Deet and other pesticides hurting the reef?

[Bay Island Diver]

I find it amazing that rather than trying to combat the problems that DO exist the Marine Park is putting so much time an effort into finding new problems to tackle, such as this Deet issue.

I guess they have caught all the poachers, stopped all the anchoring on the reef and educated every child on the Island, so they need something new to do. Bravo

 

[RTBDiver]

How the hell does anyone make a claim that something is harmful and then proceed to ask for help in supporting that claim. I'm sorry and no disrespect to Doc, but this is an irresponsible approach to any management process.

I too want to show no disrespect to anyone, including the marine park but can't you just see the managers reading these posts and thinking "Oh S$%$" someone is actually asking us why we recomend some products and badmouth others, We better find something to back this up or they will think there is just a better profit margin with the products we sell in our store. I have emailed the cactus juice people and asked where in nature I will find Octisalate, Oxybenzone and Octinoxate but they also do not reply. They just don't sound "all natural" to me but I may be mistaken and hope to hear from them. Unlike DEET, if you google those chemicals you will find all kinds of information about them hurting the reef. They also sell another "repellant" that would not be able to be called a repellant in the US or canada and it contains ingredients that in the US and Canada must be labeled not to be used on children under 3 years of age while DEET is two months and another issue to consider is that lavender, an ingredient in one of the "eco friendly" products has been shown to cause breast development in young boys.
Seems there would also be a liability issue in recomending people not use a product proven worldwide to reduce bug bites and therefore helping to prevent things like Dengue and Malaria while at the same time suggesting they use products that have not been accepted as a repellant or gone through any type of testing.
Seems the RMP really should stick to the facts and not get caught up in this type of thing as it only serves to discredit them.

 

[Doc]

I think I was able to dissect his post and obviously came to the same conclusions as you, but wanted it clarified before I made my next statement.

How the hell does anyone make a claim that something is harmful and then proceed to ask for help in supporting that claim. I'm sorry and no disrespect to Doc, but this is an irresponsible approach to any management process.

No, apparently you don't see what was going on in that post.

I too want to show no disrespect to anyone

Doc (Radawski) was not the author of anything being debated here so far. He just re-posted info from a different forum. You can't apologize for "disrespecting him" because RTBmeDiver has said nothing... yet.

I say this only so that his name doesn't get all twisted up in mis-perception.

Please... you may now continue with filling Page 2.

 

[lmorin]

Read about DEET safety HERE and about picaridin safety HERE.

There are 4 levels of "safety," Category I being worst. Form your own opinions. Summary:

DEET... is slightly toxic by the eye, dermal and oral routes
and has been placed in Toxicity Category III (the second lowest of four
categories) for these effects.

Technical grade Picaridin has low acute oral, dermal and inhalation toxicity. It is classified as Toxicity Category IV for acute inhalation toxicity and primary dermal irritation and Toxicity Category III for acute oral, acute dermal and primary eye irritation.

Picaridin is considered moderately toxic to rainbow trout, but not to bob-white quail, green algae or Daphnia m. (freshwater invertebrate). Similar information is not included on the DEET sheet.

 

[mrlipis]

No, apparently you don't see what was going on in that post.

No I got it. The Marine park sent out a bulk email asking for people to support their claims. I can only assume that Doc is on that mailing list. I clearly went out of my way to exonerate Doc. I guess I could have worded it differently.

Doc (Radawski) was not the author of anything being debated here so far. He just re-posted info from a different forum. You can't apologize for "disrespecting him" because RTBmeDiver has said nothing... yet.

I don't think this was from a forum but a group email as in "reply to all".
When I said I am sorry, I was not apologizing to Doc, just the terminology I used, Sorry, but.

I would have much preferred to have Doc, clarify his own post. I'm sure it would have been a little less abrasive.

 

[RTBDiver]

I don't think this was from a forum but a group email as in "reply to all".
.

It actually came from HERE http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/

 

[Doc]

No I got it. The Marine park sent out a bulk email asking for people to support their claims.... I guess I could have worded it differently.

Maybe that's part of the basis for this thread. Communication errors.

The RMP writes their posts, newsletters and websites in what is obviously a strained attempt at English. It is better, much better than I speak Spanish, but when you attempt to communicate with electrons, much less in a non-native language, problems arise.

I don't think this was from a forum but a group email as in "reply to all".

See the above explanation of e-mail vs. usenet groups (or similar) from RTBDiver.

When I said I am sorry, I was not apologizing to Doc, just the terminology I used, Sorry, but. I would have much preferred to have Doc, clarify his own post.

The way this thread and those like it have been going, I didn't want any stink landing on Doc Radawski because of a misunderstanding of how usenet groups (such as coral-net) function. With the internet, it helps to nip such things in the bud. Besides, Doc Radawski (RTBmeDiver) has a real life on the Southern shores of Roatan.

I'm sure it would have been a little less abrasive.

I can be extremely abrasive, I am very good at it. Note the title under my name~ and I didn't even pay for it. You'll know when I get abrasive, trust me.

I think we're all on the same page here. Until you show me scientific proof (studies from a reputable source like Jamie and Adam) I don't want to hear the dire warnings of DEET and the Oceans.

RMP and the dozens of other well meaning Green Gang Groups are eroding their credibility by repeating seeming unverified pseudo science.

This is an important but overly-long thread. Beating on the RMP in particular is an irrelevant and way to narrow a focus. They just today issued their current internet newsletter and apparently the reef destruction by the yacht "didn't meet the press deadline". They have other more pressing basic day-to-day issues such as placing buoys.

Take this to a broader forum, it is worthy of such exposure.

 

[Ayisha]

I am sure there are many options more toxic than deet available but what I was looking for were options known to be as effective and safer for the environment

bold added

Picaridin is registered with the EPA. The CDC recognizes and recommends picaridin as effective, just as DEET. The WHO field and lab studies allow it to support picaridin as effective protection against West Nile virus. Furthermore, picaridin is not a solvent to plastics, coatings or sealants, and will not damage plastic or synthetic materials, unlike DEET, which is incompatible with synthetic materials. That alone makes picaridin environmentally safer than DEET.

Here are some statements:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has revised its recommendations on insect repellents to use for effective protection against mosquitoes that may transmit the West Nile virus. In addition to DEET-based repellents, the CDC is now recommending repellents that contain the active ingredient Picaridin, which is new to the United States. Picaridin is proven to be as effective as DEET, but is more pleasant to use.

Both field and lab studies conducted by the World Health Organization have shown that Picaridin is comparable to and often superior to DEET for long-lasting, effective protection. Picaridin is currently one of the top selling active ingredients in mosquito repellents in Europe.

United Industries - Cutter Insect Repellent - Cutter Bug Repellent - Mosquito Repellent

Here is some more info on Picaridin in a nutshell:

Picaridin

 

[Ayisha]

...They also sell another "repellant" that would not be able to be called a repellant in the US or canada and it contains ingredients that in the US and Canada must be labeled not to be used on children under 3 years of age while DEET is two months...

bold added

You mean that DEET can be used on children as young as 6 months old, not "two months" - and that is with provisions. DEET is not a carcinogen, but it is certainly toxic.

 

[RTBDiver]

bold added

You mean that DEET can be used on children as young as 6 months old, not "two months" - and that is with provisions. DEET is not a carcinogen, but it is certainly toxic.

No, I meant 2 months as listed Here
ATSDR - DEET - Guidelines to Reduce Exposure

And Here http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/qa/insect_repellent.htm