Abstract:
The effectiveness of DDT and other insecticides when
properly used as indoor residual spray (IRS) to combat
malaria is not in question [1]. However, the high body
burden of DDT of those protected is very high [2], and
the human health consequences due to IRS insecticides
of those protected are of great concern [1-3]. What may
be questioned though are the effectiveness, health
impacts, social consequences, and sustainability of some
IRS alternatives. Many promising ‘silver bullets’ (using
anything but IRS) to beat malaria over the last number of
decades have come and gone. Yet, the one proven
method, IRS, gets less recognition or attention. IRS interrupts
transmission where most infections occur - the
home. It is also at home where those most likely to suffer
malaria - babies, children and pregnant mothers - are to
be found. The negative part of the IRS message though,
remains the inevitable co-exposure of the very same susceptible
groups to IRS insecticides. Protection by IRS
comes at a cost, creating a paradox -protection from
deadly malaria may carry a health burden due to the IRS
chemicals used [1,3].
