RE: email list suggestion - organic or not .....
- To: m*@ucdavis.edu
- Subject: RE: email list suggestion - organic or not .....
- From: R* R*
- Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 12:08:09 +0800
I have to agree with Charles here
DDT and the very usefull organo insecticides were basically banned
due to public and political pressure, not because any good science that
showed
conclusively they were "not safe".
Any chemical, even salt, is not safe if abused and thats certainly what
was happening with all 'cides 20+ years ago.
Charles is also correct about the insects.
If a population has no resistance to a 'cide, ie not even one individual
expresses any level of resistance then widespread resistance can never
develop.
Resistance to 'cides is very widespread because of the abuse of these
'cides. I inlcude herbicides, insecticides and fungicides as well as
antibacterials.
Large numbers of plants, insects, fungi and bacteria are all developing
resistance to various 'cides and many develop cross resistance to several
groups of 'cides that use different modes of action negating the best
efforts of
researchers. One of the biggest costs to farmers in the western world is
'cide resistane in weeds and insects. It adds tremendously to the costs of
primary produce all because these farmers did not realise that dependance
on a couple of 'cides would result in massive selection pressures that in
less than a decade would render that 'cide useless.
Intergrated pest management is the answer but if hospitals can't manage
resistant bacteria (human lives are at risk here) then I don't hold
out much hope for the farmer.
History has proved more conclusively than anything that very few people
really follow the instructions on 'cides seriously, especially application
rates,
disposal and mixing requirements or ever read the cautions about when you
can and can't apply the 'cide.
So next time you buy a 'cide use it as per the label please.
Cheers, Rod
> ----------
> From: Charles Dills
> Reply To: cdills@fix.net
> Sent: 7 December 1999 11:09 AM
> To: tonihawr@email.msn.com
> Cc: medit-plants@ucdavis.edu
> Subject: Re: email list suggestion - organic or not .....
>
> >And there's my second "rub". They know all about the 'cides and
> >how "safe" they are. But history is proving that some/much of what
> >education/research has "tested and proved safe" is not. NOT in the
> >long run. DDT. Dioxin. Dieldrin. Lindane. Etc.
>
> +++++---------------------
> Yes, I', a chemist. Safety often becomes political, not
> scientific. We tend to blame the bottles of chemicals rather than the
> ignorami that won't or can't read a label and follow instructions.
> DDT probably saved more lives than any other chemical. It
> almost eliminated malaria! I remember pictures of whole villages in
> Italy being treated with DDT in a barn. They had blowers and blew the
> stuff down their necks, up their sleeves, up their pant legs.
> Pictures showed a column of people moving through a barn between
> people with the blowers. There was such a white fog that you could
> hardly make anything out.
> Now, if you remember, DDT was banned because the brown
> pelican eggs were too fragile to survive incubation. I don't know of
> any human problem with it. The problem was that it appeared so safe
> that people grossly overused it. And the excess got washed into the
> streams and thence to the ocean.
> We thought of the ocean as an infinite dump. DDT is insoluble
> in water, but it is fat-soluble. So the particles floated around
> until they encountered a moving piece of fat we call a fish. It would
> then dissolve in the fish which in turn got eaten by the brown
> pelican.
> The knee-jerk reaction. BAN DDT! No one said , "Let's use it
> according to instructions, maybe even license people to use it
> correctly!". No, no, no, it must be banned. In my opinion,that's was
> not very clever!
> *****---------------
> >
> >What is worse, the insects are adapting - because of insect numbers
> >and anatomy and their short life spans - to the 'cides. Are humans ?
> >who knows which human survivors are surviving the "safe, tested"
> >University products being applied to our foods and adapting to them,
> >and which are still operating on inherited good genes ?
>
> +++++-------------
> I don't think the insects are "adapting" to the insecticides.
> Those that are susceptible are not reproducing, leaving the resistant
> ones to reproduce. So, yes, the gene pool does a shift, but I don't
> think they are "developing" any resistance that wasn't already there!
> I'm confident that since there is money to be made and there
> are millions of chemists, we will keep ahead of the gene pool shift.
> ---Chas---
>
> ******************************************************************
> It's possible to disagree without being disagreeable.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Charles E. Dills 1371 Avalon San Luis Obispo CA 93405
> [Mac] cdills@fix.net 805-544-1731
> cdills@fix.net http://www.fix.net/~cdills/ No size limit.
> I now have a domain name www.charlies-web.com
> Eudora 1.5.4 Netscape Navigator 3.0 Pagemaker 6.5
> Photoshop 5.0 Microsoft Word (Mac) 6.01 System 7.6.1
> Climate, Calif-med 30-80 deg 20 inches rain in winter!
> I can be forgetful. If I fail to do something I promised, tell me!
> ******************************************************************
>
