The blog is a rant against IPM.. simple as that. He uses the research paper from Rutgers published in the Journal of Medical Entomology as the basis for his argument. I have not read the full paper as yet, but in order to understand the outcomes, one has to see the total picture, and Kozolovich’s arguments against IPM are mostly demagogic and lack substance of even understanding of what IPM is about.
If one goes to the EPA link provided by the post here, and reads the rational behind a review – you see science and common sense, not the non-sense of Koslovich’s blog.
There are clearly interests that are in opposition – and there is solid science to back concerns about elevated rates of allergies and asthma caused by roach infestations, as well as research showing impact of chronic use of organophoshpate insecticides on children. No one would argue that protecting the health of low income children is not a very very high priority. It is the HIGHEST priotity ethically and practically speaking. Protecting the health of children is one of the measures of a successful and moral society and when this fails due to poverty wherever it is in the world, it is a failure of all mankind.
The key to IPM is not getting rid of pesticides, but controlling and elminating pest species intelligently and part of that is reducing, not eliminating use of pesticides whenever possible. If I can manage a pest without pesticides, all the better, but if not, then the goal should be use it, but focus on prevention so that the use is limited…
that is what IPM is about… not the rant of Kozlovich that labels and accuses without insight or perspective or respect for science.
Sam