Live data from Hacker News

Insect 'apocalypse' in U.S. driven by 50x increase in toxic pesticides: study

nationalgeographic.com

91–100 of 342 posts

Re: Insect 'apocalypse' in U.S. driven by 50x increase in toxic pesticides: study

#91
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds of all those times we are told that 'customers demanded X', as if we all stood outside supermarkets with placards saying, "We demand huge strawberries that don't taste of anything". The market does what helps the market, it often isn't good for people or the planet they inhabit - that's the story of our current era and customers need to demand change on that basis.

We did demand X though. The supermarkets had both tasteless strawberries and organic ones and we made our choice. Many supermarkets still have organic ones and we still pick the cheaper, larger, less tasty one.

I just want to share an anecdotal story with regards to "tasteless" produce from super markets.

I used to absolutely despise eating salad, I never knew why but I always just thought it was boring and I'd rather eat anything else; However, my girlfriend and I wanted to buy produce that wasn't wrapped in plastic so we started to shop at a local market held each week.

There we meet a Tongan farmer who grew everything using traditional methods, the biggest difference he said was that he used absolutely minimal irrigation (unless absolutely required due to drought at planting) and he also said that what made vegetables bitter was pesticides and it turned people off them (so I'm assuming he dind't use them). He said that the lack of pesticides and excessive water is what made his stuff taste so great, and his groups had to be a little tougher to survive so he believed they were healthier crops.

Anyway the guy was legit and he and his wife often held weekends where you could visit his farm and see everything, it was real deal.

The main point I wanted to make was that, while we were being produce from this guy, I noticed that I actually loved eating the salads, like became quite addicted to them, he even sold the flowers from all the vegetables and told us the best nutrients are found in the flours, they were delicious. Ever since we moved away and no longer had access to this guys produce, I went off them immediately again. I really dislike standard supermarket produce.

Re: Insect 'apocalypse' in U.S. driven by 50x increase in toxic pesticides: study

#92
post #77
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are making an assumtpion that your dsRNA is safe. The same type of assumption was made with Roundup where Roundup "only" effected a single pathway. We now know that this assumption was wrong and that Roundup causes cancer. Making assumptions is a very dangerous game.

You're already eating dsRNA. Plants have microRNA precursors and viruses. We eat plants. Roundup is a synthetic herbicide - that they both could be used in agriculture is when the similarity ends.

I know the difference between herbicides and microRNA but you do not seem to see the assumptions that you make.

Re: Insect 'apocalypse' in U.S. driven by 50x increase in toxic pesticides: study

#93
post #90
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this "Roundup is a dangerous poison" was a propaganda meme that came out of the need to demonize US agribusiness in Europe. It's a kind of social activism protectionism. I would not be at all surprised to learn it was sustained by funding from ag interests in Europe. OF course Roundup is not a dangerous poison. This is simply a lie that is repeated over and over by the dishonest and the gullible.

Poe's Law is strong with this one. I can't tell if you're serious or if this is advanced snarkasm.

Totally serious. The anti-Roundup fervor is of a kind with anti-GMO fervor. The goal of it is to provide a pretext to exclude cheaper US agricultural products from Europe.

Re: Insect 'apocalypse' in U.S. driven by 50x increase in toxic pesticides: study

#94
post #22

I'm part of a group developing RNAi-based pesticides which are topically applied (so non-GM). They are extremely species specific; when designed properly they can avoid even close relatives of the target insect, and the by-product of the active ingredient is degraded RNA, which is harmless. The OECD had a meeting on it recently to help develop a regulatory framework - link here if interested ( https://www.oecd.org/ch…

No. Not better, more targeted poisons. Just stop poisoning and killing. Why is it the words of the poisoners are always so positive and optimistic, telling a beneficial tale of forward looking improvement. The words have been the same since the poisoning started in the 20th century through generation after generation of new better less dangerous poisons. Your message is this “oh no we’re no working on bad poisons, we…

But how would otherwise disrupt this stale space ripe (pun?) for innovation?

Re: Insect 'apocalypse' in U.S. driven by 50x increase in toxic pesticides: study

#95
post #80
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agriculture involves preferencing specific species over others. It's intellectually dishonest to think otherwise. Getting the balance right is what we should be striving for. I'd assume you take antibiotics - lot of death caused there. Why is that OK?

Antibiotics are used to treat a specific infection. You don't take a pill of antibiotics every morning with your coffee.[1] Insecticides are usually applied pretty indiscriminately. I think that's quite a difference. [1] At least that's how they are supposed to be used. In agriculture (again agriculture, is this a pattern?) they are used indiscriminately in many parts of the world because it enables animals to be kep…

Exactly my point. A (properly designed) dsRNA only targets a single organism. It's not like an insecticide that kills everything, so is sprayed all the time. Other insects don't build up resistance, as it has no impact on them. If resistance builds up in the target insect, well, we're back where we started using toxic insecticides. Given the sequence is easy to change, resistance on a sequence basis at least is unlikely in the target itself.

Re: Insect 'apocalypse' in U.S. driven by 50x increase in toxic pesticides: study

#96
post #59
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We did demand X though. The supermarkets had both tasteless strawberries and organic ones and we made our choice. Many supermarkets still have organic ones and we still pick the cheaper, larger, less tasty one.

Organic doesn't mean more flavor. Tasteless strawberries are around for a few reasons 1) you can't try before you buy. bigger, redder strawberries look better, so sell better, so are grown more, and so on until that's the expectation. if varieties are cultivated for their looks, that means they're not cultivated for their taste or sugar content 2) bigger strawberries are easier/faster to pick, which means they're che…

Most supermarkets have pint baskets where you’re allowed to sample. Sometimes they have sampling and “pit” trays. So people do have a choice at least in some supermarkets.

The big issue for consumers (me inc) is shelflife. I want them to last more than 3 days in the fridge.

Seascapes and Rosas have a decent combo of shelflife and taste.

Re: Insect 'apocalypse' in U.S. driven by 50x increase in toxic pesticides: study

#97
post #76
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you are neglecting the negative effects of spraying billions of tons of Roundup on the planet before the public knows for sure that it is a dangerous poison. Same with neonics, we sprayed too much and the insect populations shrunk too much and will not revive quickly since the poison is still in plants and soil. The obvious thing is that industries work for profit and have no sympathy with insects or the health of in…

I think this "Roundup is a dangerous poison" was a propaganda meme that came out of the need to demonize US agribusiness in Europe. It's a kind of social activism protectionism. I would not be at all surprised to learn it was sustained by funding from ag interests in Europe. OF course Roundup is not a dangerous poison. This is simply a lie that is repeated over and over by the dishonest and the gullible.

I base my opinion on three court cases in the USA where evidence was borught to court that Monsanto knew many years ago about the cancer causing risks. on what do you base "this is simply a lie" ?

Re: Insect 'apocalypse' in U.S. driven by 50x increase in toxic pesticides: study

#98
Although I have no evidence for it, living in rural America - I’ve noticed a similar increase in allergies and severeness in allergies increase the region. Personally, I’d like to see some meaningful independent research there.

Re: Insect 'apocalypse' in U.S. driven by 50x increase in toxic pesticides: study

#99
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's super interesting. I had the same idea. I was thinking if there is a case in the current financial environment to just collect money from VCs, corporations etc and then buy land and make it "human-free". If you look at Chernobyl the results are very promising despite the radiation... see for example: http://theconversation.com/chernobyl-has-become-a-refuge-for...

why would a VC put money in this? It's not like it promises any form of return on the investment. As a charity cause, sure, but that is not something that the current financial environment encourages particularly.

> why would a VC put money in this?

Perhaps because they have much more money than they personally need and are wise? Surely there are some wise VCs out there.

Re: Insect 'apocalypse' in U.S. driven by 50x increase in toxic pesticides: study

#100
post #57
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using emotive terms like 'poisoner' to tar people trying to develop safer alternatives to current products is rather disengenuous.

People who give advise are advisors, people who kill are murderers, people who have kids are parents and people who produce or spray poisons are poinsoners. Using the word "poisoner" is not calling some names, it is simply using the correct word for the person that we are discussing.

It's these kinds of absolutes destroying discussion these days. They are trying to kill bugs. So that people can eat. They're succeeding, maybe too well. Calling them names won't make more food or fix the problem.
Post reply on HN