It Always Costs By David Suzuki Summary

It Always Costs is an essay written by David Suzuki. Throughout the text, the author argues how technology impacts the environment. David Suzuki states that even though technology has benefits, it brings a long an associated cost. Technology creates more problems rather than bring solutions. The writer moves on to state the example of DDT, which was used to eliminate mosquitoes carrying malaria and save millions of lives. However, the mosquitoes eventually became immune to thus causing ecological damage such as biomagnification. Suzuki states that this was caused due to the fact that the chemical product used targeted not only mosquitos but all insects. The compound ended up being ingested by animals such as birds there for killing a significant …show more content…
Although the author successfully managed to get his message across, the statements are concentrated on the negativity of technology and the detrimental effects that later on outweigh their benefits. His arguments, however, are flawed due to the biased manner in which they are presented. For example, when mentioning DDT, the author comes to a conclusion that DDT was very bad overall without considering all of the variables. He states that DDT ended up causing significant ecological damage but refuses to focus on the fact that millions of lives were saved or on the damages that would have been caused had there not been DDT. He also states that there are numerous examples of how technological innovations have previously caused detrimental negative effects that eventually outweighed the benefits they had originally created, however does not provide any examples or facts to support his statement. The author then moves on to mention DES as an example to further prove his point. He comments that this product had been extensively tested in Puerto Rico and shown to be efficient with no side effects however implies that the testing is faulty due to the location in which the testing was conducted. That however discredited his argument due to the fact that he has no sufficient evidence to make such statement. The comment was backed up by his personal thoughts and opinion. The examples he provided did not …show more content…
After every example provided, he states his main idea again creating a stronger connection. However, the overall essay has no reliable sources and was mainly constructed of the author’s point of view. For example, when writing about drilling for oil, his arguments are over exaggerated and the reader is left speculating due to the lack of evidence. He mentions the studies that are carried out in a limited time within a restricted area but does not prove any details. He also comments that the industry will be on its best behaviour, so the results will always be on the conservative side, therefor making accusations once again with no premise. Stating that the conclusion is then terrible is also further demonstrating how his arguments are not pertinent and that the conclusions shown are not precise nor backed up by