DDT indoor spraying should start quickly
Mar 11, 2008
INDOOR residual spraying of DDT which was supposed to have started on March 5 has been delayed due to administrative issues. The state minister for primary healthcare says as soon as the National Drug Authority has registered DDT and approved the company which will supply it, the spraying will begin
INDOOR residual spraying of DDT which was supposed to have started on March 5 has been delayed due to administrative issues. The state minister for primary healthcare says as soon as the National Drug Authority has registered DDT and approved the company which will supply it, the spraying will begin.
Although many environmentalists are up in arms against the use of DDT and do raise some pertinent issues, a firm decision must be taken.
The debate over whether or not to use DDT centres on the death toll caused by malaria on the one hand and DDT’s nature as an organic pollutant with long-term harm to both human health and the environment.
Clearly, a decision must be taken based on which of the two is a lesser evil. The threat from malaria and the poverty associated with it are far worse than when DDT is used under strict control.
Malaria is the leading cause of death in Uganda, accounting for 25-40% of all in-patient visits at healthcare facilities. Up to 20% of all hospital admissions and 15% of in-patient deaths are due to malaria. The disease claims some 320 people countrywide most of whom are children who are five years and younger.
Uganda, like many tropical countries, has reported chloroquine-resistant malaria and has since 2004 adopted artemisinin-based combination therapy in the fight against malaria.
The National Environment Management Authority has carried out an environment impact assessment audit and recommended the use of DDT under the guidelines of the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Stockholm Convention.
Perhaps the most touching response to the use of DDT came from the director of WHO’s malaria programme Arata Kochi in 2006 who pointed out that unlike the environment, African children did not have powerful movements to champion their wellbeing.
The WHO and the Stockholm Convention are fully aware of Uganda’s problem and DDT is not being used behind anybody’s back. The sooner the indoor spraying starts the better.
Although many environmentalists are up in arms against the use of DDT and do raise some pertinent issues, a firm decision must be taken.
The debate over whether or not to use DDT centres on the death toll caused by malaria on the one hand and DDT’s nature as an organic pollutant with long-term harm to both human health and the environment.
Clearly, a decision must be taken based on which of the two is a lesser evil. The threat from malaria and the poverty associated with it are far worse than when DDT is used under strict control.
Malaria is the leading cause of death in Uganda, accounting for 25-40% of all in-patient visits at healthcare facilities. Up to 20% of all hospital admissions and 15% of in-patient deaths are due to malaria. The disease claims some 320 people countrywide most of whom are children who are five years and younger.
Uganda, like many tropical countries, has reported chloroquine-resistant malaria and has since 2004 adopted artemisinin-based combination therapy in the fight against malaria.
The National Environment Management Authority has carried out an environment impact assessment audit and recommended the use of DDT under the guidelines of the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Stockholm Convention.
Perhaps the most touching response to the use of DDT came from the director of WHO’s malaria programme Arata Kochi in 2006 who pointed out that unlike the environment, African children did not have powerful movements to champion their wellbeing.
The WHO and the Stockholm Convention are fully aware of Uganda’s problem and DDT is not being used behind anybody’s back. The sooner the indoor spraying starts the better.