Monsanto Roundup deadly to humans - Glyphosate

[Janic]

The point of view of a farmer spent in conservation agriculture:
"
the goal of the ACS is also to go to zero phyto for a more virtuous system, and more protective of the environment, some in ACS manage to pass fungicides and insecticides, however we can not forget the economic side (reducing yields without valuing cereals is complicated)
For the weeding to happen totally of herbicides and durably without any work of the soil, it is for the moment not possible.
Today we can ask ourselves the question, what is the least harmful solution for the environment, a little herbicide or tillage to destroy weeds ???
Zero tillage with a maximum of vegetation cover is a consumption of diesel divided by three and storage of carbon in the soil (one of the solutions for climate change)

Where did this character [*] learn (assuming he actually learned it) what he calls AB? With a minimum of information he would have known that what he criticizes for his failed experience is precisely what AB, the real one, the more than organic, also criticizes the "false" organic people who believe that they are It is enough to stop using chemicals and to weed with the tractor, to be organic. So the ground cover, it is precisely one of the oldest techniques of the organic farming, to read for example the "fertility of the soil" of Rusch translated into French in 1968 or "we burned the earth" of Michel Remy, the organic gardening by Claude Aubert and a multitude of others which should have been used to know what organic farming consists of and which is not limited to being satisfied with no longer using chemicals.
[*] that does not call into question his good will, at most his lack of information. Now, he has discovered some of what AB really is and obviously he did not know!

[Exnihiloest]

...

Very informative this video, thank you.

[Moindreffor]

Can real bio or not feed the planet?
The "bio" (or rather the natural) has nourished the planet for millennia without the chemical industry.

I will be less optimistic on this subject, I would say "nourished"
with the increase of the population, the decrease of the areas of food crops, the urbanization, I do not think that is still the case
we agree that we must speak about organic labeling when we talk about organic
afterwards for the transition you talk about 5 years, it is actually in this order of idea, but is it within the reach of any farmer this period, it is necessary to hold financially knowing that if your customers make 15 20 km to pick up your products, the day when the same type of production will open 5 km from home, you will lose them, so in a niche with low potential, it is the rarity that allows survival

so in such a context, the glyphosate still has good days in front of him, is it harmful or harmless, I will say as for the Bordeaux mixture no more no less when it is well used, we sulphated the vines at arm's length, we come back, the same for glyphosate

for me it is better to educate than to forbid

[izentrop]

the glyphosate still has good days in front of him, is it harmful or harmless, I will say as for the Bordeaux mixture no more no less when it is well used, we sulphated the vines at arm's length, we come back, same for glyphosate

It is especially harmful for "future generation" who confuse an infinitesimal trace in the urine with toxicity. For copper it is clear that it is less biodegradable. The concentration in soils increases with each use.

Apparently organic is emulated because of the price difference, but if the purchasing power decreases .... At the same time, as it is an extra work for lower yields and loss of fertility, an increase soil erosion (large crop), with no real difference in quality ... it's already starting to get out of hand, even in the vineyard. https://www.vitisphere.com/actualite-88 ... n-2018.htm

[Adrien (ex-nico239)]

I do not know if this activity is the best example.

This world where Corsica is the same at the same ....

It turns out that my daughter worked for several years in this society


I do not give you a picture of everything that is hidden in the chemistry of wine ... but good in France it's not touching the wine.

[Janic]

by Moindreffor »18 / 12 / 18, 21: 33

Can real bio or not feed the planet?

The "bio" (or rather the natural) has nourished the planet for millennia without the chemical industry.

I will be less optimistic on this subject, I would say "nourished"
with the increase of the population, the decrease of the areas of food crops, the urbanization, I do not think that is still the case

If we consider that this is the past, before the chemical industry, the past is quite appropriate.
What is it now?
The food crop, whatever the country, the civilizations, was with local vocation, thus no claims to the American to feed the planet and thus of yield to produce surpluses. So famine countries are, at least in part, because these countries are drowning in low-cost, low-quality surpluses and the local food crop can not compete.
Likewise for urbanization, megacities concern only small or insignificant parts of the surface of these countries.

we agree that we must speak about organic labeling when we talk about organic
afterwards for the transition you talk about 5 years,

Labeling is done on 3 years in organic label. 5 Ans was for the pioneers and the real bio.

it is in this order of idea, but is it within the reach of any farmer this period,

It is to AB that made this jump that the question must be asked. But actually if this change is only opportunity because the bio is more profitable in this aspect, it will give the video above, by ignorance of what is the true AB, the most organic! Otherwise he would not have used his compact tractor to weed and he would have started with the ground cover! So that wasted time and disappointment to the key.
The other aspect that allowed this development of the AB more than organic (like laundry that is whiter than white) ), it is the awakening of conscience to do right or wrong and it is through this awareness, and its sacrifices to the key, that we can still talk today about biology in agriculture.

you have to hold it financially knowing that if your customers are 15 20 km to pick up your products, the day when the same type of production will open 5 km from home, you will lose them, so in a niche low potential is the rarity that allows survival

This is partially true! Once again, our societies have changed their way of life and currently the probio are looking for other solutions than the supermarkets which have monopolized the majority of distribution (food in this case) and which make their law there with their mantra. repeated until saturation of " it is less expensive! it is less expensive! it is less expensive! it is less expensive! "which allowed them to do away with most of the small businesses that served as a reference to insure their cheaper ... than them! and now this reference having disappeared, their mantra persists without any foundation. on the other hand the farmers who sold to grocery stores according to their true cost price, profit, have been strangled by this large distribution and consumers who have integrated this mantra whose reason had disappeared (like for vaccines and hot diseases) and who make the play and become the accomplices of these super / hyper markets.
It is therefore necessary to return to the true price allowing the various producer / consumer partners to balance demand and supply, without any tricks like the race for yields at any price to the detriment of the real quality of the final product, and without poisoning the land that feeds us. or the end consumer, which will reduce a number of illnesses and suffering, even death (agricultural chemistry and medicinal chemistry are intimately linked and therefore dependent)

[izentrop]

Very informative this video, thank you.

Especially the comments that are interesting

I tried when I was in bio brewing soil surface to destroy weeds, this technique brings many problems to solve (conditions of germination of weeds, too fast mineralization of organic matter, compaction, erosion and very complicated passage of tools such as the harvester and harrow because of very important plant debris on the surface)

I am also in a region between plain and hedgerow or plots of 3 ha can include 3 different natures of soil (wet clay with 40% of clay, silt with 20% of clay and sandy soil drying with 10% of clay) with slopes up to 10% favoring erosion, or also the difficulty of practicing organic cereal farming.

I hope one day to find the solution to practice zero tillage and zero phyto, it is also the interest of our job, constantly looking for solutions to move forward.

It is understood that with sloping and rather sandy soil erosion is an important criterion.
Another farmer's comment that I find revealing:

hervé vincent
3 weeks ago (edited)
in organic farming, the ratio between the yield and the consumption of fuel collapses: the yield is halved and the consumption of fuel to feed the plowing and the different hoeing to keep the soil clean is multiplied by three compared to the sowing direct ...

without saying that most of the conversions are done on clean and well smoked lands since the marshall plan ... in the long term, this is equivalent to a return to the Middle Ages, a big leap backwards: a miserable harvest one year on two and the land left fallow for erosive dry farming!

[Moindreffor]

It is therefore necessary to return to the true price allowing the various producer / consumer partners to balance demand and supply, without any tricks like the race for yields at any price to the detriment of the real quality of the final product, and without poisoning the land that feeds us. or the end consumer, which will reduce a number of illnesses and suffering, even death (agricultural chemistry and medicinal chemistry are intimately linked and therefore dependent)

the problem is that the supermarket brings together in one place all commodities and that to make the purchase live you have to move to the producer, I see develop organic hypermarkets, will we replace an absurdity by another?

if everyone goes around the little producer with his car, what about the carbon footprint?

not simple?

[Ahmed]

There are small markets where organic producers come to meet consumers ...

[Janic]

the problem is that the supermarket brings together in one place all the commodities and that to make the purchase on line you have to go to the producer,
if everyone goes around the little producer with his car, what about the carbon footprint?

not simple?

Not easy, it's the least we can say!
But there is a mixture of gender. Indeed, the problem of the car (for interesting that it is not the subject, if it is also necessary to take into consideration all the successive means of transport which it was necessary to implement to deliver, the halls, the super food markets from the 4 corners of France (does it also 4 coins, or even 5!?) and elsewhere? For pollution it should hardly make a difference or even the advantage local bio.

I see the development of organic hypermarkets, will we replace an absurdity with another?

For the moment they are, at most, superettes, not super / hypermarkets. The rest are, and are, only small shops.
So the subject, outside the automobile carbon pollution, is the production of healthier food than the polluted ones (that too is carbon in shambles!) By the agro-chemical industries: pollution by fertilizers, by the treatments of the soil, plants to which we must add all the pathologies generated by these products (well it also works the business of the disease and I say DE disease and professionals who depend on it)