Cargando…

Who’s afraid of DEET? Fearmongering in papers on botanical repellents

DEET (N,N-Diethyl-meta-toluamide) is considered the gold standard in mosquito repellents, not only for its effectiveness, but also for its safety. DEET has been more extensively studied for safety than any other repellent, and is accepted as completely safe when used correctly (i.e. not consumed or...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Shelomi, Matan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7140559/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32268926
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-020-03217-5
_version_ 1783519018950328320
author Shelomi, Matan
author_facet Shelomi, Matan
author_sort Shelomi, Matan
collection PubMed
description DEET (N,N-Diethyl-meta-toluamide) is considered the gold standard in mosquito repellents, not only for its effectiveness, but also for its safety. DEET has been more extensively studied for safety than any other repellent, and is accepted as completely safe when used correctly (i.e. not consumed or bathed in). Researchers studying botanical repellents, however, often paint DEET as far more toxic than it really is, falsely claiming it is a menace to the public health or even the environment. These claims are unfounded, and often the only evidence given by such publications are references to other publications also studying botanical repellents. Such publications are biased, and may be attacking DEET’s excellent safety record to justify their existence and the need for their research. The inconvenient yet undisputable fact is that no botanical repellent has been proven to be as safe as DEET, and the majority never had any safety testing whatsoever. The automatic assumption that botanical repellents are safer than DEET is the ‘appeal to nature fallacy,’ which also drives most of the market for “natural” repellents, yet natural repellents have side effects and even a body count. Finding a botanical repellent that works as well as DEET and is equally safe is a legitimate research goal on its own, and need not be justified by fear-mongering and irrational chemophobia. Researchers studying these alternatives should strive for integrity, raising the real issue of the lack of safety testing for botanical repellents rather than denying the proven safety of DEET.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7140559
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71405592020-04-14 Who’s afraid of DEET? Fearmongering in papers on botanical repellents Shelomi, Matan Malar J Commentary DEET (N,N-Diethyl-meta-toluamide) is considered the gold standard in mosquito repellents, not only for its effectiveness, but also for its safety. DEET has been more extensively studied for safety than any other repellent, and is accepted as completely safe when used correctly (i.e. not consumed or bathed in). Researchers studying botanical repellents, however, often paint DEET as far more toxic than it really is, falsely claiming it is a menace to the public health or even the environment. These claims are unfounded, and often the only evidence given by such publications are references to other publications also studying botanical repellents. Such publications are biased, and may be attacking DEET’s excellent safety record to justify their existence and the need for their research. The inconvenient yet undisputable fact is that no botanical repellent has been proven to be as safe as DEET, and the majority never had any safety testing whatsoever. The automatic assumption that botanical repellents are safer than DEET is the ‘appeal to nature fallacy,’ which also drives most of the market for “natural” repellents, yet natural repellents have side effects and even a body count. Finding a botanical repellent that works as well as DEET and is equally safe is a legitimate research goal on its own, and need not be justified by fear-mongering and irrational chemophobia. Researchers studying these alternatives should strive for integrity, raising the real issue of the lack of safety testing for botanical repellents rather than denying the proven safety of DEET. BioMed Central 2020-04-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7140559/ /pubmed/32268926 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-020-03217-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Commentary
Shelomi, Matan
Who’s afraid of DEET? Fearmongering in papers on botanical repellents
title Who’s afraid of DEET? Fearmongering in papers on botanical repellents
title_full Who’s afraid of DEET? Fearmongering in papers on botanical repellents
title_fullStr Who’s afraid of DEET? Fearmongering in papers on botanical repellents
title_full_unstemmed Who’s afraid of DEET? Fearmongering in papers on botanical repellents
title_short Who’s afraid of DEET? Fearmongering in papers on botanical repellents
title_sort who’s afraid of deet? fearmongering in papers on botanical repellents
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7140559/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32268926
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-020-03217-5
work_keys_str_mv AT shelomimatan whosafraidofdeetfearmongeringinpapersonbotanicalrepellents