Mankind’s scientific advancement in the name of progress can be absolutely detrimental to the environment and all the living organisms, as we know it. During WWII, German scientists were secretly developing chemical weapons to be used on human beings. These chemicals after the war became very abundant in various forms (chemical structure) and were recommended to farmers as a pest control. The purpose of these lethal chemicals changed from disrupting the human nervous system to eradicating insects, birds, fish and even contaminating soil. Somehow, in the transformation phase, nobody bothered to rationalize the level of toxicity these chemicals possess and how spraying them could possibly be threatening to all existence. Rachel Carter in Silent
…show more content…
Chemical corporations provide farmers with a solution that will alleviate their worries without having to provide all the ingredients because of hidden property knowledge policy. Spraying DDT doesn’t eradicate all pests, so farmers are then required to buy another more lethal insecticide such as Adrin and this cycle continues each time destroying more unintended life. When in reality “the greatest enemies to insects are other predator insects, birds and small mammals, but DDT kills indiscriminately, including natures own safeguard”(113). There have been multiple accounts of the federal government engaging in large scale spraying campaigns, which unfortunately have had a devastating aftermath. The federal government in an attempt to decrease the spread of the Dutch elm disease targeted the carrier insects such as ants, and beets with Aldrin . “The choice of Aldrin, one of the deadliest of all chemicals was not determined by a peculiar sustainability for Japanese beetle control, but simple by the wish to save money” (89). These massive spraying in the Mid-West and New England region of the United State resulted in a quick and substantial decrease in bird population particularly in robins (106). It’s obvious that both industries and the lettered government agencies pay minimal heed to the precautionary principle. Instead they are
Chemical corporations provide farmers with a solution that will alleviate their worries without having to provide all the ingredients because of hidden property knowledge policy. Spraying DDT doesn’t eradicate all pests, so farmers are then required to buy another more lethal insecticide such as Adrin and this cycle continues each time destroying more unintended life. When in reality “the greatest enemies to insects are other predator insects, birds and small mammals, but DDT kills indiscriminately, including natures own safeguard”(113). There have been multiple accounts of the federal government engaging in large scale spraying campaigns, which unfortunately have had a devastating aftermath. The federal government in an attempt to decrease the spread of the Dutch elm disease targeted the carrier insects such as ants, and beets with Aldrin . “The choice of Aldrin, one of the deadliest of all chemicals was not determined by a peculiar sustainability for Japanese beetle control, but simple by the wish to save money” (89). These massive spraying in the Mid-West and New England region of the United State resulted in a quick and substantial decrease in bird population particularly in robins (106). It’s obvious that both industries and the lettered government agencies pay minimal heed to the precautionary principle. Instead they are