Skip to main content

Why are new pesticides less harmful to ecosystems than DDT and related compounds used in the 1950s and 1960s?

In the 1950s and 60s (and earlier) chemical pesticides were used extensively but untested. After Silent Spring was published by Rachel Carson in 1962, chemical companies including Monsanto hit the author with both lawsuits and personal attacks. President John Kennedy took note and asked for an investigation into claims that led to increased regulations concerning chemical pesticides. 


Some believe that currently there is still a lack of commitment to proper testing to validate the safe use of pesticides. Often, publications note connections between current pesticides and diseases such as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, cancer, infertility, and others. Some scientists believe a commonly used weed killer - atrazine - could be more harmful to humans than originally thought. An article published in 2009 stated that birth defects, low birth weights, and reproductive problems could be outcomes even when used at concentrations that meet current federal standards. 


Natural pesticides do exist. As an example, by planting garlic with tomatoes a grower can keep red spider mites away. Farmers who practice sustainable farming methods use the least toxic substances in the least amounts possible to avoid endangering both human and animal health. Positive sustainable farming methods include crop rotation, selecting pest resistant plant varieties, and planting root stock that is pest-free. 


So, while more testing is done today for negative effects of chemical pesticides, the focus needs to remain on the continued safe and responsible use of chemicals.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more