On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 20:01:30 -0400, "ta" <ta33@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>rick etter wrote:
>> And that means also not cruelty-free. Just what I've been saying...
>>
>> "...some organic pesticides have mammalian toxicities that are far
>> higher than many synthetic pesticides..."
>> http://www.cgfi.org/materials/key_pubs/Natures_Toxic_Tools.pdf
>
>Wow, I can't *believe* CFGI, which is funded by the right-wing think tank
>Hudson Institute, could possibly be promoting information that sup****ts
>their big agribusiness clients like Monsanto, ConAgra, and Archer Daniels
>Midland, who have everything to lose by the success of organic farming.
>
>But to be fair, I can't answer the specific charges as I'm not an expert,
so
>I'm expanding the thread to get a wider range of input.
The quoted statement is rather vacuous, ta, but not controversial..
If you make two lists, one of organic approved pesticides, another
of synthetic pesticides not approved for organic farming, you will
find 'some' on either list, which have mammalian toxicities far
higher than 'many' on the other list.
|
