To spray or not to spray?

1. To spray or not to spray? Presented by Rita Pakalniskyte Marie-Helene Pech Marcin Otorowski Iris Müller Anne-Laure Mairesse

2. Case background • DDT – Dichloro–Diphenyl-Trichloroethane • DDT as a way of preventing malaria • Malaria facts: • 2-3 million deaths annualy • 350 – 500 million people affected • Economic loss (1/2 billion dollars per year) • Threat of 40% world population • Mostly affect poor, developing countries • Since 1939 DDT is commonly used for fighting against malaria

3. The problem • Long half-life length (up to 15 years), • Bio-accumulates in human body and environment, • Passedfrommotherto infants during breast feeding • No one ever died from sprayed DDT • No proofs that it cannot lead to death nor environment pollution (asbestosexample). • UNO considers banning usage of DDT -> less polluted environment but higher amount of malariainfections. Environment vshuman life

4. Principal values for decision • Human health and life • Natural environment • Financing Possibleoptions

5. Why to use, why not to use DDT?

6. The choice Marie: „We should not ban DDT. It can save many people. I am aware of risk, but the benefits aredefinitely worth it” Marcin: „We should ban DDT. We can’t afford such a high risk, and be responsible for its effects”

7. Twomethodsof makingthisdecision Risk / Benefit analysis Precautionary principle

8. Risk/benefitsanalysisvsprecautionaryprinciple

9. The decision • Awareness of difficulty of choice • Complex issue • Choosing less evil solution • Ethical and moral problem • Consequences • Our solution – to limit usage of DDT