"Phenomenal" Bug Repellants Identified

Researchers Find 7 Promising New Mosquito Repellents; Now They Need Safety Testing

(AP)  Researchers have identified seven possibilities for the next generation of mosquito repellant, some of which may work several times longer than the current standard-bearer, DEET. The next step: safety testing to make sure they're not harmful.

While the new repellants aren't likely to be available commercially for a few years, early tests on cloth were promising, with some chemicals repelling mosquitoes for as long as 73 days and many working for 40 to 50 days, compared to an average of 17.5 days with DEET, according to a study in Tuesday's edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Biting insects such as mosquitoes and ticks can spread diseases such as encephalitis, Lyme disease, Rocky Mountain spotted fever, malaria and dengue Fever.

Several of the new chemicals "were just phenomenal," said Ulrich R. Bernier, a research chemist at the Agriculture Department's mosquito and fly research unit in Gainesville, Fla. "I was so surprised."

Bernier, a co-author of the study, said he regularly receives new repellants from people and he ends up writing them back to say they don't work.

In this case, researchers funded by the Defense Department set out to determine what makes repellants work, and then to use that information in finding more effective ways to chase away disease-carrying insects, Bernier explained in a telephone interview.

"We thought, can we do a better job of designing repellants?" Bernier said.

Using USDA data on hundreds of chemicals collected over 50 years, researchers led by Alan R. Katritzky of the University of Florida rated chemicals from "1" to "5" on ability to repel insects, and then focused on what the most effective ones - the 5s - had in common.

Focusing on a type of chemical known as N-acylpiperidines, they narrowed the study down to 34 molecules - 23 that had never been tested before and 11 that had - Bernier explained.

From those, the 10 most effective were narrowed down to seven, with eliminations based on concerns about toxicity and high cost to produce.

The tests were done on cloth treated with the chemicals and then placed on the arms of volunteers.

This summer, safety tests will begin on the seven, Bernier said, to make sure they are safe to use directly on the skin.

While the military is paying for the research, any success is expected to benefit the general public too.

The current standard for repellants, DEET (N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide), was also originally developed for military use in 1946 and was registered for use on civilians in 1957.

While DEET has a good safety record, some people dislike its odor and others worry about safety for some individuals, especially children and pregnant women.

The Environmental Protection Agency says that DEET has been implicated in seizures among children, but there is not enough information to confirm it as the cause of the incidents.

EPA estimates that as much as one-third of the U.S. population uses products containing DEET every year to repel biting insects such as ticks and mosquitoes.

[mac4440]

get over yourselves people,just take the story for what it is. I work outdoors and I would welome something like this

[rf35]

MommaKat64, thinking of millions or billions of additional humans makes me sick. The population is massively bloated already, and you want billions MORE people? You''re a Republican with 6 kids, aren''t you. If you think bug spray will save billions, you are also a little delusional. Even if it could work, nature would step in with a new disease transmitted by a different vector. The planet is trying to get human numbers into balance with the environment. Unfortunately, nature''s way of doing this is far uglier than if people could just stop reproducing after one or two kids.

[mommakat64]

Honestly, I really don''t think that WE need it, we can always seek shelter in our tight-shut homes...this newly developed repellent IS NOT FOR US. But it would be so thankfully received by African, Asian and South/Central Americans who are literally ALWAYS exposed to mosquitoes and the terrible diseases that they bring. Are you all so selfish, arrogant and ignorant that you only think of your own sorry butts? Get over yourselves for maybe one time in your miserable lives, and think about the tens of billions of children who die yearly from malaria, West Nile fever and other flying insect bite diseases. This repellent would mean life to so many billions of people around this world who don''t have America''s immune capabilities and vaccines, or protective housing. No NonayaBiness, WE might not need it, but billions of people worldwide do. NonayaBiness, downtowner97 and brianbwb, you should be ashamed of your callous, insensitive, a**hole selves. da** your selfish, ingrate lives....

Try to, even possibly, think about someone else and their life-threatening problems...that YOU don''t have to endure...or fear.

[nonayabiness]

Do we really need a repellant that can last 73 days on clothes? If that includes washings and wearings, GREAT! What a breakthrough! If it''s 73 days on no washings, then, no thanks.

[brianbwb-2009]

"Mosquitoes are the best argument against the creation myth. Just picture God saying "Ok, now they need something to bite them that makes them really itchy."
Posted by downtowner97

Or it could be a warped sense of humor.

There is a joke that goes, "When God created America, He decided to make it a land rich in minerals, plants food sources, a variable climate, and immense natural beauty. Everything needed for a rich comfortable life was there in abundance.

When the angels saw His creation, they were afraid that it was so beautiful, that it would throw off the balance of good and bad. God reassured them with "But wait until you see the people I am going to put in it."

[downtowner97]

Mosquitoes are the best argument against the creation myth. Just picture God saying "Ok, now they need something to bite them that makes them really itchy."