Century of DDT

Metcalf, Robert L.

doi:10.1021/jf60188a040

Cited by 154 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, both DDT (a pesticide) and CFCs (a refrigerant) were perceived as effective, safe technological solutions to serious problems of disease (mosquito-borne malaria) and malnutrition or illness (food spoilage). Only later did the systemic environmental consequences of these discoveries become known (for DDT, see for example Metcalf, 1973, andPalumbi, 2001). In fact, discovery of the insecticidal properties of DDT resulted in an award of the Nobel Prize (for medicine, in 1948).…”

Section: Risk Versus Resilience Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond eco‐efficiency: a resilience perspective

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Business strategy with regard to sustainability is currently dominated by an eco-effi ciency approach that seeks to simultaneously reduce costs and environmental impacts using tactics such as waste minimization or reuse, pollution prevention or technological improvement. However, in practice, eco-effi ciency optimization rarely results in improved diversity or adaptability and consequently may have perverse consequences to sustainability by eroding the resilience of production systems. This editorial article contrasts a resilience approach with an eco-effi ciency approach as they relate to strategic sustainable development. In some cases, the system attributes that are critically important to resilience -such as spare capacity, reserve resource stocks and redundancy -are in opposition to ecoeffi ciency. Our most important insight is the realization that investments in what may seem counter to eco-effi ciency can nonetheless be important for sustainability.

show abstract

Section: Risk Versus Resilience Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond eco‐efficiency: a resilience perspective

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such situations arise when the parent substance is readily converted in the exposure medium or in organisms, yielding products possessing similar persistence and accumulation potential. A well-known example is the transformation of DDT to DDE (Metcalf 1973). Consequently, a screening for the parent compound alone would disregard the impact elicited by the accumulation of these conversion products.…”

Section: Interpretation Of Test Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Problems faced when evaluating the bioaccumulation potential of substances under REACH

Ehrlich

Jöhncke

Drost

et al. 2011

Integr Environ Assess Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The identification and regulation of substances that combine persistence, bioaccumulation potential, and toxicity ("PBT" substances) is one central aspect of the European chemical legislation REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation, and Restriction of Chemicals), because these substances may elicit adverse long-term effects after release to the environment. The determination of a substance that has persistence, bioaccumulation potential, and toxicity is based on a set of distinct cutoff criteria identified in Annex XIII of the REACH regulation. Regarding the bioaccumulation potential, the evaluation is focused on the substance's bioconcentration factor as single decisive criterion. In addition, the REACH guidelines provide a selection of standardized test procedures for measuring bioconcentration factor and guidance in appraising test results. However, alternative test results like bioaccumulation factors and biomagnification as well as additional indications for a bioaccumulation potential such as trophic magnification are only allowed for supporting evidence. The currently used test systems with aquatic exposure have been demonstrated to generate reliable results for the majority of neutral, lipophilic organic substances, which facilitate clear decision-making by means of the crucial bioconcentration factor cutoff criteria of Annex XIII. However, certain substance groups such as highly hydrophobic organic substances and amphiphilic and nonlipophilic compounds are difficult to evaluate with common test strategies due to inappropriate test systems or accumulation mechanisms not based on lipophilicity. Recent scientific progress has already been made to establish alternative test systems and to refine the bioaccumulation assessment by consideration of additive accumulation mechanisms and indications. This article gives an overview on actual shortcomings in the current bioaccumulation assessment under REACH and also provides suggestions for a refinement of evaluation.

show abstract

“…This was largely based on the ecological considerations, including persistence in the environment and sufficient bioaccumulation and toxic effects to interfere with reproduction in pelagic birds (i.e., thinning of eggshell). Between 1940 and 1973, estimates indicated that more than 2 million tons of DDT were used in the United States, about 80% of them in agriculture, and some level of resistance was reported in populations of 98 species of economically important insects (Metcalf, 1973). Today, no living organism may be considered free of DDT.…”

Section: Environmental Risk Of Ddt Usementioning

confidence: 99%