Should the Usage of DDT Continue in India?

By Prateek Patel

DDT, also known as Dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane, is a chemical used to

fight malaria and other diseases contracted through insects in India (Singh, 2015).

Developed in the 1940s, the chemical is primarily used in China and North Korea, apart

from India (Singh, 2015). Apart from fighting malaria and other diseases, DDT began to

be used for farming and is an effective chemical in helping grow crops and stimulating

livestock production (Singh, 2015). But the chemical insecticide, began to cause

cancer as it became used on crops and in farming (Rosenberg, 2004). DDT led to an

increase in the rate of cancer from the 1940s to the 1960s and became a threat to the

health and safety of the population (Rosenberg, 2004). The detriment that is caused led

the EPA to order the ban of DDT in the United States, as of 1973 (Singh, 2015). But the

nations of China, North Korea, and particularly India continually utilize this drug (Cone,

2009). Despite it's banning all around the world, India continually has fought to keep

DDT, as it believes that malaria is a greater health threat to the country than the

harmful effects of DDT (Cone, 2009). Around 535 people have died of malaria in 2014

alone, and the use of DDT prevents that number from escalating (Basu, 2013). With

economic benefits of keeping its citizens safe along with the profits that derive from its

distribution, India wants to continue using DDT until 2020 (Basu, 2013). Until 2020,

India has produced and will continue to produce around 6,000 tons of DDT annually

(Basu, 2013). But the question is whether it is ethical for India to continue production of

DDT despite knowing the dangers associated to it.

 The dangerous side effects of DDT make it harmful for the Indian population and

by its use, you are putting others at harm. DDT can be an effective way to treat malaria,

but it’s side effect can lead to cancer and other side effects (Sadasivaiah, 2007).

According to the CDC, the exposure of DDT puts people at a higher risk to contract the

Alzheimer’s disease (CDC, 2016). But DDT, has also been the most effective way of

preventing and reducing the likelihood of Indians to contract malaria (CDC, 2016).

Malaria is a huge problem in India, and it kills around 500-700 people each year. DDT

poses a major threat but only when used in crops and farming (Singh, 2015). This has

led people to begin to use persistent organic pollutants (POPs) as an alternative

source. But POPs, also has some side effects that can be harmful to the health and

safety of the consumer and can be highly toxic (Singh, 2015). However when it comes

to ethics, the government should determine how much they want to regulate how

farmers grow their crops and see whether its economic benefits outweigh the side

effects (Singh, 2015). And if it does, they should encourage farmers to come up with an

alternative, rather than force them to change their techniques.

On the other hand, the use of DDT in crops is what is harmful to the health of

safety of the consumer (Cone, 2009). But, it has not produced any harm or threat when

it is used exclusively as an insecticide (Cone, 2009). The chemical has been made

specifically to kill mosquitoes and other insects to prevent malaria and other similar

diseases (Cone, 2009). So the government should try to inform and encourage people

to not use it on crops and provide the chemical to livestock, because it is not meant to

be consumed (Sadasivaiah, 2007). However DDT has been effective as an insecticide,

and should only be used in this manner (Sadasivaiah, 2007). The government banning
DDT to kill mosquitos would be unethical itself, because this means that the

government will willingly allow more people to become immune to malaria (Cone,

2009).

Overall, I believe that until another insecticide is found to become an alternative,

DDT should continually be used to prevent malaria and kill mosquitoes. But the

government should spend its resources to encourage farmers from using this chemical

on their crops and for livestock production. Along with this, the government should try

to find alternatives to DDT, but I do not believe it is ethical to stop DDT production until

an alternative effective insecticide is found. DDT is harmful if used for food production,

but is necessary to protect Indian citizens from catching malaria and to kill mosquitoes.
 Works Cited

Basu, Soma. "India opposes 2020 deadline for DDT ban." India Opposes 2020

Deadline. May 4, 2013. Accessed April 30, 2017.

http://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/india-opposes-2020-deadline-for-ddt-ban-

40967.

Cone, Marla, and Environmental Health News. "Should DDT Be Used to Combat

Malaria?"

Scientific American. May 04, 2009. Accessed April 30, 2017.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ddt-use-to-combat-malaria/.

"National Biomonitoring Program." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

December 23, 2016. Accessed April 30, 2017.

https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/ddt_factsheet.html.

Rosenberg, Tina. "What the World Needs Now Is DDT." The New York Times. April 10,

2004. Accessed April 30, 2017.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/11/magazine/what-the-world-needs-now-is-

ddt.html?_r=0.
Singh, Radhika. "India is Phasing Out the Use of DDT | Latest News & Updates at Daily

News & Analysis." September 17, 2015. Accessed April 30, 2017.

<http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/standpoint-india-is-phasing-out-the-use-of-

ddt-but-it-s-not-tackling-its-long-term-effects-2125945.>

Sadasivaiah, Shobha. "Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) for Indoor Residual

Spraying in Africa: How Can It Be Used for Malaria Control?" Defining and

Defeating the Intolerable Burden of Malaria III: Progress and Perspectives:

Supplement to Volume 77(6) of American Journal of Tropical Medicine and

Hygiene. 2007. Accessed April 30, 2017.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1724/.