The “organic” method of application is via live bacteria. Which can then go on to reproduce and spread and persist and produce as much of the insecticide as they want, until something happens to limit their growth.
In the soil, yes; where it’s likely to be naturally occuring anyway, and where growth is indeed limited by a number of factors. Bt applied on the leaves breaks down rapidly in sunlight.
Good pickup. But do you have any counter to the thrust of the article - that organic farming uses plenty of pesticides, sometimes in amounts that exceed what conventional farming uses?
Not necessarily.
“Soil and leaf populations of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) were monitored following aerial application of commercial Bt formulations at the rate of 72 billion international units per acre per year during a 5-year period. Data from soil sample spore counts suggested that Bt spores persisted in Wasatch forest soils for up to 2 years but they did not proliferate. Bt isolates were recovered from leaf samples 12 months post application from sprayed, previously sprayed and from nonsprayed areas.”
[discourse, that post is not empty]
Assuming that a high application rate of an “organic” copper or sulfur fungicide is benign and that a much lower application rate of a synthetic fungicide is dangerous, seems illogical.
[discourse, this post isn’t empty either]
Not organic but… As an example, a recent news article discussed some areas banning the usual weed-killer chemicals for general lawn care. A fellow from a lawn care compnay said the replacement “safer” iron-based weed killer, they needed to use over 10 times as much to get the same effect.
Different materials, different volumes, same effect. I suppose the question is, what are the additional unintended consequences? I presume there’s a general consensus in the organic industry about what is acceptable, nobody wants to suddenly lose their certification because the certification body played fast and loose with definitions until they get caught.
Even if the effective dosages aren’t the same, by weight, there’s still a big jump from “organic farmers almost never use any pesticides at all” to “organic farmers use more pesticides than non-organic farmers do”.
Back of the envelope, the simplest assumption is that the undesired side effects of a pesticide stem directly from its pesticidal properties, and so the first-order estimate would be that any farm that’s using any pesticidal chemical to manage insects is going to have about the same amount of side effects, because they’re killing the same number of undesired insects.
And the latter claim is being made based on the weight. Which is irrelevant.
Simple, and not necessarily remotely accurate.
The effect of the pesticide on a specific pest is not necessarily related to its effect on non-target organisms.
FWIW, Genetic Literacy Project is an industry front group.
https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Genetic_Literacy_Project
You’re right; it’s quite possible that the “organic” pesticides have a much worse ratio of side effects to primary effect.
Or the other way around.
Interesting read, LHoD; thanks.
Your source does not show that the Genetic Literacy Project gets any funding from companies that sell GM seed varieties or related agricultural projects, nor does it demonstrate that articles written for or reproduced on the GLP site are invalid because of any purported industry connections.
Re GLP funding and more on those hostile to GLP.
Interestingly, Sourcewatch, which is run by the left-wing Center for Media and Democracy, is rather cagey about where its own funding comes from. According to Wikipedia, CMD publishes a “partial” list of supporters, and gets a big chunk of its funding from the Schwab Charitable Fund, whose policy permits anonymous donations.
Personally, I prefer analyzing facts and evidence, rather than attempting to dismiss them by attacking the sources that present them, or engaging in poorly constructed scaremongering. On that score, anti-GMOers do badly.
As to the claim that it doesn’t really matter how many pounds per acre of a pesticide you slather on (the implication being that organic pesticides, whatever the volume used, should be innocuous) - the reality can be quite different. Take copper sulfate and other copper-based fungicides, which have been applied at rates up to 30 pounds per acre by organic farmers.
“At very low levels copper becomes toxic to plants, humans and importantly, soil organisms, including worms. Relatively low concentrations prove toxic to soil organisms (Helling et al. 2000).”
“Copper sprays are harmful to all aquatic life (including fish), livestock and soil biota. Small elevations of copper in the soil reduce beneficial mycorrhizae associations (Liao et al. 2003). Fungi are essential for symbiotic relations with plants.”
“Copper sulfate kills soil biota and, insects (e.g. bees) when sprayed as an anti-fungal (Bogomolov et al. 1996, Böckl et al. 1998). Impact on pollinators highlights the need to be aware of timing of applications. Spraying fungicides when pollinators are present is counterproductive and environmentally irresponsible.”
Research shows disease and pathogenic fungi develop resistance to copper treatments making copper fungicides ineffectual over time…
In most soils, copper residues are likely to remain indefinitely, and will continue to influence the health of the soil."
Now, copper compounds are sometimes used in conventional farming as well, but in that case farmers have access to other, “synthetic” fungicides with much lower application rates and lesser environmental footprint.
Adding the bolding, as apparently you missed this post.
And on the quantities in general: I repeat, just comparing poundage is nonsense, even if the poundage is accurate, which I don’t have time to investigate. California has a lot of grapes and orchards. One of the things organic growers may be using is kaolin clay. This is a natural clay product that gets ground up fine, mixed with water, and sprayed on fruit and leaves, leaving a thin layer of clay. It functions mostly as a barrier – insects get confused by the color and may be irritated by the texture – but it is indeed listed by EPA as a pesticide.
And, while most pesticides get applied at rates in ounces per acre: kaolin gets applied, depending on the size of the plants, at rates up to 100 lbs per acre.
But it’s clay. That’s all. Complaining that anybody using it is applying 100 times as much pesticide as somebody applying, say, Sevin is like complaining because someone’s drinking two quarts of water a day so that’s worse than, say, taking 60 milligrams of codeine.
The theory of organics is simple - they (claim to) use materials that occur naturally in the environment, and typically break down or wash away in short timeframes. Therefore your body does not accumulate strange chemicals at unnatural levels. For example, one of the pest control methods for lawn grubs I tried several years ago was simply microorganisms with spiked shells - the grubs eat these and it shreds their digestive tract. No comparison to DDT for long term detriment to the environment, since these occur naturally in nature and deteriorate quickly; but I would have to use a lot more (indeed, they reproduce) compared to some chemicals.
So weight or volume is by no means a simple indicator of toxicity. This doesn’t mean I subscribe to the organic woo gospel - I’m sure there are artifical chemicals that also break down expeditiously and at very low levels are OK for humans. But since I mentioned Joni Mitchell and DDT, a news article mentioned the bald eagle now off the Ontario endagered species list, recovered from DDT decline; and a recent new article mentioned the CFC-induced ozone hole is almost cured. There are two examples of chemicals that have had unforseen unintended consequences that took decades to manifest (not to mention global warming). This is my point of needing to proceed very cautiously with making significant changes to the environment. Chemicals, you can stop making; biological changes cannot be put back into Pandora’s box.
Before this thread I had not heard of the Center for Media and Democracy, which runs Sourcewatch and other allied sites.
So, since they tell us to ignore the Genetic Literacy Project since the GLP are just a bunch of shills in Monsanto suits, one would naturally assume that CMD and its subunit organizations are a much more reliable source of information on GMOs.
Let’s see - here’s an article on genetically engineered salmon from PR Watch, another CMD outfit.
“Despite insufficient testing and widespread consumer opposition, AquaBounty’s food experiment is dangerously close to becoming the first genetically engineered animal produced for human consumption. Yes, a newfangled fish may soon land on a dinner plate near you.”
"For those who have been following this news for the past several years, the timing of the FDA’s release of its draft environmental assessment – the Friday before Christmas – was no surprise. But the news was still frightening: The FDA may give this transgenic animal the green light under a new approval process that treats the fish as an “animal drug.”
“Prefer your salmon without those eel genes spliced into its DNA? Pay close attention because this frankenfish may hit the market without any sort of label.”
“Dangerously close”, “frightening”, “frankenfish”. Yes, that’s the kind of sober, fact-based reporting we crave. Don’t pay attention to the FDA’s approval of genetically engineered salmon (they’re probably infiltrated with Monsanto clones). And the 8 years since approval without horrific consequences (following 20 years of R&D, evaluation and regulatory oversight) means nothing. We could be sprouting eel appendages any day now.
CMD’s PR Watch has also bravely stood up for GMO opponent Dr. Oz, with a stirring story headlined “Kochs, Corps, and Monsanto Trade Group Have Bankrolled Group Attacking Dr. Oz”. When Distinguished Men of Science like Dr. Oz are criticized, there must be nefarious corporate motives behind it.
Yes, CMD and PR Watch are now my go-to sources for accurate, unbiased info on GM products.
/sarcasm
By the way - in the back-and-forth about toxic fungicides, it wasn’t mentioned that there’s an alternative to spraying fungicides on crops. We can breed fungal disease-resistant varieties, either through conventional breeding or (surprise!) genetic modification.
Too bad that’s not an option that organic growers can use, since DNA is unnatural.
I’ve been following this thread from the git-go and made 6 posts early on. I gotta say that every time I see the thread in the “unread” threads roster I read the title as
blah blah blah modify orgasms blah blah blah.
I doubt I’m alone in this, but I might be. Comments? 
Now I’m totally confused about Oz. CMD is pro-Oz, the GOP senate cadidate, and GLP is a shill for big business, then who are the intelligent, honest and straight-forward ones? Apparently neither…
The article linked fails to mention what is different and the reason for the gene-splicing, other than it might make fish grow faster. More interesting but not mentioned, is whether it can cross-breed with regular salmon. I hope this does not result in traditional fishermen being sued for netting the cross-bred progeny of escaped salmon…
Maybe with eel genes they are more slippery and can escape the nets, thus becoming the dominant species… /s
(Yes, Discourse, I want to post that link again, since apparently it didn’t get read the first time.)
(a) The producer must use management practices to prevent crop pests, weeds, and diseases including but not limited to:
(1) Crop rotation and soil and crop nutrient management practices, as provided for in §§ 205.203 and 205.205;
(2) Sanitation measures to remove disease vectors, weed seeds, and habitat for pest organisms; and
(3) Cultural practices that enhance crop health, including selection of plant species and varieties with regard to suitability to site-specific conditions and resistance to prevalent pests, weeds, and diseases.
Bolding mine. Yes, organic producers have noticed that there are alternatives to pesticide use. Yes, this has been mentioned in this thread. Yes, choosing resistant varieties is among those alternatives, and has also been mentioned in this thread.