People concerned mosquito spraying has harmful effects

While aerial mosquito spraying has been around for nearly 70 years, residents have grown increasingly concerned lately with the chemicals used and their potential health side effects.

Aerial missions have been recently conducted in Nokomis and North Port, while ground sprayings took place in Englewood and Siesta Key, according to Sarasota County Mosquito Management.

In its sprayings, the Mosquito Management team uses Dibrom, a brand name of naled, an insecticide in the organophosphate pesticide family that is commonly used to kill adult mosquitoes. It’s been used in the United States for the past 57 years.

And depending on data from community surveillance — which measures mosquito populations in the county — it may also use anvil and zenivex, a low-volume spray which contains less chemicals but is more expensive.

The use of naled has been banned by the European Union and Puerto Rico, a country heavily impacted by the Zika virus, which stopped using it over concerns it causes behavioral issues in children.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, however, says naled is safe for people, pets, wildlife, farm animals, the environment or the water.

According to the agency, naled “does not pose a health risk to people or pets in the area that is sprayed” when “a small amount of insecticide” is used. The CDC says naled does not cause cancer or asthma attacks.

Mosquito Management applies naled at a rate of 0.64 ounces-per-acre from a release altitude of 300 feet. Each application of the chemical is calibrated to maximize the product effectiveness on targeted pests while reducing potential safety concerns.

“Naled is known to interfere with cholinesterase activity, an enzyme essential for the proper working of your nervous system,” Danielle Fischer said on Facebook, citing Extension Toxicology Network, a collaborative website comprised of students from University of California-Davis, Oregon State University, Michigan State University, Cornell University and University of Idaho.

On its browse page, the website celebrates German philosopher, Paracelsus, noted as the father of modern toxicology.

In his defense of naled, interestingly enough, Matt Smith, the county’s director of Mosquito Management, circles back to Paracelsus, saying “The difference between poison and medicine is in the dosage.”

“People take medications that are extremely toxic because they need it, like radiation,” Smith said. “There is a great benefit, but do I want radiation pumped into me? No. But I realize it’s a small dose and there are health benefits.”

Like anything with chemicals, Smith said naled is not without risk. Although when used at the correct, small dosage, that concern is minimized. It’s also extremely effective, reducing the mosquito population 80-90 percent based on recent findings.

“The reason we use (naled) is directly for the public’s benefit,” Smith said. “A lot of mosquitoes are very aggressive. And our main mission is public health and protecting it from the huge list of mosquito-borne viruses.”

In his 15 years in the business, Smith says he’s heard all the concerns but read no viable evidence to back up the claims.

“I live in this county, too,” he said. “I have a wife, kids and pets. I’ve studied, I pay attention to all the science and I’ve seen no evidence of adverse environmental effects. And we do this all for public health.”

The county contracts with Vector Disease Control International for its aerial applications, which costs around $150,000 a year. The chemicals cost roughly $400,000 a year on top of that.

Should the county increase its applications of zenivex, which contains a potentially less harmful insecticide, etofenprox, it may increase its chemical costs another $100,000 a year.

“Everybody in Florida does a fair amount of spraying and Dibrom is less expensive. We also have to be fiscally responsible,” said Smith, noting there is no documentation naled is unsafe at the proper dosage.

Despite that, doubters linger.

“Of course the CDC and Environmental Protection Agency say the spraying is safe, but not all scientists agree,” Denaro said on Facebook.

The Florida Department of Health did not respond to attempts for comment.

Email: jscholles@sun-herald.com