Notices
Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Pesticides and Environment

  1. #1 Pesticides and Environment 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    8
    What does the careless and unscientific use of pesticide result in ??

    And could anyone please hint an example of an incident where use of pesticide affected human life or habitats of animals etc.

    I have finished 1/4th of it and some more to go . Help !!


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    http://www.thescienceforum.com/HOMEW...NG.-15422t.php

    Please at least show us what you've done so far, and what your current thoughts are on the rest of your assignment.


    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    8
    I've already got some important tragedies that claimed the deaths of many due to the use of pesticides and I've collected some data from many sources about Organic pesticides and scientific way of using pesticides and so !!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    8
    edit : Thanks
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard spuriousmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,193
    What is scientific use of pesticide? Only use it in experiments?
    "Kill them all and let God sort them out."

    - Arnaud Amalric

    http://spuriousforums.com/index.php
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    8
    No what I meant by scientific was - using it in a stable manner. Thanks.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard spuriousmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,193
    maybe progressive or combinatorial use is more scientific than 'stable' use, which just sounds as environmental agenda talk.
    "Kill them all and let God sort them out."

    - Arnaud Amalric

    http://spuriousforums.com/index.php
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,569
    Quote Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey
    maybe progressive or combinatorial use is more scientific than 'stable' use, which just sounds as environmental agenda talk.
    I smell sandals, vegan food and hemp skirts.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    is Rachel Carson's "Silent spring" still in print then ?
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista
    Quote Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey
    maybe progressive or combinatorial use is more scientific than 'stable' use, which just sounds as environmental agenda talk.
    I smell sandals, vegan food and hemp skirts.
    What, I'm not welcome here?
    "The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair." ~ Douglas Adams
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    I took a course on the use of biological pesticides, which contained a small part on chemical pesticides. Bt toxin has been used really well as an insect specific toxin, the only problem with viral and bacterially derived pesticides is that they cost a lot. Viral pesticides have the potential of being incredibly species specific, but the current ones in production are very expensive and aren't as effective as chemical ones.

    http://www.certisusa.com/pest_manage...nsecticide.htm

    Edit: There was some controversy a few years back after a paper in Nature claimed bt plants were killing monarch butterflies, but it was later revealed that the data from that study had been altered. All subsequent studies showed no effect on monarch butterflies.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring was published in 1963. Things have changed a hell of a lot since then! The entire theme of her book is now obsolete. We no longer use the same pesticides.

    Proper use of pesticides involves first selecting an environmentally friendly product. This is a product that has two important qualities.
    1. It is target specific. It kills only those species that you want to kill - not other more useful species.
    2. it is quickly and totally biodegradable.

    There is a tendency by many of the hemp sandal brigade to assume that only 'natural' pesticides like Bt toxin, or pyrethrum, can meet those conditions. In fact, there are many 'natural' pesticides that are quite harmful, and many synthetic pesticides that meet those conditions well.

    For example ; glyphosate (in Roundup) as a synthetic herbicide, meets both conditions quite well. It kills weeds. It has difficulty killing woody plants. It is totally harmless to insects, birds, mammals, fish etc., except in very large doses. When released into the environment, it breaks down quickly and leaves no toxic residues.

    Synthetic pyrethroids are excellent insecticides, which are totally biodegradable, and kill only insects.

    On the other hand, some 'natural' products are harmful. Copper sulphate is a widely used 'organic' fungicide, and is sprayed on fruit trees prone to mould diseases. It is non biodegradable, and can persist in soils for decades. It is vermitoxic - killing earthworms. It is hepatotoxic - harming the liver if ingested. All round, not a nice material.

    So, initial selction of a pesticide is important, and should be done based on good science, not dogma.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    8
    With your help and some other sites I think I just finished the project .Thanks for sharing your views .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard spuriousmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,193
    Well, I am not done yet sharing.
    "Kill them all and let God sort them out."

    - Arnaud Amalric

    http://spuriousforums.com/index.php
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,569
    Quote Originally Posted by drowsy turtle
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista
    Quote Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey
    maybe progressive or combinatorial use is more scientific than 'stable' use, which just sounds as environmental agenda talk.
    I smell sandals, vegan food and hemp skirts.
    What, I'm not welcome here?
    I don't think you understand me. I smell them. As a hobby.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring was published in 1963. Things have changed a hell of a lot since then! The entire theme of her book is now obsolete. We no longer use the same pesticides.

    Proper use of pesticides involves first selecting an environmentally friendly product. This is a product that has two important qualities.
    1. It is target specific. It kills only those species that you want to kill - not other more useful species.
    2. it is quickly and totally biodegradable.

    There is a tendency by many of the hemp sandal brigade to assume that only 'natural' pesticides like Bt toxin, or pyrethrum, can meet those conditions. In fact, there are many 'natural' pesticides that are quite harmful, and many synthetic pesticides that meet those conditions well.

    For example ; glyphosate (in Roundup) as a synthetic herbicide, meets both conditions quite well. It kills weeds. It has difficulty killing woody plants. It is totally harmless to insects, birds, mammals, fish etc., except in very large doses. When released into the environment, it breaks down quickly and leaves no toxic residues.

    Synthetic pyrethroids are excellent insecticides, which are totally biodegradable, and kill only insects.

    On the other hand, some 'natural' products are harmful. Copper sulphate is a widely used 'organic' fungicide, and is sprayed on fruit trees prone to mould diseases. It is non biodegradable, and can persist in soils for decades. It is vermitoxic - killing earthworms. It is hepatotoxic - harming the liver if ingested. All round, not a nice material.

    So, initial selction of a pesticide is important, and should be done based on good science, not dogma.
    The use of copper sulphate is ridiculous, it has long been linked to cancer. There is a long cultural attachment to it's use in France, some of the farmers think it affects the flavour of the wines. The worse part is that many of them distribute it by hand out of a sack. Although, anhydrous copper sulphate is not natural, it has to be produced industrially to get any useful amount of it.

    Soapy water can be used as insecticides as well, especially against water dwelling insects, as it can block the spiracles of the insect and suffocate them.

    Also, to be fair pyrethroids aren't completely safe, they are safe in the amounts needed to kill insects. I wouldn't recommend someone eat an entire box of Raid.

    I hope I didn't come off as one of those "pro-natural" propagandist, I didn't intend that. Like I said there was controversy over Bt toxin, especially over Bt plants. I am a strong supporter of GMO plants

    Edit: As a microbiologist I just have a bias for biological pesticides.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    To tired and sleep

    I apologise if it seemed as though I was having a go at you. Definitely not intended.

    The thing I was trying to get at is that there is no difference between 'natural' and 'synthetic' in relation to safety. Either can be 'safe' or hazardous. As you pointed out in relation to synthetic pyrethroids, anything becomes hazardous in high enough dose. In the same way, everything is 'safe' if the dose is low enough.

    For copper sulfate, I think the original idea was to tap into natural ores. There are a few, where copper compounds have been in contact with SO2 from geothermal gas emission. Since copper sulfate is found in 'natural' ores, the dogma says that it must be OK. You and I know it is not.

    I am well aware of the example you raised, with Bt corn and its supposed effect on monarch butterfly caterpillars. The pollen will kill insects, including caterpillars, but the dose in the field turned out to be too low to do that. Another example of the general principle that no-one should jump to conclusions about toxicities until doses as well as toxicity is measured.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •