4 ms·
The biggest shock is that we still put the burden of proof on science to demonstrate the extent to which food chains are disrupted by isolated uses of pesticide
by zahma 3y ago
The biggest shock is that we still put the burden of proof on science to demonstrate the extent to which food chains are disrupted by isolated uses of pesticides, as if habitat fragmentation, global warming, land use change, pollution, water table pollution and change, overpopulation, etc. doesn’t all tie in. We are so, so myopic.
It’s about time the burden of proof falls on chemical companies to show their products don’t do such tremendous damage, instead of leaving it to be discovered and reported in already obliterated ecosystems.
- richbell 3y agoIt's even worse: the chemical companies also get to dictate what science is allowed to be considered. https://youtu.be/i5uSbp0YDhc https://youtu.be/i5uSbp0YDhc (this whole video is a gem, but ~13:30 is the relevant bit)
- senderista 3y agoWow, so they get to fund their own studies, formulate their own protocols, and their studies don't even have to be independently replicated!
- Zigurd 3y agoIt. wouldn't be called regulatory capture if it wasn't executed like a well-run combined arms military operation.