46 DDT — Killer of Killers 



were afraid to handle iu This, in part, was due to the fact 

 that DDT was a relatively new material and neither the man- 

 ufacturers themselves nor the governmental agencies that 

 were working with it had had sufficient time to learn all about 

 it. Of course, it was known that DDT was somewhat toxic 

 to many of the lower animals, but experiments were still in- 

 conclusive. But what of its effea on man? Would a single 

 large dose kill? Would a number of small doses taken at 

 intervals over a period of time have a cumulative effea that 

 :would eventually result in death even though a single dose 

 produced no toxic symptoms? 



Obviously, few men are so constituted that they will aa 

 as human guinea pigs so that the world may get the answers 

 to such important questions. A more indirea approach must 

 be used. Rats, mice, rabbits, cats, dogs, and numerous other 

 animals must take the place of man himself and be the un- 

 willing test animals. The manufacturers as well as various 

 governmental agencies lost no time in rounding up a number 

 of these animals and forcing DDT down their throats, inject- 

 ing it into their bodies, and applying it to their skins. 



But all such tests take time, particularly if one is study- 

 ing the cumulative effects of small doses of a substance taken 

 at intervals. Should DDT have been kept off the market un- 

 til years had elapsed and enough data had been collected to 

 determine without doubt just exaaly how poisonous it was? 

 This would have been senseless, for in the meantime the in- 

 seas would have been able to continue their deadly work. It 

 was certainly much better to release the material to the public 

 with a word of caution as to its possible dangers. Let people 

 use it, but let them also realize that they should also use 

 common sense in handling it. That was the attitude of the 

 U. S. Department of Agriculture, Produaion and Marketing 



