nazgul@apollo.uucp (Kee Hinckley) (09/22/86)
In article <1530@mtx5a.UUCP> mat@mtx5a.UUCP writes: > With the exception of insecticides used against species that have the > immediate potential for severe damage to people and the environment (the > Karpa beetle and methyl bromide), insecticides approved for use today are > self-destructing when exposed to the environment. Absolutely not true. There are a number of insecticides that are currently used on crops that do NOT break down. Some of these were originally thought to be safe, others are applied regardless of the fact. I came into this discussion in the middle, but I gather someone was proposing using insecticides to wipe out a disease carrying insect. o No application will reach all of the insects. (In Africa some malaria carrying mosquitos breed in the puddles left by cow hooves. Are you going to hit every cow hoof puddle in Africa with an insecticide?) o No insectide will kill all of the insects. A certain percentage will survive, and their descendants will be even more likely to survive. -kee -- ...{mit-eddie,yale,uw-beaver,decvax!wanginst}!apollo!nazgul Apollo Computer, Chelmsford MA. (617) 256-6600 x7587 or 499B Boston Rd, Groton MA. (617) 448-2863 I'm not sure which upsets me more; that people are so unwilling to accept responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate everyone else's.
geoff@burl.UUCP (geoff) (09/24/86)
In article <303f1d1e.46@apollo.uucp> nazgul@apollo.UUCP (Kee Hinckley) writes: > >Absolutely not true. There are a number of insecticides that are currently >used on crops that do NOT break down. Some of these were originally thought >to be safe, others are applied regardless of the fact. > > -kee This is a good point, but there is one thing that bothers me about the whole idea of insect eradication. Suppose we found the perfect insecticide which kills all of the insects in the area and is totally harmless to people. Wonderful. The only problem is that there is an entire food chain with insects at the bottom. The insecticides might not hurt the birds, but lack of insects to eat sure might. And flowering plants which rely on insects for cross-pollenization. And lots of consequences we don't even forsee. Things would have to be awfully bad before this scenario would be preferable.... -- geoff sherwood ...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd mgnetp ]!burl!geoff ...![ ihnp4 cbosgd akgua masscomp ]!clyde!geoff
mat@mtx5a.UUCP (m.terribile) (09/25/86)
> In article <1530@mtx5a.UUCP> mat@mtx5a.UUCP writes: > > With the exception of insecticides used against species that have the > > immediate potential for severe damage to people and the environment (the > > Karpa beetle and methyl bromide), insecticides approved for use today are > > self-destructing when exposed to the environment. > > Absolutely not true. There are a number of insecticides that are currently > used on crops that do NOT break down. Some of these were originally thought > to be safe, others are applied regardless of the fact. > > I came into this discussion in the middle, but I gather someone was > proposing using insecticides to wipe out a disease carrying insect. The original question was they hypothetical `what if we found that AIDS has a significant insect transmission vector?' My response was that if the incidence of the disease became great enough, we might have to consider complete indoor quarantine of the affected individuals, as well as loading their living areas with as much insecticide as it appeared that they could stand for as long as they were likely to live, and that we would have to consider ``environmentally disasterous'' use of pesticides as well, in order to keep ourselves from being killed off completely. It was a hypothetical question, and I don't think that anyone here would like to be faced with the choices. My understanding is that, except in cases where *no substitute at all exists*, all pesticides must degrade rapidly in the environment, and that no new pesticide would be approved unless it met this critera. Is this incorrect? -- from Mole End Mark Terribile (scrape .. dig ) mtx5b!mat (Please mail to mtx5b!mat, NOT mtx5a! mat, or to mtx5a!mtx5b!mat) (mtx5b!mole-end!mat will also reach me) ,.. .,, ,,, ..,***_*.