4 ms·
Organic food is overall a net negative for the environment. Due to higher crop loss, more land is used for agriculture, even when taking fertilizer-related ener
by dkural 11y ago
Organic food is overall a net negative for the environment. Due to higher crop loss, more land is used for agriculture, even when taking fertilizer-related energy use into account. Many pesticides target genes only found in the disease vector (easy to establish this via genomics) and have no impact on humans.
- mkj 11y agoWhat's an example of that kind of pesticide? I thought most were more wide-acting, at least for non-microbial pests.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- ArtDev 11y agoNo. 25% lower yields are a small price compared to traditional pestcides. From increased cancer rates, dead pollinators, heavy metals and hormone disrupting chemicals we cannot even begin to quantify the cost of heavy pestcide use. GMOs are a better solution, we can agree on that.
- DiabloD3 11y agoGMOs aren't totally the answer either. There are no proper FDA guidelines on cross-kingdom gene transfers (ie, corn with squid genes in it). Accelerated breeding programs to, for example, use genes from one Nightshade in another, and then use a standard hybridization process to further select desirable traits without harming the viability of the plant (which, for futher example, many tomato and pepper breeds are simply shitty plants that require a lot of trellising and other tender loving care to produce a useful yield) is the better solution. Also, another very useful solution that small time farmers deploy is using predator species (bugs, nematodes, other things that eat or otherwise stop harmful bugs), or planting companion crops, such as basil and onions and garlic alongside tomatoes and peppers to deter common pests.