Sulfoxaflor: Nice court bans two insecticides

[GuyGadebois]

And better still, it condemns the ... of ANSES and the ... of Dow Agrosciences ...
https://www.actu-environnement.com/ae/n ... 34563.php4

[izentrop]

We will also have to ban organic spinosad, which uses the same mechanisms. But where do we go if the courts which do not have jurisdiction also start to agribashing.

The ASSos make the law, the state and the ANSES only has to crash ... Bravo, let's go cheerfully in the wall

[GuyGadebois]

The ASSos make the law, the state and the ANSES only has to crash ... Bravo, let's go cheerfully in the wall

If ANSES was independent and did not work hand in hand with the bastards of the chemical industry, we would not be there. Fortunately, there are counter powers.
Aside from that, spinosad is much less toxic than neonicotinoids (toxic to mammals, therefore humans) but in my opinion it should be banned (at least) in organic.

[izentrop]

spinosad

This insecticide is extremely toxic to bees with acute contact DL50 of 0,0029 μg / bee.

sulfoxaflor:

This insecticide is toxic to bees (oral LD50 of 0,146 µg / bee).

50 times less toxic and very little residual in the soil.

After that depend on doses used and with the precautions of use respected, the risks are minimal.

It is just a procedural battle to scuttle agriculture as we do for nuclear. It's so much easier to hit minorities under the guise of sacrosanct public opinion.

The court ordered ANSES to pay 1 € to the applicant associations (Future Generations, the National Union of French Apiculture (Unaf) and the Agir pour l'Environnement association). Same sanction for Dow Agrosciences.

In addition it is profitable.

[GuyGadebois]

Hello the long term effects of Sulfoxaflor!
Unfortunately, we can't ban everything yet, but it will come. They will be made to give up the industrialists of death. Insecticides "organic" or not. When we see the disappearance of nearly 80% of insects in Europe, it is not the time to be choosy.

[Exnihiloest]

We have more to lose than to win at this game. That said, if we want the malaria to return to Corsica, or for our potato fields to be ravaged by the Colorado potato beetle, or our vines for phylloxera, let’s continue to think we are smarter than our ancestors who eliminated them, for good reasons that the least enlightened and the most ignorant of today no longer see, or that the nostalgics of a good old time refuse to see by idealization in images of Epinal of times they have not known. The possible collateral damage from insecticides is nothing compared to their absence.

But if the most extreme environmentalists, like Greta, one day take power, we can even cherish the hope of a return of famines and epidemics. It would be the consecration, the success, the return to times without pollution, the proof that all the ecological work will have been useful and will have succeeded! Jubilant, huh?

The problem of the disappearance of insects, most certainly multifactorial, must be studied and overcome, and it is certainly not by shouting haro on the industrialists, who have only met the needs, that we will elucidate the question and find solutions. The primaries, followers of the lynching, never find solutions, they only stir up debates.

[eclectron]

The primaries, followers of the lynching, never find solutions, they only stir up debates.

This is what you do, lynch above, the environmentalists.
What solutions do you bring as a "liberal" friend, a friend of the wallet instead of the heart and instead of common sense?

As always "Your" liberal solution is:
1) to deny the problem,
2) then to admit it but to consider that it is not so serious,
3) then consider it serious but there is time,
4) and finally it is serious and time is short but we will find a technological and marketable solution, of course

Or not ... because there are problems which once crossed a threshold can no longer be solved.

If it was so simple ...

So we are waiting for YOUR solutions rather than spitting on the green which at least has the merit of being attentive to life as a whole and not only to profitability.
We know, you can't understand or hear this speech ... it's YOUR problem to refuse sensitivity.
How much is sensitivity?

We beg of you, do not hesitate to bring "realistic, pragmatic, reasoned and reasonable" man solutions to all the problems you raise here, problems which are created by the same logic of "reasoned pragmatic realists and reasonable ".

Yes it is difficult to admit that YOUR thought, therefore YOU, is the very source of all the problems that you cite.
How do you get around to continuing with the same logic and solving the problems that you yourself have created?
-> Spit on the ecologists! and headlong flight. this is your program, right?

[GuyGadebois]

...

Ultra-liberal-primary non-human automaton response.

[Exnihiloest]

...

Ultra-liberal-primary non-human automaton response.

"Non-human" is what the Nazis said about the Jews. When you have an intelligent objection, related to the subject, and not the last of the sophisms, let us know, Gadebois.

[GuyGadebois]

...

Ultra-liberal-primary non-human automaton response.

"Non-human" is what the Nazis said about the Jews. When you have an intelligent objection, related to the subject, and not the last of the sophisms, let us know, Gadebois.

Are you reduced to "that"? Hat!