Le Potager du Sloth: Gardening without fatigue more than Bio

[Doris]

Yes, we were talking about the same thing, I castrated a few spring onions. My friends argued that it is a gateway to illnesses. I did not really understand why, and I did in my head, because anyway, if I had left the flower I would not have had much to harvest, the energy being devoted to the production of seeds.

[Moindreffor]

I'm waiting for the rains to arrive (3 drops this afternoon). I will plant or seed the place. That's why I pulled out when the leaves are still a little green!

actually still very green these leaves, is your explanation really honest? "need space ???"
soon you will have to increase your PP even more

[Did67]

actually still very green these leaves, is your explanation really honest? "need space ???"
soon you will have to increase your PP even more

Let's understand: I would have left them a little longer if I had only considered the state of the leaves; but on the one hand they are quite big, on the other hand, at this place (there is a line of leeks next to it), I will transplant or sow with the arrival of the rains (a very small rinse this evening). .. It's not a "need for space" in the strict sense ... But that suits me - and anyway, they weren't for long. This is how it should be seen.

[Did67]

My friends argued that it is a gateway to illnesses ...

Ah well say so. They argue serious !:

And the corn that we castrate ... Or the pink garlic from Lautrec, which casts itself ... Or the broccoli that we harvest ... Or the green beans ... Or the tomatoes ... It happens to them to think ????

[Doris]

You have to understand them, we are not in a corn department here (humor, obviously) !!!!
But hey, beliefs, my father's father has already done like that, and so on. It starts to reflect now, seeing that I harvested three times more per m2 than them, there you see the smoke above their heads

[stephgouv]

They don't ask you how much fertilizer you put for so much yield?
I think people are completely "beside their pumps" when we talk to them about our vegetable garden.
They don't realize that our vegetable garden works differently from theirs and suddenly they imagine a lot of things.
As long as skeptical people have not tried at least once the PP, they will remain skeptical! Except maybe those with an open mind.

[Rajqawee]

You speak of "bobo attitude". We have a good example here!

GF's report could be titled (and it would be much more statistically significant): "Half of conventional vegetables do not contain quantifiable traces of pesticide residues!"

And we could be happy about it. And encourage people to eat vegetables ... Rather than cooked dishes full of bad fats!

Instead, the emphasis is on a bias (which is real until this is specified), linked to the fact that the DGCCRF takes a panel of vegetables, including organic ones. As a result, the rate of reaching the quantifiable threshold is reduced by 2 to 3%. Note: the panel is not very representative: there are 8 "organic" vegetable samples out of 716 ... A little more than 1%.

But the sores are alerted to a bias of 5% in the results displayed ...

I come back to this, because it challenged me: in the meantime, I read, and understood I'm trying to summarize to discuss it a little more. Edit live: in fact, I found two other articles which complete and shed more light on the subject:
https://www.reussir.fr/fruits-legumes/p ... -et-le-bio

and live from the DGCCRF (he stings the one eh !! try to say it after two beers)
https://www.economie.gouv.fr/dgccrf/res ... e-vegetale (2018)
https://www.economie.gouv.fr/dgccrf/con ... es-en-2016 (2016)

If we summarize the situation in:
-the vast majority of products tested are non-organic
- roughly 50% of the products tested show quantifiable traces of pesticides (but beware, these figures vary according to the groups. Much more fruit, for example)
-only 3,6% of the products tested exceed the authorized thresholds in terms of pesticide residues (this is a threshold fixed by product)

We can in particular look (by taking the future generation page and by taking the more analyzed report of the DCCGRFCCGFCTCGFC) the difference on the tests between 2016 and 2020:
-fruits with 72 to 63% quantifiable residues
- vegetables from 49 to 42% of quantifiable residues

So, firstly, there is a clear reduction in residues (and that, regardless of whether the legislation has evolved since we are talking about residues, not non-compliance. I did not look, but at least we are sure). That is the very pleasing conclusion!

On the other hand, what we also note is that when future generations "correct" the rates indicated by the DGC% @! by removing organic products, the rates of "residue" products increase by a few points. This means that the organic products are in their vast majority without residue (otherwise well they would not lower the rate as much). And that, somewhere, is also gratifying. (I did the calculation for the vegetables, given the figures provided, the 8 vegetable samples did not contain any residue). Okay, so you could assume that organic produce doesn't have any residue, but with such a small sample, that's not very relevant.

Finally, it would remain to continue thinking (but my message is already long enough) with:
-are the thresholds set by the authorities relevant
-are the residues without impact
-Don't organic farming have other interest (preservation of the environment or soil, auxiliaries ...)

I'll end with my personal opinion: given their price, I'm going to start wondering if it's worth buying organic vegetables. Fruits may be another story ...
Ps: dear moderators, if this post is too off topic, no worries

[Obamot]

If the critters never come out of the ground, the cats won't be able to. Mole?

This game of cats bringing back prey is not trivial, I have seen it before and it seems to be part of a kind of social behavior to justify the food they receive (are they aware of some kind of 'exchange?) they are in any case proud to show in an ostentatious way that they “fulfill their role”. They are capable of very thorough understandings.

[Did67]

I'll end with my personal opinion: given their price, I'm going to start wondering if it's worth buying organic vegetables. Fruits may be another story ...
Ps: dear moderators, if this post is too off topic, no worries

Thanks for completing a bit!

1) Yes, of course, the question of the thresholds set by the regulations arises. On the one hand, we apply fairly large margins of uncertainty. On the other hand: a) it is evaluated on animals and we saw above that for dogs, onions are toxic, not for humans; slugs feast on poisonous mushrooms, etc; b) more fundamentally, the thresholds are set per molecule - we never study the "cocktail" effect ...

So the question remains relevant. I never advise against the use of "organic" - I explain why it is not as perfect as we want us to believe (and more for the environment or sustainability - natural fertilizers? Where do they come from? ? - only for human health).

2) "Organic" agriculture could have other interests - environmental, etc. But I am not sure that the "intensive" form that this agriculture takes is, on this side, as efficient. To tell the truth, I doubt it! Work the land intensively? Use breeding "auxiliaries"? Use pesticides in natural fertilizers, far from being harmless / inexhaustible? Where is the "progress" ???

But yes, it's worth buying "organic" products by sorting - a little ethics, a little self-control. "Local organic", "seasonal organic", yes. Organic off-season, organic from the other side of the world, no! And the "organic" bobo sold at a high price for allegations that are pure bobology: no, no and bobo! I refuse to get fucked in the ass like this (are there no children here?)!

But above all: it is better to eat fresh, not organic vegetables than no vegetables at all. This all studies have always confirmed. But as it is the speech of conventional farmers, no bobo will ever take it up. As no booze will protrude against alcohol (they like - and me too - a small glass of wine at a social evening) much more toxic, deadly and carcinogenic than glyphosate (I'm talking about the overall balance for the company, not doses).

So what is the use of demonstrating that the figures are underestimated by 2 to 3%! For the call for donation which is on the site ??? So that the article is widely covered in the media as FranceSoir proves (free publicity) ???

[Did67]

If the critters never come out of the ground, the cats won't be able to. Mole?

This game of cats bringing back prey is not trivial, I have seen it before and it seems to be part of a kind of social behavior to justify the food they receive (are they aware of some kind of 'exchange?) they are in any case proud to show in an ostentatious way that they “fulfill their role”. They are capable of very thorough understandings.

It is a mark of affection. He saw his mother bring back prey when he was young.

It is also a feline behavior: there is a hunting territory and then there is the "home", secure. A lion, however the king of the jungle, often brings back its prey and then the family shares ... These are the legacies of such behavior (atavism).

But don't go so far as to share the mouse to please your cat!