he held onto that position for a long time, even when people were starting to die by the thousands. SciBabe was super pissed at him.
I didn’t know that about Dr Offit. It just goes to remind us that we shouldn’t grow too comfortable trusting a single source, as even scientists we trust can be wrong (and even double-down on their wrongness because of ego). The takeaway here is just that Rachel Carson’s book is highly controversial among many scientists (Offit just being a bit more vocal) and I think that honestly representing her work requires looking into that. There is no denying the impact of her work, however.
You may be thinking about Michael Crichton. He was on a crusade against her for years.
But her book is controversial nonetheless. Plenty of actual scientists criticize Carson's work. She made claims not supported by evidence (such as that DDT causes cancer in humans, which is unproven). There was an impact to birds, specifically, though the severity of that may not have been as great as she claimed. I think many scientists unfairly maligned her, but that doesn't mean she was right, either.
I read a book once where some asshat tried to persuade people DDT was still better than Malaria and the we should continue using it. He also was a climate change denier, so yeah. Guy was a fucking idiot or just paid very well to lie.
Paul Offit is a well-known scientific skeptic and vaccine advocate. To the best of my knowledge, not a climate change denier. I think his criticisms of Rachel Carson are a bit over the top and unfair, but the point here is that many scientists disagree with her findings. This isn't as clear-cut as climate change.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-rachel-carson-cost-millions-of-people-their-lives
For what its worth, Carson's work, right or wrong, led to the creation of the EPA in the US, and raised our collective awareness of the environmental impact of pesticides. This is a good thing, regardless of whether her specific conclusions about DDT were right or wrong. The counter-argument about whether or not the DDT ban was responsible for millions of people dying is that mosquitos were developing DDT resistance, and continued use would have had diminishing returns anyway. Nonetheless, this remains a hot debate within the scientific community.
I'm definitely going to have to take a closer look at this one before the book is published. Interesting thing about Paul; I've interviewed him before (this piece: https://bodyforwife.com/get-your-fucking-flu-shot/) and really liked him but did he ever disappoint when Covid showed up. He really took the side of "this isn't going to be that bad / lock downs are far worse / don't let this affect your life" kind of shit. And I don't know if he ever came around but he held onto that position for a long time, even when people were starting to die by the thousands. SciBabe was super pissed at him.
I didn’t know that about Dr Offit. It just goes to remind us that we shouldn’t grow too comfortable trusting a single source, as even scientists we trust can be wrong (and even double-down on their wrongness because of ego). The takeaway here is just that Rachel Carson’s book is highly controversial among many scientists (Offit just being a bit more vocal) and I think that honestly representing her work requires looking into that. There is no denying the impact of her work, however.
You may be thinking about Michael Crichton. He was on a crusade against her for years.
But her book is controversial nonetheless. Plenty of actual scientists criticize Carson's work. She made claims not supported by evidence (such as that DDT causes cancer in humans, which is unproven). There was an impact to birds, specifically, though the severity of that may not have been as great as she claimed. I think many scientists unfairly maligned her, but that doesn't mean she was right, either.
The most balanced source on this I have found is this article. https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2017/05/01/how_rachel_carson_and_silent_spring_gave_birth_to_chemophobia.html?source=acsh.org