Dear Jenny
If your ‘fatty acid insecticide’ is not poisonous to anything, then I think you may have been wasting your time.
Yours Pedantically
Barney
E.U Interference!!!*****!!!
Moderators: KG Steve, Chantal, Tigger, peter, Chief Spud
-
Cider Boys
- KG Regular
- Posts: 968
- Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:03 pm
- Location: Somerset
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 111 times
-
Colin Miles
- KG Regular
- Posts: 1025
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 8:18 pm
- Location: Llannon, Llanelli
Jenny - Fatty Acid Insecticides - surely a chemical? Sorry - simply don't believe that anything can't be poisonous. Think of allergies. There is probably some poor lettuce or cabbage variety keeling over just at the mention of the word Fatty Acid!
Mr Potato Head - maybe Johnboy was right. And what about KG articles I mentioned?
Richard - forgive me if I misunderstand you as I find your English a little difficult to follow. Plants make 'toxic' chemicals themselves as a defence mechanisms against the bugs that attack them. The bigger the attack the more toxic chemicals we are like to eat, whether or not we attempt to control the bugs or not. Derris and other 'organic' chemicals such as Fatty Acids are simply additional tools in our armament. And now that modern detection methods have become so sophisticated, it is possible to detect all sorts of chemicals, (maybe most) both 'good' and 'bad' in everything that we eat, breathe and drink. But this is no reason to panic. Look at the standard of our health and length of life. In general these have all increased enormously despite all the chemicals that we olduns on this site will have ingested in the 50's, 60's and 70's.
Obviously we have to be vigilant but nothing is that black and white. When even DDT can make a comeback...!
Mr Potato Head - maybe Johnboy was right. And what about KG articles I mentioned?
Richard - forgive me if I misunderstand you as I find your English a little difficult to follow. Plants make 'toxic' chemicals themselves as a defence mechanisms against the bugs that attack them. The bigger the attack the more toxic chemicals we are like to eat, whether or not we attempt to control the bugs or not. Derris and other 'organic' chemicals such as Fatty Acids are simply additional tools in our armament. And now that modern detection methods have become so sophisticated, it is possible to detect all sorts of chemicals, (maybe most) both 'good' and 'bad' in everything that we eat, breathe and drink. But this is no reason to panic. Look at the standard of our health and length of life. In general these have all increased enormously despite all the chemicals that we olduns on this site will have ingested in the 50's, 60's and 70's.
Obviously we have to be vigilant but nothing is that black and white. When even DDT can make a comeback...!
-
Cider Boys
- KG Regular
- Posts: 968
- Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:03 pm
- Location: Somerset
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 111 times
Dear Mr Potato Head and Jenny
Most Scientific Agriculturists conclude that the tremendous increase in crop production over the twentieth century is down to the development and use of insecticides.
To argue that we do not need insecticides is like saying desease vaccination was never needed because we do not catch deseases now. People who do not use insecticides are ‘living of the backs’ of the agriculturists who have used them to control pests that would otherwise make even our backyard growing difficult. It is the same with blight and other pests, people can get away without spraying because the majority of crops (in the real world) thankfully are sprayed.
Barney
Most Scientific Agriculturists conclude that the tremendous increase in crop production over the twentieth century is down to the development and use of insecticides.
To argue that we do not need insecticides is like saying desease vaccination was never needed because we do not catch deseases now. People who do not use insecticides are ‘living of the backs’ of the agriculturists who have used them to control pests that would otherwise make even our backyard growing difficult. It is the same with blight and other pests, people can get away without spraying because the majority of crops (in the real world) thankfully are sprayed.
Barney
-
Jenny Green
- KG Regular
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 4:47 pm
- Location: East Midlands
Cider Boys wrote:Dear Mr Potato Head and Jenny
Most Scientific Agriculturists conclude that the tremendous increase in crop production over the twentieth century is down to the development and use of insecticides.
To argue that we do not need insecticides is like saying desease vaccination was never needed because we do not catch deseases now. People who do not use insecticides are ‘living of the backs’ of the agriculturists who have used them to control pests that would otherwise make even our backyard growing difficult. It is the same with blight and other pests, people can get away without spraying because the majority of crops (in the real world) thankfully are sprayed.
Barney
I'd be interested to read any evidence you have to back up your statements, Barney.
(Formerly known as 'Organic Freak')
Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed.
Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed.
-
Jenny Green
- KG Regular
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 4:47 pm
- Location: East Midlands
Cider Boys wrote:Dear Jenny
If your ‘fatty acid insecticide’ is not poisonous to anything, then I think you may have been wasting your time.
Yours Pedantically
Barney
Fatty acids, as far as I understand their use, work by blocking the holes through which insects breath. Now if you think that holding a pillow over someone's face is poisoning them, then perhaps there might be some logic to your statement.
(Formerly known as 'Organic Freak')
Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed.
Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed.
-
Mr Potato Head
See, I thought that 'in the real world', scientific agriculturalists thought that repeated spraying with noxious chemicals has not only harmed beneficial insects, bacteria and other wildlife, but also contributed to the increased success of spray tolerant pests (much like anti-biotic tolerant diseases, to follow your analogy.)
Perhaps, much like the over-hygenic world that has produced immuno-suppressive diseases and superbugs, heavy use of blanket pesticides has only produced crops that have no tolerance to attack themselves.
I thought that organic growing was intended to counter this ever-decreasing circle of scientific vs. nature one-upmanship and try alternative methods; using natural methodologies (rather than just a natural product in an unnatural way) to get the effects we desire...
Perhaps, much like the over-hygenic world that has produced immuno-suppressive diseases and superbugs, heavy use of blanket pesticides has only produced crops that have no tolerance to attack themselves.
I thought that organic growing was intended to counter this ever-decreasing circle of scientific vs. nature one-upmanship and try alternative methods; using natural methodologies (rather than just a natural product in an unnatural way) to get the effects we desire...
-
Cider Boys
- KG Regular
- Posts: 968
- Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:03 pm
- Location: Somerset
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 111 times
Dear Jenny
I do take your point regarding ‘fatty acid insecticides’ and concede perhaps they are not poisonous. However you know, surely, it is blatantly obvious that the fact the ‘Western World’ enjoy an abundance of food is due to science. And the introduction of pesticides, artificial fertilizers and the engineering technology of the internal combustion energy have given us a privileged life where we can ‘play’ at doing the ‘right thing’ for the environment. There are still areas of the world where whole crops are wiped out, causing suffering and starvation, where people are too poor to invest in insecticides and other modern practices. The whole ‘organic’ movement serves the privileged rich minority of the world. If practised widely can only lead to higher food costs with lower production. I also play at trying to be ‘organic’ so my produce is as natural as possible, but to think ‘organic’ methods without chemicals are sustainable in feeding the world is ridiculous.
Kind regards
Barney
I do take your point regarding ‘fatty acid insecticides’ and concede perhaps they are not poisonous. However you know, surely, it is blatantly obvious that the fact the ‘Western World’ enjoy an abundance of food is due to science. And the introduction of pesticides, artificial fertilizers and the engineering technology of the internal combustion energy have given us a privileged life where we can ‘play’ at doing the ‘right thing’ for the environment. There are still areas of the world where whole crops are wiped out, causing suffering and starvation, where people are too poor to invest in insecticides and other modern practices. The whole ‘organic’ movement serves the privileged rich minority of the world. If practised widely can only lead to higher food costs with lower production. I also play at trying to be ‘organic’ so my produce is as natural as possible, but to think ‘organic’ methods without chemicals are sustainable in feeding the world is ridiculous.
Kind regards
Barney
-
Jenny Green
- KG Regular
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 4:47 pm
- Location: East Midlands
You are confusing me with being a Luddite, Barney. I'm all for science, and being organic does not mean being anti - science. In fact, as Mr Potato Head points out organics aims to circumvent some of the problems caused by the use of pesticides (such as resistance build up) by harnessing nature to man's use, rather than attempting to blast it out of existance, which has proved to give only short term solutions.
There is so much we simply do not know about the way things grow and micro-ecologies work that we risk throwing the baby out with the bath water if we ignore such things.
The whole issue of pesticide and artificial fertiliser use in the third world is a far more complex area than the simplistic notion that famine could be cured if only they had free insecticide.
If you could find some evidence to back up your opinion we could debate this further as it's a very interesting topic.
You are quite right that we abundantly feed ourselves here in the West. In fact we are getting more obese and we waste huge amounts of food too. The proportion of income we spend on food has dropped dramatically over the decades and now we spend our excess income on useless consumer goods that are thrown away and fill up landfill sites.
And you're saying this situation is preferable?
There is so much we simply do not know about the way things grow and micro-ecologies work that we risk throwing the baby out with the bath water if we ignore such things.
The whole issue of pesticide and artificial fertiliser use in the third world is a far more complex area than the simplistic notion that famine could be cured if only they had free insecticide.
If you could find some evidence to back up your opinion we could debate this further as it's a very interesting topic.
You are quite right that we abundantly feed ourselves here in the West. In fact we are getting more obese and we waste huge amounts of food too. The proportion of income we spend on food has dropped dramatically over the decades and now we spend our excess income on useless consumer goods that are thrown away and fill up landfill sites.
And you're saying this situation is preferable?
(Formerly known as 'Organic Freak')
Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed.
Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed.
For me the findamental stumbling block of the whole Organic argument is that the plants can only absorb their nutrients as soluble ions. I just cannot believe that they can possibly differentiate betweeen an Organic ion and a non-organic, chemical, manmade ion of the same type. The atomic structure is identical.
Allan
Allan
Mr PH,
This thread is getting totally out of hand.
This brief extract is taken from The Organic Gardening Catalogue:-
Derris Dust.
Derris is the strongest and longest lasting of the insect sprays that we offer killing caterpillars aphids thrips and sawfly. The active ingredient is rotenone which is taken from a number of tropical plants. Can be used on crops right up to one day before harvest. Derris powder is not soluble in water and should be used on dry days.
Now this innocuous substance is causing so much trouble. Or is it? Or could it be that by your "Purist" posting trying to tell us that because you do not use pesticides so nobody else should. I am aware that this is not exactly what you wrote but in essence that is what I take your posting to mean.
This Forum has been in this position several times in the past and it has always got ugly.
I am happy for you not to use Derris or any other chemical but I resent people like you trying to force me to behave in the same way as yourself.
You obviously have a Bee in your bonnet about the use of chemicals and the Bee in my bonnet is "Purists."
Purists are always trouble and the classic example are the animal rights extremists because when they cannot get their own way or it is not to be done how they want it they react and we have seen the results of what they do.
The trouble is that you have got to have quite a few seasons growing under your belt before you can even begin to fully understand growing you are now telling people like myself that you know better than I do. I resent the underlying implications.
To say that I am spitting feathers is an understatement!!
JB.
This thread is getting totally out of hand.
This brief extract is taken from The Organic Gardening Catalogue:-
Derris Dust.
Derris is the strongest and longest lasting of the insect sprays that we offer killing caterpillars aphids thrips and sawfly. The active ingredient is rotenone which is taken from a number of tropical plants. Can be used on crops right up to one day before harvest. Derris powder is not soluble in water and should be used on dry days.
Now this innocuous substance is causing so much trouble. Or is it? Or could it be that by your "Purist" posting trying to tell us that because you do not use pesticides so nobody else should. I am aware that this is not exactly what you wrote but in essence that is what I take your posting to mean.
This Forum has been in this position several times in the past and it has always got ugly.
I am happy for you not to use Derris or any other chemical but I resent people like you trying to force me to behave in the same way as yourself.
You obviously have a Bee in your bonnet about the use of chemicals and the Bee in my bonnet is "Purists."
Purists are always trouble and the classic example are the animal rights extremists because when they cannot get their own way or it is not to be done how they want it they react and we have seen the results of what they do.
The trouble is that you have got to have quite a few seasons growing under your belt before you can even begin to fully understand growing you are now telling people like myself that you know better than I do. I resent the underlying implications.
To say that I am spitting feathers is an understatement!!
JB.
-
Mr Potato Head
Please, I think it's fair to say that the whole point of organic growing is that it's not 'playing', that it is genuinely looking for scientific solutions to problems that affect the raising crops all over the world, not just in my back garden! 
JB, swallow your feathers. I at no point suggested that anyone else should do as I do, or do as I say. I merely laid out my argument and you can take that as you will. To compare me with terrorist organisations such as the ALF is frankly, pretty offensive.
I don't have a bee in my bonnet about chemicals, because I know that humans managed to farm without the use of artificial pesticides for thousands of years before DDT, paraquat, derris etc. and will be quite capable of doing do well into the future.
Nor am I advocating some kind of hippy-ish notion of 'let's all get back to the land' in lieu of scientific rigour. However, where possible i'm not going to do the 'progress first, consequences later' approach.
Anyway, my scientific rigour tells me that Gill's comment is probably most appropriate in this instance, and I shall be instigating a programme of kettle boiling with immediate effect. Arguing makes you thirsty...
JB, swallow your feathers. I at no point suggested that anyone else should do as I do, or do as I say. I merely laid out my argument and you can take that as you will. To compare me with terrorist organisations such as the ALF is frankly, pretty offensive.
I don't have a bee in my bonnet about chemicals, because I know that humans managed to farm without the use of artificial pesticides for thousands of years before DDT, paraquat, derris etc. and will be quite capable of doing do well into the future.
Nor am I advocating some kind of hippy-ish notion of 'let's all get back to the land' in lieu of scientific rigour. However, where possible i'm not going to do the 'progress first, consequences later' approach.
Anyway, my scientific rigour tells me that Gill's comment is probably most appropriate in this instance, and I shall be instigating a programme of kettle boiling with immediate effect.
Arguing makes you thirsty...-
Cider Boys
- KG Regular
- Posts: 968
- Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:03 pm
- Location: Somerset
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 111 times
Dear Jenny
I do not think that you are a Luddite at all but you do not appreciate that your ‘organic’ methods may work for you but if practised world wide would result in famine. You have repeatedly asked for evidence to back up my theories, all I can say is they are not my theories but proven facts obvious to anyone with experience of agricultural history.
For example, consult Freams ‘Elements of Agriculture’, the textbook prepared under the authority of the Royal Agricultural Society of England.
Together with Mechanisation, Technical Innovations, The New Insecticides, Compound Fertilizers and Selective Herbicides allowed us to dramatically increase our food production.
Unless the ‘organic‘ movement want us all to go back to toiling on the land, the real world will continue to use Insecticides and Selective Herbicides (with possible GM foods) to help keep us living.
Jenny what evidence have you got that without these chemical aids our food production would have dramatically increased?
After the Second World War we still had rationing with long queues for bread etc. It was good old DDT (not organic practises) that allowed us grow cereals again by controlling wireworm. (I am not arguing for the use of DDT now but it served a purpose then.)
Ask the Irish if they would have preferred their organic growing of potatoes, at the time, or a Chemical blight control to prevent their famine
All the best
Barney.
I do not think that you are a Luddite at all but you do not appreciate that your ‘organic’ methods may work for you but if practised world wide would result in famine. You have repeatedly asked for evidence to back up my theories, all I can say is they are not my theories but proven facts obvious to anyone with experience of agricultural history.
For example, consult Freams ‘Elements of Agriculture’, the textbook prepared under the authority of the Royal Agricultural Society of England.
Together with Mechanisation, Technical Innovations, The New Insecticides, Compound Fertilizers and Selective Herbicides allowed us to dramatically increase our food production.
Unless the ‘organic‘ movement want us all to go back to toiling on the land, the real world will continue to use Insecticides and Selective Herbicides (with possible GM foods) to help keep us living.
Jenny what evidence have you got that without these chemical aids our food production would have dramatically increased?
After the Second World War we still had rationing with long queues for bread etc. It was good old DDT (not organic practises) that allowed us grow cereals again by controlling wireworm. (I am not arguing for the use of DDT now but it served a purpose then.)
Ask the Irish if they would have preferred their organic growing of potatoes, at the time, or a Chemical blight control to prevent their famine
All the best
Barney.