"James" wrote in message
oups.com...
It might not have helped in floods but it sure did in droughts, disease
and insect pests.

No amount of organic farming could limit locust lost like a little bit
of poison. I would rather eat a little poison and live instead of
dying of starvation.

Farmers were able to use a little bit of chemical fertilizer and
produce more than using a train load of manure. I'm old enough to have
seen train loads of manure. It certainly takes a lot less time to
spread chemical fertilizer than manure.

Chemicals against diseases allowed crops to live instead of dying
before you even get started.

I'm not saying there are no downside to chemicals but I'm no _Silent
Spring_ fanatic. It's a question of the whole picture. DDT might have
lowered the bald eagle population but without have using it last
century you might have been killed by some disease carrying insect.

You got to ask if we would be worrying about West Nile, Killer Bees,
Rocky Mountain Spoted Fever, etc. if we were still using DDT.

Of course you can point out all the things chemicals cannot do but
what's the point? Fact is chemicals work. Also calling people who
disagree with you misinformed tends to make you sound more nutty.

It's only recently that people can afford organic produce and $4
coffee. Just the fact that organic produce costs way more than
non-organic proves chemicals work. These should be no organic premium
if it was such a good system.

I have started eliminating midifed or synthetic chemicals in my household &
garden for a number of reasons. One is cost, not just to my pocket but also
the environment. I stopped using laundry powders and detergents in favour of
washing soda (sodium carbonate). In my opinion it does a very similar job to
commercial powders, though I may need to use a little more than I did of the
powders although I never used the amounts recommended on the packaging so it
may be like for like had I used the recommended rates. Moreover, washing
soda is a product I can buy in bulk (10 kgs or more at a time, I take my own
sack) and therefore it comes with less packaging than commercially packed
detergents. As a simple product, and in bulk, it utilises less energy to
produce ans transport. It does not contain phosphorous or other aspects
harmful to water ways (though in large quantities it can in itself have
negative effects on waterways) and best of all it is cheaper than commercial
supermarket packed powders. Alternatives to synthetic or complex chemicals
do exist that can save money as well as our environment.

rob