Quote :

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is to
launch a new campaign to eliminate deaths from malaria, to mark the
first World Malaria Day.
The disease causes over a million deaths a year, with 90% of all cases occurring in Africa.
Mr Ban wants all of Africa to have access to basic measures to control the disease by the end of 2010.
"We need desperately to step up our efforts to roll back malaria", he says in a statement.
More than half a billion people are infected with malaria each year.
Despite this, it is preventable and treatable.

BBC News

Can't see it happening. There's enough global crises imminent without worrying about an age-old one.

Well I can see it happening but the plan is to prevent it happening. I have been critical about Bono getting 50 billion of US taxpayer money for aids. This money as far as I am concerned just goes to the drug companies and backhanders. My understanding is that Malaria was well in control until the spraying of DDT was banned. Maybe there was no money to be made on DDT. Maybe the World Wildlife Fund cares more about a mosqeito than a human.

The DDT issue is far more complex than you think youngdan. The main concern is that DDT becomes useless as mosquito populations develop resistance to it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT#DDT_use_against_malaria

Distributing a simple mosquito net to all of Africa would be a good start... You can buy them here for about a tenner so imagine what you can distribute them for on mass quantity without profit. Ireland could ample afford to give every person in Sub Saharan Africa a net. Imagine the kudos in that - aside from the moral obligation of course.

Gordon Brown pledged 1 million mosquito nets last week I think.

This sounds good. I am wondering about a long term solution. Perhaps if enough nets were supplied the mosquito's food source (us) would be reduced enough to significantly lower the mosquito population?
I remember reading recently (for a P.ie thread on racial diversity) that people with sickle cell anaemia (not otherwise a good thing to have) are less affected by malaria. Is there a possibility for a bit of genetic engineering to protect people, I wonder. Any medical experts out there?

Sorry, that would be 20 Million nets.

politics.co.uk article

Reading that wiki article it cites Sri Lanka. From 34 to 1955 there were 1.5 million cases. It dropped to 17 cases in 1963 but went to 600000 in 1968 after ddt was banned. Then you read about people complaining about stains on walls. Over here you have sporadic spraying to combat West Nile Virus and Eastern Equine Virus and people are advised to remain indoors. Who knows what effects these sprays have. When you are outdoors here you see mothers spraying insect repellent on kids by the can full. They can not figure that if it kills a hornet then it must be poisonous. When I was growing up that fly spray was some stuff for killing bluebottles. A good start would be to confiscate Bono's money and give everybody on Earth a net. He is a nice guy so he could be given The Al Gore Medal of Honour.

But the issue with ddt is that it has all kinds of other consequences for the food chain, doesn't it?

Kate P wrote:

But the issue with ddt is that it has all kinds of other consequences for the food chain, doesn't it?

The wiki article mentioned Silent Spring which is a book that deals with that topic I believe. But there's plenty to be going on with the DDT-resistant mosquitos without entering a topic that'll only lead to hippy taunts.

Nets certainly seem a good idea. Overall though, malaria is very treatable and while prevention is better then cure, treatement will probably be the focus of the new initiative.

Who does Ban ki Moon want to pay for this. Does he have a magic wand.

youngdan wrote:

Who does Ban ki Moon want to pay for this. Does he have a magic wand.

He claims to have the resources.

Good. Because a small bit of money wisely spent could make a big difference. I would like to see the UN dissappear. After 911 and the Tsunami and lesser events the amount of cash that is raised by private donation is astounding. The problem is being forced by taxes while others with money seem less willing to put their money where their mouth is

youngdan wrote:

Reading that wiki article it cites Sri Lanka. From 34 to 1955 there were 1.5 million cases. It dropped to 17 cases in 1963 but went to 600000 in 1968 after ddt was banned. Then you read about people complaining about stains on walls. Over here you have sporadic spraying to combat West Nile Virus and Eastern Equine Virus and people are advised to remain indoors. Who knows what effects these sprays have. When you are outdoors here you see mothers spraying insect repellent on kids by the can full. They can not figure that if it kills a hornet then it must be poisonous. When I was growing up that fly spray was some stuff for killing bluebottles. A good start would be to confiscate Bono's money and give everybody on Earth a net. He is a nice guy so he could be given The Al Gore Medal of Honour.

You will find here many consciencious organic mothers who regularly dowse their children's heads with carcinogenic fluids ( it says on the label they are carcinogenic) to kill a couple of nits. Have they never heard of a comb? These substances should be banned.

Kate P wrote:

But the issue with ddt is that it has all kinds of other consequences for the food chain, doesn't it?

Well, the major issue was that it was used as a wide-area spray, rather than being used inside houses. That's not to say it wouldn't have got into the food chain (the problem being that it is non-digestible, and remains in body fat, so tends to concentrate up the food chain), but not to the same extent.

Also, did anyone mention the new malaria species in Sarawak?

If that is not true nothing is. I read someplace that the average english woman puts 37 pounds of chemicals onto herself each year. I won't even use shaving cream. If the body was designed/evolved to sweat, how can deoderants be a smart idea? Rolling this stuff onto the nodes under the armpit is a lot worse than minute parts of ddt in my opinion.

The blessing of internet communication is that it renders chemical treatment unneccessary