How one scientist took on the chemical industry Mark Lytle

In 1958, Rachel Carson received a letter

describing songbirds suddenly dropping
from tree branches.

The writer blamed their deaths
on a pesticide called DDT

that exterminators had sprayed
on a nearby marsh.

The letter was the push
Carson needed to investigate DDT.

She had already heard from scientists
and conservationists who were worried

that rampant use of the pesticide
posed a threat to fish, birds,

and possibly humans.

She began to make inquiries
through government contacts

from her years working
in the United States Bureau of Fisheries.

She asked: “what has already silenced
the voices of spring?”

In 1962, Carson published her findings
in “Silent Spring.”

Her book documented
the misuse of chemicals

and their toll on nature
and human health.

“Silent Spring” immediately drew both
applause and impassioned dissent—

along with vicious personal attacks
on the author.

How did this mild-mannered biologist
and writer ignite such controversy?

Carson began her career
as a hardworking graduate student,

balancing her studies in biology
at John Hopkins University

with part time jobs.

Still, she had to leave school
before completing her doctorate

to provide for her ailing father
and sister.

Carson found part time work
with the Bureau of Fisheries

writing for a radio program
on marine biology.

Her ability to write materials that could
hold the general public’s attention

impressed her superiors,
and in 1936,

she became the second woman
to be hired at the Bureau full time.

In 1941, she published
the first of three books on the ocean,

combining science with lyrical meditations
on underwater worlds.

These explorations resonated
with a wide audience.

In “Silent Spring,”
Carson turned her attention

to the ways human actions
threaten the balance of nature.

DDT was originally used during
World War II to shield crops from insects

and protect soldiers
from insect-borne diseases.

After the war, it was routinely sprayed
in wide swaths to fight pests,

often with unforeseen results.

One attempt to eradicate fire ants
in the southern U.S.

killed wildlife indiscriminately,
but did little to eliminate the ants.

In spite of this and other mishaps,
the US Department of Agriculture

and chemical companies
extolled the benefits of DDT.

There was little regulation or public
awareness about its potential harm.

But Carson showed how
the overuse of chemicals

led to the evolution
of resistant species—

which, in turn, encouraged the development
of deadlier chemicals.

Since DDT does not dissolve in water,

she asserted that over time
it would accumulate in the environment,

the bodies of insects, the tissues
of animals who consume those insects,

and eventually humans.

She suggested that exposure to DDT
might alter the structure of genes,

with unknown consequences
for future generations.

The response to “Silent Spring”
was explosive.

For many people the book
was a call to regulate substances

capable of catastrophic harm.

Others objected that Carson
hadn’t mentioned DDT’s role

controlling the threat insects
posed to human health.

Former Secretary of Agriculture
Ezra Taft Benson demanded to know

“why a spinster with no children
was so concerned about genetics?”

and dismissed Carson
as “probably a Communist.”

A lawyer for a pesticide manufacturer
alluded to Carson and her supporters

as “sinister influences”
aiming to paint businesses as “immoral.”

In reality, Carson had focused
on the dangers of chemicals

because they weren’t widely understood,
while the merits were well publicized.

She rejected the prevailing belief
that humans

should and could control nature.

Instead, she challenged people
to cultivate

“maturity and mastery, not of nature,
but of ourselves.”

Carson died of cancer in 1964,

only two years after
the publication of “Silent Spring.”

Her work galvanized a generation
of environmental activists.

In 1969, under pressure
from environmentalists,

Congress passed
the National Environmental Policy Act

that required federal agencies to evaluate
environmental impacts of their actions.

To enforce the act,

President Richard Nixon created
the Environmental Protection Agency.

And in 1972, the EPA issued
a partial ban on the use of DDT.

Long after her death, Rachel Carson
continued to advocate for nature

through the lingering impact
of her writing.

1958 年,雷切尔·卡森(Rachel Carson)收到一封信,信中

描述了鸣禽突然
从树枝上掉下来。

作者将他们的死亡归咎于

灭虫者喷洒
在附近沼泽地的一种名为 DDT 的杀虫剂。

这封信是
卡森调查 DDT 所需的推动力。

她已经从科学家
和环保主义者那里听说过,他们担心

农药的猖獗使用
会对鱼类、鸟类

甚至人类构成威胁。

她在美国渔业局工作多年,开始
通过政府联系人

进行调查

她问:“是什么让
春天的声音沉寂了?”

1962 年,卡森
在《寂静的春天》中发表了她的发现。

她的书记录
了化学品的滥用

及其对自然
和人类健康的损害。

《寂静的春天》立即引起了
掌声和热烈的反对——

以及对作者的恶毒人身攻击

这位温文尔雅的生物学家
和作家是如何引发如此争议的?

卡森的职业生涯
始于勤奋的研究生,


在约翰霍普金斯大学的生物学学习

与兼职工作之间取得了平衡。

尽管如此,为了照顾生病的父亲和妹妹,她还是不得不
在完成博士学位之前离开学校

卡森找到
了在渔业局为海洋生物学

广播节目写作的兼职工作

她撰写能够吸引公众注意力的材料的能力

给她的上级留下了深刻印象
,1936 年,

她成为该局第二位
全职受雇的女性。

1941 年,她出版
了三本关于海洋的书籍中的第一本,

将科学与
对水下世界的抒情冥想相结合。

这些探索引起
了广大观众的共鸣。

在“寂静的春天”中,
卡森将注意力

转向人类行为
威胁自然平衡的方式。

滴滴涕最初是在
二战期间用于保护农作物免受昆虫

侵害并保护士兵
免受虫媒疾病的侵害。

战后,它经常被
大面积喷洒以对抗害虫,

结果往往出乎意料。 在美国南部

根除火蚁的一次尝试

不分青红皂白地杀死了野生动物,
但对消灭火蚁却收效甚微。

尽管发生了这些事故和其他事故
,美国农业部

和化学公司仍
称赞 DDT 的好处。 对其潜在危害

几乎没有监管或公众
意识。

但卡森展示
了过度使用化学物质如何

导致
耐药物种的进化——

这反过来又鼓励了更
致命的化学物质的发展。

由于滴滴涕不溶于水,

她断言随着时间的推移,
它会在环境、

昆虫的身体
、食用这些昆虫的动物组织中积累

,最终会在人类中积累。

她认为,接触 DDT
可能会改变基因结构,

对后代产生未知的影响

对《寂静的春天》的反应
是爆炸性的。

对许多人来说,这
本书呼吁规范

能够造成灾难性伤害的物质。

其他人反对卡森
没有提到滴滴涕在

控制昆虫
对人类健康构成威胁方面的作用。

前农业部长
Ezra Taft Benson 要求知道

“为什么一个没有孩子的老处女
如此关注基因?”

并将卡森
斥为“可能是共产主义者”。

一家农药制造商的律师
暗指卡森和她的支持者

是“险恶的影响”,
旨在将企业描绘成“不道德的”。

实际上,卡森之所以
关注化学品的危险,是

因为它们并未被广泛了解,
而其优点却得到了广泛宣传。

她拒绝普遍
认为人类

应该并且可以控制自然的信念。

相反,她挑战
人们培养

“成熟和精通,不是来自自然,
而是来自我们自己”。

卡森于 1964 年死于癌症,

距离《寂静的春天》出版仅两年。

她的工作激励了
一代环保活动家。

1969 年,在
环保主义者的压力下,

国会通过
了《国家环境政策法案》

,要求联邦机构评估
其行动对环境的影响。

为了执行该法案,

理查德尼克松总统创建
了环境保护署。

并且在 1972 年,EPA 发布
了部分禁止使用 DDT 的禁令。

在她死后很久,雷切尔·卡森

通过她作品的挥之不去的
影响继续倡导自然。