CPE 680 LEADERSHIP AND PROFESSIONAL

ETHICS FOR ENGINEERS

(CASE STUDY ON USE OF DDT)

LECTURER / ADVISOR:
ASSOCIATE PROF IR DR NADIAHNOOR MD YUSOP

GROUP MEMBERS:

NURUL NAJIHAH BINTI JAFFAR 2015430344

TENGKU DARWINA IRFANI BINTI TENGKU 2015664292
KAMARUL ZAMAN

MELISSA LAILA ANAK MUNAN 2015283286

MUHAMMAD NAJMI BIN MOHD SHAH 2015259114

MUHAMMAD SHAZIMAN SANI BIN MOHD SAFIEE 2015431006

NUR AFIDAH BINTI MD JOHAN 2015238826

 ETHICAL STUDY ON USES OF DDT

DDT was widely used during the Second World War to protect the troops and civilians
from the spread of malaria, typhus and other vector borne diseases. After the war, DDT was widely
used on a variety of agricultural crops and for the control of disease vectors as well. It is still being
produced and used for vector control. Growing concern about adverse environmental effects,
especially on wild birds, led to severe restrictions and bans in many developed countries in the
early 1970s. The largest agricultural use of DDT has been on cotton which accounted for more
than 80% of USA use before its ban there in 1972. DDT is still used to control mosquito vectors
of malaria in numerous countries.

DDT is highly insoluble in water and is soluble in most organic solvents. It is semi-volatile
and can be expected to partition into the atmosphere as a result. Its presence is ubiquitous in the
environment and residues have even been detected in the Arctic. It is lipophilic and partitions
readily into the fat of all living organisms and has been demonstrated to bioconcentrate and
biomagnify. The breakdown products of DDT, 1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis (4-chlorophenyl) ethane
(DDD or TDE) and 1,1-dichloro-2,2bis (4-chlorophenyl) ethylene) (DDE), are also present
virtually everywhere in the environment and are more persistent than the parent compound.

DDT (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane) was developed as the first of the modern

synthetic insecticides in the 1940s. It was initially used with great effect to combat malaria, typhus,
and the other insect-borne human diseases among both military and civilian populations. It also
was effective for insect control in crop and livestock production, institutions, homes, and gardens.
DDT's quick success as a pesticide and broad use in the United States and other countries led to
the development of resistance by many insect pest species.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, the federal agency with responsibility for regulating
pesticides before the formation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1970, began
regulatory actions in the late 1950s and 1960s to prohibit many of DDT's uses because of mounting
evidence of the pesticide's declining benefits and environmental and toxicological effects. The
publication in 1962 of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring stimulated widespread public concern over
the dangers of improper pesticide use and the need for better pesticide controls.
 Since 1996, EPA has been participating in international negotiations to control the use of
DDT and other persistent organic pollutants used around the world. Under the auspices of the
United Nations Environment Program, countries joined together and negotiated a treaty to enact
global bans or restrictions on persistent organic pollutants (POPs), a group that includes DDT.
This treaty is known as the Stockholm Convention on POPs. The Convention includes a limited
exemption for the use of DDT to control mosquitoes that transmit the microbe that causes malaria
- a disease that still kills millions of people worldwide.

The World Health Organization (WHO) declared its support for the indoor use of DDT in
African countries where malaria remains a major health problem, citing that benefits of the
pesticide outweigh the health and environmental risks in September 2006. The WHO position is
consistent with the Stockholm Convention on POPs, which bans DDT for all uses except for
malaria control. DDT is one of 12 pesticides recommended by the WHO for indoor residual spray
programs. It is up to individual countries to decide whether or not to use DDT. EPA works with
other agencies and countries to advise them on how DDT programs are developed and monitored,
with the goal that DDT be used only within the context of programs referred to as Integrated Vector
Management.

In Malaysia, the DDT can be related with using DDT spraying which its role is in stopping
dengue worldwide. Thatched huts were sprayed by the World Health Organization with DDT to
kill mosquitoes which carry the parasite causing malaria. The DDT killed other insects as well
including wasps that normally ate moth larvae that lived in the thatched roofs and ate the straw
thatching.

In 2002, Malaysia was a signatory to the Stockholm Convention on POPs and it was
committed to carrying out a GEF/UNEP-funded project for the gradual growth of a National
Implementation Plan (NIP) for POPs management. In fact, the use of pesticides in Malaysia was
not subjected to regulatory control until the Agricultural Chemicals Board was established under
the Agricultural Chemicals Act 1974. The use of persistent OCPs was then gradually controlled
by a series of governmental rules. This policy led to their controlled use in the mid-1970s.
Historically, pesticides have been used to enhance the crop yields in Malaysia since the Second
World War. The country became a model for the World Health Organization (WHO), following
the successful control of malaria mosquito vectors by DDT during the 1950s. Most of the regulated
pesticides under the Pesticide Act 1974 were used in the sector until they were banned in the late
1990s. Despite that residues of these pesticides have been frequently found in various media of the
environment such as water, sediment and biota. Md. Sani pointed out that there is no integrated
programme to monitor pesticides compared with other hazardous chemicals.

Tropical rainforest areas, such as Malaysia are traditionally agriculture-based countries.

In peninsular Malaysia, Cameron Highlands is a tourist resort which is the second most important
state for growing vegetables (mostly cabbage, tomato, and leafy vegetables), and are also
important for tea, flowers an fruit. In addition, Cameron Highlands Catchment area is a source of
water supply to many areas of Peninsular Malaysia. Sg.Telom, Sg.Bertam and Sg.Lemoi are the
three main rivers of the Cameron Highlands Catchment, which drains the northern, middle and
southern sections of the highlands. Over the years, the condition of the rivers, lake and ponds has
been degraded in terms of water pollution, river environment and ecosystem. Based on previous
studies, the middle of the Cameron Highlands catchment area with its agriculture and urban
pollution sources are the most exposed part of the area. Because of the agricultural activities, the
land clearing for development and the road construction, the water quality of rivers has declined.
The previous study of Lee et al showed HCH and DDT levels between 38.3 and 78.3 ng/g and
between 19.0 and 113.8 ng/g respectively in the sediment of the Cameron highlands Rivers in
1998. From this study, the risk of contamination by intensive agriculture activities was assumed.
Likewise, even though lindane was banned in 2003 in Malaysia, there is still evidence of lindane
existence in the environment.

Intended benefit of DDT has been to maintain crop yields by protecting plants from
insects. DDT is acutely toxic to insects and is therefore applied to kill the pests or prevent
outbreaks, particularly in intensive farming systems where only a few crops are produced. Almost
four-fold increase in Indian food-grain production is estimated to be a result of such pesticide use
from the late 1940s to the late 1990s.

Another key application of the chemical is in the prevention of diseases such as malaria,
dengue fever, and Zika fever. Insects in these cases act as carriers, or vectors, of life threatening
diseases which are typically prevalent in the tropics. The insects most responsible for such diseases
are often mosquitoes but can also include flies and ticks. Mosquitoes of the genus Anopheles can
transfer Plasmodium sp. parasites to humans by means of their bites, causing several types of
malaria which can lead to fever, fatigue, seizures, or even death. The dengue virus also causes an
unpleasant fever, while the Zika virus is suspected to cause microcephaly in babies whose mothers
have been infected during pregnancy. A third group of diseases, represented by the typhoid
bacteria, are not very persistent in the environment and hence depend on transfer, by means of
insects, for their spread. Typhoid bacteria cause aches and pains, fever, constipation, or diarrhea.
DDT use can be very effective in controlling the insects carrying the disease, at least initially.

But fortunately, unintended adverse impact come along with the benefit. Extensive
evidence shows that exposures to DDT, whether as a pesticide or a disease control agent, can cause
ecological and human health effects. DDT belongs to a group of chemicals known as Persistent
Organic Pollutants (POPs). POPs are organic chemicals, consisting largely of carbon, that have
high molecular weight, are lipophilic, and have a propensity to evaporate and disperse over long
distances. These compounds are persistent, hard to break down, and will therefore remain for a
long time within the environment or human bodies. They disperse easily and are unfortunately
toxic to both humans and wildlife.

DDT is persistent with a half-life time of 2 to 15 years. Its residues may be found for
decades in soil, from where they can merge within organisms and later be transferred to consumers
by means of food consumption. The chemical’s properties make it bind efficiently to organic
liquids or solid matter, fats, and fat tissues, and hence offer great potential for bio-concentration
in organisms and for bio-magnification by up-concentration through the food chain: Plants treated
with the chemical are eaten by plant-eating organism where it accumulates in fat tissues. The
organisms are eaten by predators leading to even higher concentrations of DDT in the predator’s
bodies. Small predators are eaten by other predators resulting in further increase in concentration.

DDT is suspected of having a variety of sub-lethal effects. The chemical is mutagenic and
therefore suspected to be carcinogenic, and has had toxic effects on internal organs and on the
neuronal system in test organisms. The compound and its many derivatives have an endogenic
effect in the human body and interfere with the hormonal system and associated with reproductive
and developmental problems, incomplete development of sexual organs.

It is difficult to make a strict distinction between uses and misuses of DDT. As a heuristic,
the misuse categorize as preventive use for a pest attack, use of overdoses to make sure that a pest
is killed and use of DDT as the primary tool to eradicate malaria. National governments in
conjunction with World Health Organization (WHO) – a special division within the United Nations
dedicated to public health issues misused DDT in all three ways in the 1960s and 1970s. All three
forms of misuse lead to excessive use, and increase the risk of resistance and uptake in organisms.
Misuse of DDT is in this perspective overlapping with overuse.

The agriculture is characterized by the removal of natural obstacles to work such as

draining water saturated soils and removing hedges in favor of wide open spaces that could be
more easily handled by machinery. Another consequence on societal was that these vast surfaces
were often turned into monoculture systems, one crop dominating at first in larger fields but very
soon also across the whole landscapes. The increasing demands for food production, not only
for human consumption but also for the production of feeds for cattle and pigs, created even higher
pressure for increased productivity. Increased mono-cultural farming caused pests to become a
more significant problem: with fields planted uniformly containing a single crop and without the
natural pest control provided by beneficial insects and birds among diversified crops, the singular
crops became more vulnerable to insect attacks. Without pesticide use, industrial agriculture would
be less yielding, due to substantial losses from pest infection.

The impacts of use in agriculture are not limited to human and ecological health. Vandana
Shiva (1997, 2000) has argued that mono-cultured food production endangers the local agricultural
knowledge and indigenous practices that farming communities in developing countries have built
up over centuries. Her claim is that modern Western industrial food production does not allow
alternative production schemes, they are ridiculed, presented as irrational, or out-competed
because so-called external costs are neglected. Shiva further claims that farmers in India can grow
enough nutrition to feed the country if they cultivate biodiversity without chemicals.

As stated on the United Nations (UN 2015), the Earth’s population will increase up to 9.7
billion residents by 2050 expected to make sure the food production will have to be increased
correspondingly. In societies dominated by a growth in population such as India and many nations
on the African continent, there are arguments for using DDT as a pesticide to contribute
incremental of food production, and potentially support feeding an increasing number of
inhabitants. This argumentation is linked to the ethical value of utility as increased food
production can produce more well-being for a higher number of people because fewer will starve.
In observation, the use of DDT might be the best way to produce more food and it reach the demand
of number of people in country.

For the next reason in usage of DDT is to be used to combating diseases. Should we allow
that 300 million people are annually infected with malaria when we have DDT to combat the vector
organisms?. These two intentional applications of DDT are linked to food and health security
which values everybody’s right to be safeguarded from hunger or illness. The uses of DDT also
relate to the ethical value of justice. In the case of food production this concerns whether the
food is distributed fairly, if the least-advantaged members of society benefit from the increased
production, or if they have access only to sprayed food products, whereas the privileged class enjoy
organic and high quality meals. Justice is also involved if disease or health risks primarily affect
certain vulnerable groups such as children or poor people. We observe vector borne illnesses
primarily in poorer regions, hence, the use of DDT to combat disease such as malaria can comply
with justice.

An argument against the intentional use of DDT as a pesticide, and hence against increased
food production, states that it in a long-term perspective violates the values of stewardship of the
Earth and social stability. Such use and its long-term consequences support population growth
and a higher world population that is unsustainable both socially and environmentally. From a
long-term perspective, societies should not focus on increasing food production, rather they should
aim at decreasing population growth and hence minimize the need for growth in the production of
food. These arguments address the long-term consequences of intentional use of DDT as a
pesticide, whereas the former address short-term issues.

The ethical values of humility and precaution are at stake regarding the overuse of DDT
resulting in a build-up of the residues in crops, soils, and animals. Harmful consequences of the
overuse of DDT are today well documented, but were not foreseen before intensive over-use
began. Both farmer and national government, encouraged by the WHO committed hubris when
they tried to enhance crop yields or eradicate malaria by very excessive use of the chemical. We
see this as a violation of the ethical value of humility as the use of DDT was seen as an omnipotent
technology on which the solution to the problems of hunger and malaria was built. This approach
also violates the principles of precaution as no preventive measures, such as the establishment of
early warning mechanisms, were taken when DDT was used in large scale.

Today we know that overuse of DDT results in bioaccumulation and bio-magnification.

The bio-concentration of DDT means that organisms with tissues particularly rich in fats are more
likely to suffer adverse health effects whereas bio-magnification signifies that organisms at higher
levels of the biological hierarchy such predators that carry a higher risk of being affected. In this
instance, the ethical values of stewardship of the Earth and respect for nature are involved.
The intensive use of DDT cause ecosystems to be shifted out of balance and neglects their intrinsic
value, suggesting that species and their environments must be protected not only directly through
wild-life protection but also indirectly by sustained restrictions on DDT.

A less evident strike-back of intensive use of DDT occurs via the endocrine disrupting
effect. This effect is not clearly understood and only supported by uncertain scientific evidence.
Here, the precautionary principle is at stake and calls for preventive measures even when decisive
scientific evidence is not at hand. Endocrine disruption is widespread over the animal kingdom,
not only relating to human existence but also posing a threat to many other organisms, striking-
back indirectly at society through the loss of biodiversity and diminishing ecosystem services. This
aspect potentially risks human health and therefore possibly violates the ethical values of safety
and security.

The use of DDT and other pesticides may have societal impacts in communities such as
self-sustaining local communities that do not subscribe to the application of modern Western
science and technology in food production, and instead practice an alternative, holistic, and low-
technological way of producing food. Vandana Shiva (1997, 2000) has argued that the modern
Western technologies approach to food production is no better than more diversified approaches.
When it comes to forcing industrial and highly technologies food production methods onto poor
farmers in self-sustaining local communities, the value of farmers’ autonomy is violated. Also
disregarded is a respect for nature due to the fact that mono-cultural agriculture practices violate
biodiversity and are environmentally unsustainable.
 Based on the above identification of linkages between intentional actual use, potential
misuse, adverse effects, and long-term consequences for society and culture and general ethical
values. The main ethical issues of the use of DDT are linked to ethical value is to increase food
production by protection of crops against pests. It is link to ethical values by compliance with
utility, food safety, justice if the food is distributed fairly and in long-term perspective, it violates
social stability and stewardship of the earth. Next DDT is use to prevent disease by killing vectors,
it also compliance with utility, health safety and justice. The over and misuse of DDT can related
to violation of humility.

Ethical dilemma is differs from unethical situation or action. According to oxford

dictionary, ethical dilemma is mean by a situation in which a difficult choice has to be made
between two courses of action, either of which entails transgressing a moral principle. Both choices
will bring negative impact based on society and personal guidelines. Meanwhile, unethical
situation or action can be defined as an action that falls outside of what is considered morally right
or proper for a person, a profession or an industry.

The use of DDT must be regulated and restricted to prevent overuse. DDT may
increase the quality of health of a person by eliminating the vectors that transfer harmful disease.
Unfortunately, overuse of DDT may also give big effect to the surrounding since it cannot be
justified as it violates safety and security, humility, precaution, stewardship of the Earth and also
respect of nature. Since it give a lot of effects, quick ethical analysis suggest that the overuse of
DDT is unethical and must be avoided.

A distinction must be made between two purposes of use of DDT. In one case, it was
introduced to ensure sufficient food production, the other was due to a wish to increase life quality
by eliminating the vectors that transfer harmful disease. This distinction is especially important as
the use of DDT must be restricted to avoid overuse, therefore arguing for each case becomes
relevant. Alternatives to the use of DDT in malaria prevention is not foreseen to emerge in near
future, whereas we will argue that the use of DDT should not be allowed in agriculture as
alternative pesticides do exist that can replace the compound in that case. Hence, the use of DDT
in agriculture is not ethical but modest use of DDT to combat malaria is acceptable.
 The third ethical dilemma discussed on anthropocentric versus environmental concerns.
Most likely this ethical concern is more easily overcome when we consider organisms at the lower
levels of the biological hierarchy, such as insects, as they, on a mere physiological basis, have no
spine, little brain, and are not able to sense pain. The situation becomes different when the
organisms affected are to be found higher up in the hierarchy, such as predatory birds and polar
bears, or if the natural environment changes appearance. The suspected effects on various higher
level animals are generally sub-lethal and may be considered acceptable when judged from an
anthropocentric ethical point of view, such as utilitarianism. On one hand, humans are being
exposed to an array of potential health damages, particularly when DDT is sprayed inside their
houses. One type of adverse effect, that of endocrine disruption, can strike anywhere with
seemingly no particular social or sexual differentiation. The endocrine disrupting effect has been
demonstrated to affect both males and females.

In order to transcend the dilemmas, some technological and institutional design criteria
being proposed. Legal Legislation be introduced and followed. Countries began to withdraw
DDT as a malaria control agent partly due to the environmental effects and partly because of
drainage efforts and the removal of wetlands resulting in the reduction of vector survival places
by the late 1960s. The presence of DDT was first detected in food and the environment in the
1960s more than two decades after its introduction (Watson 2001). DDT was banned in the US
with many other nations implementing similar bans shortly after 1972.

The use DDT is now regulated under the Stockholm Convention in 2008 that has been
signed by 180 countries. It is illegal to use DDT with the purpose of protecting crops against pests
nowadays. The use of DDT increased to more than 40,000 tons per year through the period of
extensive use in agriculture with a peak production of 82,000 in 1963. The production decreased
to approximately 3,300 tons in 2009 as a result of the restrictions.

The restricted use of the compound for eradicating disease vectors has been lifted in the
Stockholm Convention hence, one may identify countries where the usage to fight vector borne
diseases is allowed. The WHO’s policy is to recommend DDT use as part of a management
package in high transmission areas where the degree of control must be particularly high. Some
countries, mostly in Africa, resumed using DDT to control malaria as their mosquito populations
have become more resistant to other pesticides During the 2000s.
 The ethical analysis points to expanding available alternatives to the use of DDT in
agriculture and in the combat against vector borne diseases and to transform industrialized
agriculture methods into more environmentally friendly practices through organic agriculture.
Holistic alternatives to pesticides in agriculture must be practiced. The increasing of hedges
and biodiversity in the landscape would enhance predators of pests which have been found to be
equally efficient to the use of pesticides. The development of new pesticides and other
technological agriculture practices to prevent pest attack in mono-cultural agriculture is also a
possibility if ethical standards for example farmers’ autonomy or precaution are not violated.

There is convincing evidence that advantages exist which are connected to such ways of
growing crops in organic agriculture and agroecology encourage the use of biological and
ecological methods for controlling pests. These include maintaining hedgerows that sustain
predatory organisms like wasps or birds, planting multiple crops together to reduce the likelihood
of pest or disease outbreak, and using methods like the push-pull model developed in Kenya was
greatly reduce the demand for pesticides. Simultaneously, such farming systems have a more
continuous demand for labor that may be handled within a family and have a higher crop range
that can provide a more nutritious selection of food.

More challenging is finding ways or alternatives to DDT in prevention of vector-borne

diseases. The argument goes that malaria is, in a number of ways, not only disastrous to human
health, but also costly to society in a many developing countries and that no other solutions exist.
Despite this, the Stockholm treaty calls for DDT to be phased out over time. The history of DDT
shows that the insecticide was initially very effective in the 1950s before succumbing to the growth
of pest resistance in the 1960s. However, this resistance tends to disappear with time and, as a
result, treatments with DDT become effective again. By 2000, when several developing countries,
notably South Africa and India, reinitiated the spraying of DDT, the insecticide was proven to be
very efficient. However, pest resistance had already re-emerged on a widespread scale across
Africa by 2011.

The argument goes that malaria is not only disastrous to human health, but also costly to
society in a many developing countries (Zelson 2014), and that no other solutions exist. Despite
this, the Stockholm treaty calls for DDT to be phased out over time. The history of DDT shows
that the insecticide was initially very effective in the 1950s before succumbing to the growth of
pest resistance in the 1960s. Other technological solutions might have longer-lasting effects than
periodically reviving DDT by deliberately spread of male mosquitoes that have been made infertile
through radiation, thus lowering their reproductive success, but not without many obstacles.
Research in and development of new ‘gene drive’ technology is now being tested in Brazil to
genetically modify mosquitoes to be infertile (Mendes 2012). Alternatively, insect habitat control
measures and behavioral change steps can be taken in combination, without necessarily needing
any of these technologies.

There are reliant on quite a large amount of chemicals offering benefits to us such as the
increased availability of food by means of increased crop growth or improved public health
through medicines and disease control. On the other hand, some of these chemicals have at a later
stage been found to produce negative impacts. The challenge arises as how to evaluate the positive
and negative effects and how to balance those up against each other. The number of ethical
questions that even one chemical substance raises is endless and although it is possible to group
some chemicals, their relating effects tend to be so specific and unique that almost every chemical
requires its own assessment. Early warning mechanisms can be seen in the two volumes of the
late lessons from early warnings series issued by the European Environment Agency which
consists of an extensive list of case studies relating to industrial pollutants (EEA 2001, 2013).

There are important points made in Our Stolen Future (Colburn 1993) is that existing risk
assessment tools cannot foresee undesired consequences of chemical compounds – such effects
may be completely new. One reaction to this issue is to set up early warning measures with the
purpose of spotting new undesirable effects for human health and the environment. These could
try to spot weak indicators in the scientific literature. When indicators of new, unwanted, and
potentially dangerous effects are recognized, resources to further research in those potential effects
are allocated to further research so that it can be decided whether the potential effect is real or not.
Early warning mechanisms can be included within existing legal regimes regulating the use of
industrial pollutants, for example into the Stockholm Convention.

As we all known, DDT in Malaysia have been an overwide use in industrial chemicals.
There are pros and contrast in the used of that chemicals. Based on discussion above, we can agree
on the use of DDT in Malaysia but on a certain reason. The reason is, we suggest that the utilization
of DDT must be intensely controlled to forestall abuse. The Stockholm Convention gives a morally
solid lawful structure for the control of DDT. That’s mean there must be a limited time use and
their own schedule. This condition is made to make the use of DDT become more manageable and
lessen the percent rate of pollution. Besides that, we don't recognize enticing moral contentions
for the utilization of DDT in horticulture as options exist both as target-particular pesticides and
by methods for all encompassing agrarian methodologies. We recommend that it turns out to be
all the more generally acknowledged to pick all not relevant options, and that hindrances for
settling on this decision are brought down. This means, the alternative can be used to overcome
the problem that caused by the use of DDT to be affected to the country.

We find that a modest use of DDT in the fight against malaria is ethically justified until
better alternatives are available. This action can prevent the negative effect to our country and also
the world. Further studies to find the alternatives to be done fast and rapidly so that we can hundred
percent secure about using the DDT in our country. The effect of DDT to our health is very critical
as it on a serious stage. There are many kind of side effect that have been discuss and it surely can
causes death to one. So, to bare this kind of thing from happening, it is recommended that early
warning and caution instruments are set up to spot unexpected impacts of the choices created to
supplant DDT in both horticulture and in the area of general wellbeing. Last but not least, the
support and research from the students of chemical engineering on how to overcome the problem
causes by the DDT to eliminate the ethical dilemma.
REFERENCE

1. Aktar, W.; Sengupta, D. & Chowdhury, A.: 2009, ‘Impacts of pesticides use in agriculture:
their benefits and hazards’, Interdisciplinary Toxicology, 2(1), 1-12.
2. Beamon, B.M.: 2005, ‘Environmental and Sustainability Ethics in Supply Chain
Management’, Science and Engineering Ethics, 11, 221-234.
3. Beauchamp, T.L. & Childress, J.F.: 2001, Principles of biomedical ethics, New York:
Oxford University Press.
4. Bond, J.: 2009, ‘Professional ethics and corporate social responsibility’, Process Safety
and Environmental Protection, 87, 184-190.
5. Borgå, K.; Gabrielsen, G.W. & Skaare, J.U.: 2001, Biomagnification of organochlorines
along a Barents Sea food chain, Environmental Pollution, 113, 187-198.
6. Bouwman, H.; Bornman, R.; van den Berg, H. & Kylin, H.: 2013, ‘DDT: fifty years since
Silent Spring’, in: EEA (ed.), Late Lessons from Early Warnings: Science, Precaution,
Innovation, Copenhagen: EEA, pp. 240-259.
7. Colburn, T.; vom Saal, F.S. & Soto, A.M.: 1993, ‘Developmental Effects of Endocrine-
Disrupting Chemicals in Wildlife and Humans’, Environmental Health
Perspectives, 101 (5), 378-384.
8. Davis, M.: 2002, ‘Do the Professional Ethics of Chemists and Engineers
Differ?’, HYLE: International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry, 8 (1), 21-34.
9. EEA: 2001, Late Lessons from Early Warnings: the Precautionary Principle 1896-2000,
Copenhagen: EEA [available online at: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications
/environmental_issue_report_2001_22 , accessed 28 October 2016].
10. EEA: 2013, Late Lessons from Early Warnings: Science, Precaution, Innovation,
Copenhagen: EEA, [available online at: http://www.eea.europa.eu/ publications/late-
lessons-2, accessed 28 October 2016].
11. EEA: 2015, Priority Substances and Certain Other Pollutants according to Annex II of
Directive 2008/105/EC. Copenhagen: EEA, [update from 8 June 2016 available online
at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-framework/priority_substances.htm,
accessed 28 October 2016].
12. EU: 2000, Communication from the commission on the precautionary principle COM 1,
Brussels: Commission of the European Communities [available online at: http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2000:0001: FIN:EN:PDF, accessed
31 March 2017].
13. Leblanc, G.A.: 1995, ‘Trophic-Level Differences in the Bioconcentration of Chemicals:
Implications in Assessing Environmental Biomagnification’, Environmental Science &
Technology, 29, 154-160.
14. Mendes, H., 2012. Brazil tests GM mosquitoes to fight Dengue, Nature, News and
Comments article [available online at: http://www.nature.com/news/brazil-tests-gm-
mosquitoes-to-fight-dengue-1.10426, accessed 28 October 2016].
15. Parke, D.V.: 1995, ‘Ethical Aspects of the Safety of Medicines and other Social
Chemicals’, Science and Engineering Ethics, 1, 283-298.
16. Petrosyan, P.S.: 2011, ‘Chemical Safety Problems’, Conservation Science in Cultural
Heritage: Historical-technical Journal, 11 [available online at: https://conservation-
science.unibo.it/article/view/2693/2092, accessed 31 March 2017].
17. Strandberg, B.; Bandh, C.; van Bavel, B.; Bergqvist, P.-A.; Broman, D.; Näf, C.; Pettersen,
H. & Rappe, C.: 1998, ‘Concentrations, biomagnification and spatial variation of
organochlorine compunds in a pelagic food web in the northern part of the Baltic Sea’, The
Science of the Total Environment, 217, 143-154.
18. UNICEF: 2004, Fact Sheet: Malaria a Global Crisis [available online
at: http://www.unicef.org/media/media_20475.html, accessed 27 October 2016].
19. Wang, X. & Wang, W.-X.: 2005, ‘Uptake, absorption efficiency and elimination of DDT
in mariner phytoplankton, copepods and fish’, Environmental Pollution, 136, 453-464.
20. Zelson, E.: 2014, ‘Rethinking DDT: The Misguided Goals of the Stockholm Convention
on Persistent Organic Pollutants and a Plan to Fight Malaria Worldwide’, William & Mary
Environmental Law & Policy Review, 243, [available online
at: http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmelpr/vol39/iss1/8/, accessed 28 October 2016].