Comments on: Bed bugs as vehicle for change

By: Sam Bryks

Sam Bryks — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 22:43:20 +0000

For a detailed overview of the history of DDT presented in a balanced post.. read the Wikipedia article on DDT.. I have posted the link to the section on Human Health Effects….

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT#Effects_on_human_health

then you can understand my irritation at a post suggesting that DDT has no health effects.. unbelievable!!!
propaganda is insidious and usually can be revealed by just scratching the surface.. Wiki articles are very well referenced..
Not always perfect, but this one is solid..

By: Sam Bryks

Sam Bryks — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 17:36:46 +0000

Dear WakeUpPeople

you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and good arguments that are respectful are always useful in forwarding knowledge.
I apologize for the tone of portions of my response, but i get frustrated when i read things that have little real connection to the reality of the world before us. I have heard Michael Potter speak on a number of occasions at different workshops and meetings, and i respect his work, but we have disagreed on vrious issues and i have learned from him and i believe he has learned a few things from me as well. I also know he has stated on a number of occasions that without new actives, the problem of bed bugs seems grim. Arguing about vaccines and green meanies has no real relevance in this argument. The banning of various products is based on science, and not on the views of environmental extremists.
as for health effects of DDT, well i studied this for my licencing, and guess what.. it has effects on people.. though in initial discovery of DDT it was an amazing product and the discoverer actually got the Nobel Prize i believe for the discovery and the impact it had … We can also have anecdotal arguments abut people who smoke living to be 100, but it does not speak to the reality of lung cancer and tobacco.
I suggest you do a bit of reading on the net .. go to the National Healthy Homes web site, or EPA and read a bit about IPM..
I believe that everyone who reads this site and posts here understands the impact of bed bugs and wants to control them, but we are not living in 1930 or 1946 or 56 or 1980.
There is clear evidence of detrimental impact of various pesticides that have been removed by the EPA.. That is their job. And i know from personal experience that pesticides can be overused in the urban environment.
So if you want to support better management of bed bugs to the benefit of all of society, please learn a bit more about the issues.
You can disagree, but i don’t want to argue with someone who thinks we should bring back DDT and start spraying and dusting with this product.. There is nothing to argue about.
Sam

By: WakeUpPeople

WakeUpPeople — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 02:37:01 +0000

This is for Renee: So sorry to read that you cannot respond to me because I think that DDT’s resistance is propaganda. Well, you do not know me and just because I have a view different than yours that you just shut down. I was happy to read your post right after mine and Sams saying that Mr. Potter asked the EPA to bring back banned things. We cannot agree on the DDT issue and that’s fine. But, that doesn’t mean that we cannot write about other issues in a civilized manner. I never wrote anything bad about anyone here and once a person writes against someone views, then I guess it’s okay to write irate things about that person, which I think is wrong.

I’m a college-educated w/honors person and am not stupid. Seeing and reading about the adverse and strong reactions to bed bug bites gets me fuming as to why this is not considered a health hazard. Just because it does not cause death, but I think that bed bugs are a severe hazard and not just a nuisance. I believe they can cause death and physical and emotional pain and the government and the people need to wake up…hence my name!

I hope I can keep posting in the future about my views without being harrassed and downgraded with words, especially people in the pco profession who should show some professionalism.

So Renee, I’m not going to bite your head off, so-to-speak. You should write your response if you will. If not, I’ll understand.

By: WakeUpPeople

WakeUpPeople — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 02:14:18 +0000

To Mr. Sam: #1: I am NOT a pco or in the industry as Renee wrote; #2: Let’s stick to the conversation at hand and not bring up every other thing that happened in 1946 or shortly thereafter ’cause there were actually a few GOOD things that were discovered around those times that we still use today, ex.: immunization shots against deadly diseases. Now there were those Greenie Meanies that were against shots saying it paralyzed children, etc. and thankfully they did not get their way. #3: saying degrading remarks such as “…nonsensical thoughtless drivel…” and “…why don’t you let us know the name of your firm, so some readers can be warned not to use your services.” is just useless about IPM and the discussion at hand. It seems to me that you are so prejudiced about IPM that it’s blocking a healthy normal argument. You have a right to your views as well as I have a right to mine.

All I know is that I’m reading about people using kerosene and gasoline for bedbugs and I rather use “that 3-letter word” than those things anytime. “DDT as far back as the early 50’s and therefore it is most likely that it would not be effective, but of course, let’s forget that it is persistent and is absorbed in fat, and God knows what long term effects on children.” Hmm. I guess no one knows the effects that DDT has on humans because it seems like none is found as far as ill-effects of this. No studies have shown DDT to be a hazard to humans…period. I know people personally exposed to DDT and their health is fine. Two people I know lived to the ages of mid ’80s and low ’90s. And they were perfectly fine as humans can get health-wise.

So put your anger aside and stop the irate writing and write like a professional, that is what you are isn’t it?

By: Sam Bryks

Sam Bryks — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:33:08 +0000

Renee.. i very much appreciate your concern, and I do not want to be in conflict with you as i value what you do here and have said it before and say it again.
I think that Marc’s comments are taken out of context. In an ideal world if we could control pests without toxics that have potential harm to people, it would be wonderful, but I know that Marc is not against pesticides per se, but is against excessive use, and as I am, is for prevention and solving any pest problem in the best way with the least use of pesticides that is possible. That’s it… nothing more complex than that.
IPM is a lot simpler than it seems. If there is anything i can do to help advance undrestanding of this, i will do my best. I saw in the latest edition of PCT magazine that the National Research Defense Council NRDC (i don’t know if you know this or remember, but they were active in banning use of Alar on apples about two decades ago due to concerns about human health) – they have endorsed the NPMA Green Certification policy. I am a member of NPMA but i am not yet familiar with this but i know that NPMA also endorses IPM and i would not be surprised that their Green Certificsation has a lot of commonalities with IPM..
Renee, i will do my best to moderate my own sometime abrasive comments but so much of what you have put here speaks to the concept.
Education, and knowledge of the pest and its behaviour and looking for best practices so that the people most vulnerable do not have to suffer this horrid pest as well as excess use of pesticides..
whether we call it IPM or not is perhaps irrelevant, except that when i am trying in my own struggles to educate stakeholders I use the concept as something that people can see and grasp. When i tell tenants that it takes co-operation and if they cannot prepare due to physical limitations or in cases in which we know that the limitations are related to mental health issues then getting help for them is not optional, it is a must, and that it is not only their responsibility, but it is shared – i am talking IPM. When i tell a group of superintendents or property managers that helping to facilitate help for a tenant to prepare for treatment for bed bugs is THEIR JOB when the tenant is incapable of doing this on their own, i am talking IPM. And when i am working with pest control firms, i emphasize to them that it is not enough to just send people to spray units endlessly, but it takes communication with clients and oversight of the situation as pest management, that is IPM.
ok.. i’ll stop …. i am prone to expositions … sorry for that..
If i had another better way to describe the process rather than IPM, I might drop the term, but truthfully, it is a concept that has much background and much of common sense process attached to it, and when it is being portrayed in incorrect terms, it needs to be supported..The National Healthy Homes organization as well as NEHA and CDC and HUD support IPM programs and a number of states have made School IPM a rule of best practices.
We took the term a step further with the IPM Chain of Accountabiity Program, and so far where we have presented this formally, it has been well accepted. The idea of accountability in solving and preventing bed bug problems is clear.
ok.. i must stop there..
best wishes on your ongoing endeavours…
Sam from Jerusalem

By: Renee Corea

Renee Corea — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 15:19:31 +0000

I actually started a reply to WakeUp. I would have referenced Michael Potter’s op-ed from last Sunday — which should carry some weight since he was calling for EPA/state exemptions and for new pesticides R&D. Truth is I don’t know how to reach someone who thinks DDT resistance is propaganda (what I myself think about DDT is clear from my posts). So I gave up before finishing it and was going to try again. Or not. Sometimes people just need to vent and I did not think WakeUp is someone in the industry; sounds to me like a bed bug-suffering member of the public.

I’m not trying to make this site IPM “clean” — whatever that means. What I actually said (and explained) is that I avoid the word IPM here — it is a confusing term that requires many explanations and definitions and is therefore not of much use to me, to me personally. This post is entirely about this confusion, my confusion.

As for this debate about IPM and pesticides, while not for the first time you are suggesting that people are making this up with an intent to politicize, there is Marc Lame speaking plainly, so plainly that a child could understand.

I don’t want to fight anymore, Sam. It serves no purpose.

By: Sam Bryks

Sam Bryks — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 19:29:23 +0000

Renee,, in a forum of comment, as in a debate which is what is happening here over and over again in relation to IPM, i think that there is a necessity to put illogical and distorted arguments into light.
You are correct in Saying that IPM as a “substitute” for pesticides iis a categorical error.. It is exactly that, but i keep hearing comments about how IPM excludes pesticides or that it doesn’t exist, and I present the realities here about how incorrect that is.,.
Hearing some of these pro pesticide arguments without any real regard for the reality of human health is beyond comprension to me. No one says we should tolerate bed bugs and not use pesticides, but respected scientists and aothers say that we should not return to pesticides that pose risk to people and especially to children. So we get rid of the bed bugs, but we make children suffer for that.
I am presenting a well argued perspective here and i shoiuld have the privilege of calling nonsense as it is .. nonsense..
Perhaps i am wasting my time .. but i thought that this was a place to present best practices. We have people ;like Rich arguing against IPM .. |I never viewed IPM as a pollitical thing bvecause what it is was always very clear to me and i have pracdticed it for nearly 30 years with great satisfaction at every success and every time it meant less pesticides. but hwne i hear people politicizing IPM and making it seem as if it is an anti-pesticide ideology.. it frustrates me to no end. IPM is not anti-pesticide. it is based on common sense and on best use of pesticides when needed…
if that doesn’t make sense, well, perhaps I have to leave this excellent blog and stop comments altogether. there is so much here that is part of what IPM is really about and in that it shares the logic and common sense of the IPM concept.. But now and then we get this kind of ridiculous stance and i think it deserves response..
Debate is part of democracy and comments about opposing positions when based on well grounded facts can be framed in sarcasm and humour and example. And when there is stupidity, well, it needs to be identified for what it is… tune in on your own congresional or senatorial debates or British or Canadian parliamentary question periods
I take my lumps when i am wrong…
if you wnat to make NYvsBedBugs, IPM “clean” that is your choice Renee.. I ike your site, but i don’t need to hear this kind of stuff wihtout responding, so i can just not hear it at all if that’s what it takes. I think it diminshes your site if it is unanswered.

By: Renee Corea

Renee Corea — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 18:30:59 +0000

I wish we would stop having this conversation (the I can’t believe you’re so stupid conversation) and start having a productive conversation, on the level of dirty reality where things actually happen, of what can be done, and how these positions can be reconciled for the greater good of society.

We’ve reached a possibly manufactured impasse, but an impasse nonetheless, in that we don’t want pesticides, apparently, but we don’t want bed bugs either.

Fine. What can we kill bed bugs with instead of pesticides? And how can we make this affordable? Because if it’s not affordable it’s not a solution.

No one wants to have that conversation — there is no political will for the solutions that suggest themselves when you start to think about the problem in this way, and the various stakeholders do not want to look to themselves to see what they can improve and what they can offer.

The idea that IPM is a substitute for pesticides is a categorical error.

However much Sam wishes to say that this is not so, there are clearly people out there proclaiming this loudly. To wit, the nice people of Bloomington considering the bed bug problem from the comfort of their cocktail party.

Why do I care?

Because they have the power to shape the discourse.

And there are people in NYC, people living with bed bugs, who will get no relief.

The people who can afford thermal and other high-end bed bug treatments are effectively saying to everyone else, sucks to be you.

By: Sam Bryks

Sam Bryks — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 16:36:50 +0000

I wasn’t going to bother to reply to this nonsense, but it is a prime example of what is wrong with the industry..
it is exactly this kind of nonsensical thoughtless drivel that hurts the pest management industry’s credibiity. ,. Yes, let’s go back to 1946…. we can bring back X-ray machines in shoe stores to see if shoes fit, and let’s bring back lead paint cause it works so well to preserve buildings, and let’s not worry about exposure of workers to asbestos…cause it is such a wonderful and inexpensive material.
Bed bugs had been shown to have resistance to DDT as far back as the early 50′s and therefore it is most likely that it would not be effective, but of course, let’s forget that it is persistent and is absorbed in fat, and God knows what long term effects on children. The ban on some organophosphates was grounded in concerns about risk to children and results showing impact on developing fetuses of experimental animals (chlorpyrifos),. Go for it “wakeuppeople”, why don’t you let us know the name of your firm, so some readers can be warned not to use your services.,
Given a choice between this kind of nonsense and the approaches supported by IPM practictioners, i think that the answer is quite clear, and let’s hope that common sense will prevail instead of nonsense..,

By: WakeUpPeople

WakeUpPeople — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 00:39:09 +0000

I am all for bringing back the old pesticides that worked. The pesticides are now banned and need to be brought back because this bedbug outbreak is an emergency. And the EPA said back in the ’70s that they would bring back DDT if need be if there was an emergency. So, that should be done with all the pesticides that worked and are now banned. I do not wanna read any of that “DDT does not work” propaganda because I’m not talking specifically about DDT here. I believe that the answer herein lies in IPM and pesticides. But, 80% pesticides and 20% IPM.

How many times can an exterminator spray for roaches. Well, there’s 2 things here. I believe that an exterminator should spray for roaches and that should not be an “all-fix”. Because if someone does not wash their floors or their stoves or counters or refrigerators and has roaches, well, the spray and pray will not work. But, clean up and caulk and spray and that could work.

But, getting rid of bedbugs are backbreaking work and labor and pesticides should be 80% if not 100% of the solution because there are a lotta people out there that just cannot do the labor like the elderly and disabled and other people.

“There is no such thing as IPM in structural pest control and bedbugs aren’t going to drive everyone into the arms of those who worship that the IPM Temple of Doom. What bedbugs will do is awaken everyone to the need to go back to what worked in 1946 and what will be the answer in 2010. Chemical pesticides!”

I agree with Rich. Bravo! Someone is on our side!