View Single Post
  #7   Report Post  
Old 13-04-2009, 11:30 AM posted to uk.rec.gardening
Jeff Layman[_2_] Jeff Layman[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,166
Default holding numbers and glysophate

Ophelia wrote:
brian mitchell wrote:
Three years ago I bought a 5 litre container of Roundup from a local
farmers supply store. When I tried to buy the same this year I was
told they couldn't sell it to me without a holding number. I could
buy a 1 litre container but the price difference is extreme. The 5
litre costs £50, the 1 litre £30.

I'm interested to know if anyone here has run into the same situation,
anyone with a large plot or who gardens professionally? The people in
the store couldn't tell me why this new piece of regulation had been
brought in or what terrible danger is supposedly being averted by it.
brian mitchell


Perhaps the url that Sacha just posted might have answers to some of the
questions?

www.seedtoplate.com


(snip junk)

"Seed to Plate is sponsored by Northland Organic Foods, Inc.". Not exactly
an unbiased source...

And as for the press release reference source: "The Institute of Science in
society is a not for profit organisation dedicated to providing critical and
accessible scientific information to the public and to promoting social
accountability and ecological sustainability in science."

Sounds good, doesn't it? And if you look at the webpage "About ISIS", you
can find things there such as:
"Science should be unbiased and accessible to all, regardless of gender,
age, race, religion or caste.".

Nothing wrong with that. But read on:
"Science should be based on a holistic, ecological perspective that takes
proper account of the complexity, diversity and interdependence of all
nature."

Er - isn't that a bias? And then:
"It is in accordance with the precautionary principle: when there is reason
to suspect threats of serious, irreversible damage, lack of scientific
evidence or consensus must not be used to postpone preventative action."

So lack of scientific evidence must not be used to postpone preventative
action. That is from an organisation calling itself an "Institute of
Science...".

Give me strength...

--
Jeff