Why did Rachel Carson think that DDT was that bad?

Answer 1

what was so bad about DDT? apart from the fact it gave some people cancer and weak pelican shells? and why was it banned? As biographer Mark Hamilton Lytle writes, Carson "quite self-consciously decided to write a book calling into question the paradigm of scientific progress that defined postwar American culture." The overriding theme of Silent Spring is the powerful-and often negative-effect humans have on the natural world.[37] Carson's main argument is that pesticides have detrimental effects on the environment; they are more properly termed "biocides", she argues, because their effects are rarely limited to the target pests. DDT is a prime example, but other synthetic pesticides come under scrutiny as well-many of which are subject to bioaccumulation. Carson also accuses the chemical industry of intentionally spreading disinformation and public officials of accepting industry claims uncritically. Most of the book is devoted to pesticides' effects on natural ecosystems, but four chapters also detail cases of human pesticide poisoning, cancer, and other illnesses attributed to pesticides.[38] About DDT and cancer, the subject of so much subsequent debate, Carson says only a little: In laboratory tests on animal subjects, DDT has produced suspicious liver tumors. Scientists of the Food and Drug Administration who reported the discovery of these tumors were uncertain how to classify them, but felt there was some "justification for considering them low grade hepatic cell carcinomas." Dr. Hueper [author of Occupational Tumors and Allied Diseases] now gives DDT the definite rating of a "chemical carcinogen."

Answer 2

Rachel Carson believed DDT was harmful because of its persistence in the environment, its toxic effects on wildlife, and its potential harm to human health. She argued that the widespread use of DDT could lead to ecological disruption and harm to species other than the targeted pests.