3 ms·

No, there are organic pesticides. Some on them can be better (e.g. less stable) than some synthetic ones, that's all. And them being organic also guarantees tha

No, there are organic pesticides. Some on them can be better (e.g. less stable) than some synthetic ones, that's all. And them being organic also guarantees that they can't be improved, in terms of stability or targeting, so that is entirely stupid.

Y-bar 5y ago
> And them being organic also guarantees that they can't be improved Please explain this part. I was under the impression that certifications for "organic" labeling was a threshold thing and nothing prevents one brand from trying to be more efficient within limitations compared to another brand, as long as it is below or above certain levels.
- gizmondo 5y ago
  I had in mind a relatively broad definition* from the latest Swiss public initiative on the topic. Which was forbidding any chemical alterations to the compounds already produced by plants, etc. Not really familiar with labeling requirements in the US. * intended by organizers, not spelled in the text.
  - Y-bar 5y ago
    I'm European and have not heard of something like what you are alluding to. I know certain specific categories of pesticides are either forbidden (e.g. Propargite), or limited. But given your response I still do not understand what it has to do with artificial limits of "organic" labeling of certain categories of compounds, especially since it is often NGO:s which are responsible for many of these labels and their verifications.
- lathyrus_long 5y ago
  The list of pesticides allowable in organic farming is (at least under OMRI rules) determined by naturalness, not safety. For example, pyrethrin occurs naturally in chrysanthemums, so it's allowed, even though it's highly toxic to bees. Tau-fluvalinate is a synthetic pyrethroid (pyrethrin analog), so it's forbidden, even though it's sufficiently nontoxic to bees that it's used as a miticide in commercial hives. Synthetic pesticides are designed and screened in the same way as small molecule drugs, a long and uncertain process that's still far easier than discovering a new natural product. At least in theory, these synthetic compounds can be optimized for whatever we want. It's just that absent regulation, the commercial incentive is for better short-term yield regardless of the ecological cost. One could imagine a certification similar to organic that forbids the most ecologically damaging practices--even if they're using natural products--and permits safer use of synthetic products. Probably a hard sell to consumers, though. I've occasionally seen produce marketed as "IPM" (integrated pest management), which isn't quite that but goes in that general direction.
User23 5y ago
As the name neonicotinoids implies, nicotine itself is a fairly effective natural pesticide. Subsistence farmers in the American Southeast used to dust their gardens with ground up tobacco. Probably some people still do.

Y-bar 5y ago

> And them being organic also guarantees that they can't be improved Please explain this part. I was under the impression that certifications for "organic" labeling was a threshold thing and nothing prevents one brand from trying to be more efficient within limitations compared to another brand, as long as it is below or above certain levels.

gizmondo 5y ago
I had in mind a relatively broad definition* from the latest Swiss public initiative on the topic. Which was forbidding any chemical alterations to the compounds already produced by plants, etc. Not really familiar with labeling requirements in the US. * intended by organizers, not spelled in the text.
- Y-bar 5y ago
  I'm European and have not heard of something like what you are alluding to. I know certain specific categories of pesticides are either forbidden (e.g. Propargite), or limited. But given your response I still do not understand what it has to do with artificial limits of "organic" labeling of certain categories of compounds, especially since it is often NGO:s which are responsible for many of these labels and their verifications.
lathyrus_long 5y ago
The list of pesticides allowable in organic farming is (at least under OMRI rules) determined by naturalness, not safety. For example, pyrethrin occurs naturally in chrysanthemums, so it's allowed, even though it's highly toxic to bees. Tau-fluvalinate is a synthetic pyrethroid (pyrethrin analog), so it's forbidden, even though it's sufficiently nontoxic to bees that it's used as a miticide in commercial hives. Synthetic pesticides are designed and screened in the same way as small molecule drugs, a long and uncertain process that's still far easier than discovering a new natural product. At least in theory, these synthetic compounds can be optimized for whatever we want. It's just that absent regulation, the commercial incentive is for better short-term yield regardless of the ecological cost. One could imagine a certification similar to organic that forbids the most ecologically damaging practices--even if they're using natural products--and permits safer use of synthetic products. Probably a hard sell to consumers, though. I've occasionally seen produce marketed as "IPM" (integrated pest management), which isn't quite that but goes in that general direction.

User23 5y ago

As the name neonicotinoids implies, nicotine itself is a fairly effective natural pesticide. Subsistence farmers in the American Southeast used to dust their gardens with ground up tobacco. Probably some people still do.