February 2016


Options: Use Proportional Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mitchel Cohen <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Science for the People Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 23 Feb 2016 14:22:51 -0500
text/plain (4 kB) , text/html (4 kB)
At 01:23 PM 2/23/2016, you wrote:

I tried to leave this comment on your blog, but 
it wouldn't accept it, saying it was too many 
characters. (According to my character count, it's under .... )

While improved sanitation, clean water, and 
removal of puddles (which serve as mosquito 
breeding sites) are always welcome, fumigation 
with dangerous pesticides is much more dangerous than the disease.

It is a mistake to combine the Zika virus with 
dengue fever. There has been no connection 
established between Zika and microcephaly. In the 
U.S. there are around 25,000 cases of 
microcephaly each year. NONE have tested positive 
for Zika virus. And in Colombia, there are many 
cases of Zika, but few cases of microcephaly.

So, the microcephaly outburst in Brazil is most 
likely caused by <i>the pesticides</i> being 
applied, the new TDaP vaccine mandated (unlike 
elsewhere) for pregnant women, or the release of 
genetically engineered mosquitoes -- NOT by a the Zika virus.

On the other hand, in 1981, an epidemic of dengue 
hemorrhagic fever (DHF) did sweep across the 
island of Cuba. Transmitted by blood-eating 
insects, usually mosquitos, the disease produces 
severe flu-like symptoms and incapacitating bone 
pain. Between May and October 1981, over 300,000 
cases were reported in Cuba with 158 fatalities, 
101 of which were children under 15.

Declassified documents reveal that the US Army 
set loose swarms of <b>specially bred <i>Aedes 
aegypti</i>mosquitos</b> in Georgia and Florida in 1956 and 1958.

In 1967 <i>Science</i> magazine reported that at 
the US government center in Fort Detrick, 
Maryland, dengue fever was among those "diseases 
that are at least the objects of considerable 
research and that appear to be among those 
regarded as potential BW [biological warfare] 
agents." (<i>Science<i> (American Association for 
the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC), January 13,1967, p.176)

On a clear day, October 21, 1996, a Cuban pilot 
flying over Matanzas province observed a plane 
releasing a mist of some substance about seven 
times. It turned out to be an American 
crop-duster plane operated by the US State 
Department, which had permission to fly over Cuba 
on a trip to Colombia via Grand Cayman Island. 
Responding to the Cuban pilot's report, the Cuban 
air controller asked the US pilot if he was 
having any problem. The answer was "no". <b>Two 
months later, Cuba observed the first signs of a 
plague of <i>Thrips palmi,</i> a plant-eating 
insect never before detected in Cuba. It severely 
damages practically all crops and is resistant to a number of pesticides.</b>

Cuba asked the US for clarification of the 
October 21 incident. Seven weeks passed before 
the US replied that the State Department pilot 
had emitted only smoke, in order to indicate his 
location to the Cuban pilot. (For further details 
of the State Department's side of the issue, see 
New York Times, May 7,1997, p.9) By this time, 
the <i>Thrips palmi</i> had spread rapidly, 
affecting corn, beans, squash, cucumbers and other crops.

In response to a query, the Federal Aviation 
Administration stated that emitting smoke to 
indicate location is "not an FAA practice" and 
that it knew of "no regulation calling for this practice".

In April 1997, Cuba presented a report to the 
United Nations which charged the US with 
"biological aggression" and provided a detailed 
description of the 1996 incident and the 
subsequent controversy. In August, signatories of 
the Biological Weapons Convention convened in 
Geneva to consider Cuba's charges and 
Washington's response. In December, the committee 
reported that due to the "technical complexity" 
of the matter, it had not proved possible to reach a definitive conclusion.

The way to deal with invasions of mosquitoes -- 
whether genetically engineered elements in a 
biowarfare destabilization effort or of a more 
natural kind -- is to use biological predators of 
those mosquitoes (dragonflies, bats, frogs, 
certain birds and fish), proper non-harmful 
larvaciding (and elimination of standing water), 
and individual organic mosquito repellents 
(catnip and many other natural plants) -- NOT by 
falling for the pharmaceutical and agricultural industry's propaganda.

Mitchel Cohen
No Spray Coalition against pesticides