> Well, it's supposed to be "safe". Why didn't he drink it?
Urine is also safe. Would you drink your own in front of a camera if I asked you to during an interview on water purification systems?
Most people react negatively to such weird requests, especially if they're out of the blue, in front of a camera, and asked by person who evidently tries to prove some point at your expense.
> And the interview was originally about Golden Rice.
Yes, which has nothing whatsoever to do with Roundup. Golden rice is a cool piece of biotech created to save more than half a million lives of children annually (and save many more from blindness) and is given away for free to grow (and replant) by people that need it. Bringing up Monsanto's pesticide in that interview was disingenuous, not to mention off-topic.
> Actually, in a functioning ecosystem, no pesticides are needed. Insects & other microorganisms are natural parts of the food web.
First of all, not really. That is, sure if you don't mind half your crops being rotten. I've never seen the evidence that you can successfully run a high-yield zero-pesticide farm. But I'm not that into farming and I'll be more than happy to learn I'm wrong.
But more importantly, even if possible, apparently almost no one does that. Especially not organic farmers, who dump even more chemicals on food than usual, with only difference is that those chemicals have "organic-certified" label. So between "a lot of pesticides", "even more pesticides applied by industry that tries to cheat you into thinking they're not using pesticides" the "one pesticide" solution suddenly doesn't sound that bad.
IMO, this whole notion that we accept poisons on our food is ridiculous. But ymmv. Many people are content getting fat & diabetic eating McDonalds.
> That is, sure if you don't mind half your crops being rotten.
Sorry, but that's a load of BS. Local farms don't really have this issue. Also note there is a huge problem of waste with conventional farming & animal meat production.
Re: "pests". Pests have predators. If you encourage the predators to thrive, you don't have a pest problem. Conventional monoculture chemical agricultural practices are prone to disease & pests because the natural food web & community is disrupted. It's an unsound architecture that requires expensive & destructive inputs to maintain. It's the industrial model fighting nature.
Why not work with nature instead?
> I've never seen the evidence that you can successfully run a high-yield zero-pesticide farm.
See the links I posted above. Both high-yield farms use zero-pesticides.
> But I'm not that into farming and I'll be more than happy to learn I'm wrong.
Maybe you should look more into it before stating such a strong opinion...It sounds like you are heavily influenced by propaganda from large chemical & petrol companies. I don't blame you, they have huge marketing budgets & are owned by the same interests that run the major media outlets. Too bad nature doesn't have a marketing department, huh?
> But more importantly, even if possible, apparently almost no one does that.
That's untrue. Natural methods are still dominant in most of the world. America is an outlier.
America subsidizes petrol chemical centralized agriculture. We don't subsidize natural methods. Lobbying & corporate interests drive this behavior.
> Especially not organic farmers, who dump even more chemicals on food than usual, with only difference is that those chemicals have "organic-certified" label.
The USDA Organic label is pretty asinine. Many think it's a way of sabotaging natural chemical free methods.
Note that natural food webs don't need chemicals. It has been done successfully but does not receive much attention on a large scale because it does not suit large scale corporate interests. If you take an interest in chemical free gardening, you can try it out yourself.
Natural methods emphasizes small, autonomous farms. It's also better for the environment since natural ecosystems are built (serving a variety of functions), instead of the monoculture pesticide drenched, petrol subsidized, environmentally destructive system that we have today.
Urine is also safe. Would you drink your own in front of a camera if I asked you to during an interview on water purification systems?
Most people react negatively to such weird requests, especially if they're out of the blue, in front of a camera, and asked by person who evidently tries to prove some point at your expense.
> And the interview was originally about Golden Rice.
Yes, which has nothing whatsoever to do with Roundup. Golden rice is a cool piece of biotech created to save more than half a million lives of children annually (and save many more from blindness) and is given away for free to grow (and replant) by people that need it. Bringing up Monsanto's pesticide in that interview was disingenuous, not to mention off-topic.
> Actually, in a functioning ecosystem, no pesticides are needed. Insects & other microorganisms are natural parts of the food web.
First of all, not really. That is, sure if you don't mind half your crops being rotten. I've never seen the evidence that you can successfully run a high-yield zero-pesticide farm. But I'm not that into farming and I'll be more than happy to learn I'm wrong.
But more importantly, even if possible, apparently almost no one does that. Especially not organic farmers, who dump even more chemicals on food than usual, with only difference is that those chemicals have "organic-certified" label. So between "a lot of pesticides", "even more pesticides applied by industry that tries to cheat you into thinking they're not using pesticides" the "one pesticide" solution suddenly doesn't sound that bad.