5 ms·

So what is the safer alternative to Glyphosate?

by pkaye 7y ago

QuickToBan 7y ago
Organic (natural) pesticides tend to be safer. Unfortunately, USDA has been doing a terrible job with their USDA Organic certification. It is firstly very expensive. Secondly, it is no guarantee that glyphosate is not present. This could be due to fraud or negligence. Third, it is subject to lobbying to legalize nasty synthetic pesticides as being Organic. The USDA needs to step up and do its job. Meanwhile, I nevertheless advocate buying Organic. Use a warm solution of baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) in which to dissolve fruits like apples and others for 12-15 minutes. It helps dissolve a fair portion of the pesticides, but is not a substitute for buying Organic. Refer to https://suppversity.blogspot.com/2017/10/nahco3-aka-baking-soda-washes-all.html https://suppversity.blogspot.com/2017/10/nahco3-aka-baking-s...
- jcranmer 7y ago
  > Organic (natural) pesticides tend to be safer. This is patently false. Natural pesticides and herbicides are almost always more toxic to humans than synthetic pestices and herbicides, in large part because minimizing human toxicity is one of the goals in the chemical research programs.
  - alexandercrohde 7y ago
    Source please?
  - dqv 7y ago
    What are some examples of organic pesticides that are less safe than glyphosate?
    - chicob 7y ago
      Rotenone, a naturally ocurring herbicide. Known cause of Parkinson's disease.
    - tptacek 7y ago
      Isn't "less safe than glyphosate" is a weird metric, since glyphosate is relatively safe compared to other chemical herbicides? Wouldn't atrazine be a better comparison?
    - jcranmer 7y ago
      Copper sulfate is one.
      - pkaye 7y ago
        Copper Sulfate is toxic to birds, mammals, insects, etc. It has a lower LD50 than glyphosate. https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/03/20/far-more-toxic-than-glyphosate-copper-sulfate-used-by-organic-and-conventional-farmers-cruises-to-european-reauthorization/ https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/03/20/far-more-toxic...
      - petre 7y ago
        The funny thing is that copper sulphate is actually an inorganic substance while glyphosate is an organic substance.
      - lumberjack 7y ago
        No it isn't. It does not have any long term exposure effects due to ingestion of residue on produce.
        jcranmer 7y ago
        Nor does glyphosate. No one has been able to demonstrate health effects due to pesticide residue. Even studies purporting to show health effects for glyphosate do so at concentrations associated with handling the chemical in bulk, not at concentrations associated with consumption of residue.
        mehrdadn 7y ago
        > Even studies purporting to show health effects for glyphosate do so at concentrations associated with handling the chemical in bulk Do more well-accepted organic pesticides have these kinds of problems with bulk handling? Because otherwise I feel like this should be reason enough to avoid it.
        JamesBarney 7y ago
inflatableDodo 7y ago
Solar powered weeding robots, big greenhouses and indoor hydroponics. Apparently environment control is the largest use of energy in farming, so much so, that you can actually use less energy by growing under lights.
oneplane 7y ago
There are plenty of alternatives, but none of them are easy money. They are in the order of slightly-less-easy-money all the way down to intense-changes-but-still-earn-well. That is also the problem, as any change that even costs a cent on the bottom line is a cultural no-no.
feld 7y ago
Nothing. Don't listen to this guy. Glyphosate is not a pesticide, it's an herbicide. Anyone using the wrong terminology is a conspiracy theorist you can safely ignore.
- Mediterraneo10 7y ago
  I’m afraid it is you who are unfamiliar with the terminology, for glyphosate is commonly classed among "pesticides" in scholarly parlance.[0] [0]https://scholar.google.pl/scholar?hl=pl&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=glyphosate+pesticide&btnG= https://scholar.google.pl/scholar?hl=pl&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=glyph...
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
shaki-dora 7y ago
"One study found that not using pesticides reduced crop yields by about 10%"[0] That's not terribly bad. There are also communities of organic farmers working on methods to improve yields without pesticides. There is a lot still to be learned (and re-learned) about crop cycling, for example. Other ideas are mixed fields with different crops, new tilling protocols etc. Some pesticides are also legal under different certification schemes. Sulfur, for example, is the most used pesticide in the EU. Pyrethroid is allowed under some schemes, and it's actually a drug approved for human use (lice), and therefore (and because it's rather old) thought to be safe at the far lower doses one is exposed to via the food chain. The chart https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pflanzenschutzmittel#/media/Datei:Pesticides_vs._fertilizers.png https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pflanzenschutzmittel#/media/Da... is also rather interesting, in that it shows highly diverging use of pesticides and fertilizers across EU countries. There is no definitive pattern here, with Sweden and the Netherlands as the extremes on opposite sides, two countries that are rather similar both in economics as well as climate. Spain/Italy/Portugal might be high because they have much larger shares of multi-year crops such as wine and olive trees, while yearly crops such as corn and wheat are less susceptible because the diseases die with the plants every year. OTOH, at least olives aren't fertilized I believe. What's also interesting is the positive correlation between pesticide use and fertilizer use. I expected the opposite, i. e. farmers compensating for expected losses to disease with increased fertilizer and vice versa. This not happening may point at a cultural issue at play here, with some farmers choosing these tools excessively, or maybe a lack of knowledge of alternatives. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pesticide#Benefits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pesticide#Benefits

So what is the safer alternative to Glyphosate?

by pkaye 7y ago

So what is the safer alternative to Glyphosate?

Organic (natural) pesticides tend to be safer. Unfortunately, USDA has been doing a terrible job with their USDA Organic certification. It is firstly very expensive. Secondly, it is no guarantee that glyphosate is not present. This could be due to fraud or negligence. Third, it is subject to lobbying to legalize nasty synthetic pesticides as being Organic. The USDA needs to step up and do its job. Meanwhile, I nevertheless advocate buying Organic. Use a warm solution of baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) in which to dissolve fruits like apples and others for 12-15 minutes. It helps dissolve a fair portion of the pesticides, but is not a substitute for buying Organic. Refer to https://suppversity.blogspot.com/2017/10/nahco3-aka-baking-soda-washes-all.html https://suppversity.blogspot.com/2017/10/nahco3-aka-baking-s...

jcranmer 7y ago
> Organic (natural) pesticides tend to be safer. This is patently false. Natural pesticides and herbicides are almost always more toxic to humans than synthetic pestices and herbicides, in large part because minimizing human toxicity is one of the goals in the chemical research programs.
- alexandercrohde 7y ago
  Source please?
- dqv 7y ago
  What are some examples of organic pesticides that are less safe than glyphosate?
  - chicob 7y ago
    Rotenone, a naturally ocurring herbicide. Known cause of Parkinson's disease.
  - tptacek 7y ago
    Isn't "less safe than glyphosate" is a weird metric, since glyphosate is relatively safe compared to other chemical herbicides? Wouldn't atrazine be a better comparison?
  - jcranmer 7y ago
    Copper sulfate is one.
    - pkaye 7y ago
      Copper Sulfate is toxic to birds, mammals, insects, etc. It has a lower LD50 than glyphosate. https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/03/20/far-more-toxic-than-glyphosate-copper-sulfate-used-by-organic-and-conventional-farmers-cruises-to-european-reauthorization/ https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/03/20/far-more-toxic...
    - petre 7y ago
      The funny thing is that copper sulphate is actually an inorganic substance while glyphosate is an organic substance.
    - lumberjack 7y ago
      No it isn't. It does not have any long term exposure effects due to ingestion of residue on produce.
      - jcranmer 7y ago
        Nor does glyphosate. No one has been able to demonstrate health effects due to pesticide residue. Even studies purporting to show health effects for glyphosate do so at concentrations associated with handling the chemical in bulk, not at concentrations associated with consumption of residue.
        mehrdadn 7y ago
        > Even studies purporting to show health effects for glyphosate do so at concentrations associated with handling the chemical in bulk Do more well-accepted organic pesticides have these kinds of problems with bulk handling? Because otherwise I feel like this should be reason enough to avoid it.
        JamesBarney 7y ago

inflatableDodo 7y ago

Solar powered weeding robots, big greenhouses and indoor hydroponics. Apparently environment control is the largest use of energy in farming, so much so, that you can actually use less energy by growing under lights.

oneplane 7y ago

There are plenty of alternatives, but none of them are easy money. They are in the order of slightly-less-easy-money all the way down to intense-changes-but-still-earn-well. That is also the problem, as any change that even costs a cent on the bottom line is a cultural no-no.

feld 7y ago

Nothing. Don't listen to this guy. Glyphosate is not a pesticide, it's an herbicide. Anyone using the wrong terminology is a conspiracy theorist you can safely ignore.

Mediterraneo10 7y ago
I’m afraid it is you who are unfamiliar with the terminology, for glyphosate is commonly classed among "pesticides" in scholarly parlance.[0] [0]https://scholar.google.pl/scholar?hl=pl&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=glyphosate+pesticide&btnG= https://scholar.google.pl/scholar?hl=pl&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=glyph...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

shaki-dora 7y ago

"One study found that not using pesticides reduced crop yields by about 10%"[0] That's not terribly bad. There are also communities of organic farmers working on methods to improve yields without pesticides. There is a lot still to be learned (and re-learned) about crop cycling, for example. Other ideas are mixed fields with different crops, new tilling protocols etc. Some pesticides are also legal under different certification schemes. Sulfur, for example, is the most used pesticide in the EU. Pyrethroid is allowed under some schemes, and it's actually a drug approved for human use (lice), and therefore (and because it's rather old) thought to be safe at the far lower doses one is exposed to via the food chain. The chart https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pflanzenschutzmittel#/media/Datei:Pesticides_vs._fertilizers.png https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pflanzenschutzmittel#/media/Da... is also rather interesting, in that it shows highly diverging use of pesticides and fertilizers across EU countries. There is no definitive pattern here, with Sweden and the Netherlands as the extremes on opposite sides, two countries that are rather similar both in economics as well as climate. Spain/Italy/Portugal might be high because they have much larger shares of multi-year crops such as wine and olive trees, while yearly crops such as corn and wheat are less susceptible because the diseases die with the plants every year. OTOH, at least olives aren't fertilized I believe. What's also interesting is the positive correlation between pesticide use and fertilizer use. I expected the opposite, i. e. farmers compensating for expected losses to disease with increased fertilizer and vice versa. This not happening may point at a cultural issue at play here, with some farmers choosing these tools excessively, or maybe a lack of knowledge of alternatives. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pesticide#Benefits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pesticide#Benefits