"God bless General Péron": DDT and the endgame of malaria eradication in Argentina in the 1940s

Health emergencies, science contrarianism and populism: A scoping review

Populism has emerged as a central explanation employed by both media outlets and scholars for the mishandling of the COVID-19 crisis. Nonetheless, the relationship between public health and populism extends before and beyond the pandemic. This paper offers a comprehensive overview of existing evidence and theoretical conceptualisations on the intersection of populism, health emergencies, and contrarian scientific positions, drawing from a diverse range of disciplines. I conducted a scoping review of 283 original studies, analysing their analytical framework, geographic focuses, and methodological approaches. Employing quantitative text analysis, I summarised the research field into 18 common topics, organised into five coherent categories: citizen's perspective, political elites, political communication, pandemic consequences, and non-COVID-related issues. While the scholarly interest in this area has surged since the onset of the pandemic, it has predominantly concentrated on specific cases, such as Brazil and the US, often conflating different policy types. The evidence summary elucidates that populism assumes varying roles within distinct contexts, and there is no linear relationship between political populism and specific approaches to health crises and science. I further compare definitions of populism within the context of health and scientific positions. I propose that future research should employ a policy typology for health emergency responses, assessing political positions based on policy arenas. This paper contributes to the understanding of the complex interplay between political populism, contrarian scientific perspectives, and public health.

DDT and Other Chlorinated Insecticides

The use of organochlorine insecticides such as DDT, lindane and cyclodieneshas declined markedly worldwide over the last decades. Most are now banned or not used. At an acute toxicity level they have been relatively safe in use for humans. However, the greatest concerns are their persistence in people, wildlife and the environment due to their slow metabolism. Although their carcinogenicity for humans has not been supported by strong epidemiological evidence, their potential to be modulators of endocrine and immune function at levels remaining in the environment or associated with residual spraying of DDT continue to be of concern. At present, DDT is still allowed by the United Nations for combating malaria, with continual monitoring and assessment where possible. The toxicological consequences of exposure of animals and people to DDT is discussed as well as some analogues and other insecticides such as lindane, dieldrin and chlordecone that, although little used, continue to persist in surroundings and people. Because of circumstances of world health brought about by climate change or human activities that have yet to develop, there may come a time when the importance of some may re-emerge.