You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
8 points

Yeah but what if by increasing its usage, it means that you get more into the underground water supply and you end up with elevated concentration in drinking water because of this?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

If it’s dangerous then obviously stop doing it. But use science to test your hypothesis

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

It is pretty well understood at this point that a significant portion of pesticide runs off into our environment. It is reasonable to assume that an increase in usage will increase runoff and therefore increase risks of contamination.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
*

Don’t assume, test the hypothesis. Why are you so against using the scientific method?

I’m honestly pretty shocked at how anti science this thread is. Wanting proof that something is safe or unsafe shouldn’t be a controversial position.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

When Syngenta is involved, I’m extremely skeptical that the process is scientific or rather that the variables optimized for are people’s or the environment’s health. The dose isn’t an on/off switch, it isn’t boolean. Given Syngenta’s track record, I’m guessing that they’re optimizing for how much they can sell before the damage is apparent to most. I do believe they’re scientifically establishing these amounts.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Canada

!canada@lemmy.ca

Create post

What’s going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Regions

🏒 Sports

Hockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities

💵 Finance / Shopping

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social & Culture

Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


Community stats

  • 3.5K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.3K

    Posts

  • 49K

    Comments

Community moderators