pesticides-silver+class+'09+'09

= Pesticides (By Stephen Farrington and Anthony Harley)media type="custom" key="3483220" =

toc Background There is no wildly popular pesticide that can kill all pests (without killing non-pests), mainly because of the fact that pests vary wildly in species, habitats, eating and mating habits, etc. The extensive use of pesticide since the industrial revolution in the 1800's has made the expanded deployment of pesticidal systems (such as crop dusters and roach motels) wildly available to the public and industrial sectors. In addition to preventative measures such as roach motels and coating crops with pesticides, there have been active measures (such as exposing ponds in mosquito-ridden areas to various poisons in an attempt to curb mosquito populations, which can easily carry blood-born diseases) taken to prevent "catastrophes" against a general human population. Pesticides are chemicals that kill or help to curb pest populations when they are exposed by environmental contact with the pest. However, they are expensive and ineffective, highlighted mainly by the pest’s abilities (no matter what kind of pest) to adapt (either through evolution or environmental/behavioral adaptations) and side effects that result in needless destruction. These side effects range from killing species not intentionally targeted by these chemicals to destroying or harming various influenced ecosystems or natural processes. Basically, wherever pesticides are, there are problems of all shapes and sizes that shouldn’t be there and are tough to deal with.

There are multiple ways of classifying pesticides. Algicides or algaecides for the control of algae Avicides for the control of birds Bactericides for the control of bacteria Fungicides for the control of fungi and oomycetes Herbicides for the control of weeds Insecticides for the control of insects - these can be ovicides (substances that kill eggs), larvicides (substances that kill larvae) or adulticides (substances that kill adults) Miticides or acaricides for the control of mites Molluscicides for the control of slugs and snails Nematicides for the control of nematodes Rodenticides for the control of rodents Virucides for the control of viruses



Abstract
Pesticides are chemicals that kill or help to curb pest populations when they are exposed by environmental contact with the pest. However, they are expensive and ineffective, highlighted mainly by the pest’s abilities (no matter what kind of pest) to adapt (either through evolution or environmental/behavioral adaptations) and side effects that result in needless destruction. These side effects range from killing species not intentionally targeted by these chemicals to destroying or harming various influenced ecosystems or natural processes. Basically, wherever pesticides are, there are problems of all shapes and sizes that shouldn’t be there and are tough to deal with.

Pesticides, according to a study reported in Bioscience magazine and led by Cornell entymologist David Pimentel, cost the people employing the pesticides 3 billion dollars (usually farmers) in deployment costs, crop losses, domestic animal losses, disease and plant infertility. (http://www.healthyworld.org/pestic_costs.html) In addition, another 5 billion dollars is paid by tax-paying citizens of the United States in clean-up and pesticide removal.

The cost that people pay for the damage done by pesticides cannot only be measured in money (as the pesticide industry is want to do), the number of killed animals (both for intended and unintended use), or the damage done so far to the environment. Most of the damage has yet to be discovered, and of that, we can only guess at the destruction. In addition to kill insects, the following list is a list of known side effects that are hurting the targeted deployment, use and overall minimal impact of pesticides:

They are not extensively proven to work as mentioned or thought (an important deciding factor for any application of pesticide). They are not federally approved, but are still deployed (average testing for a chemical compound is 6-10 years). (http://btny.purdue.edu/Pubs/PPP/PPP30.html#federal) They are deployed in ridiculously high amounts (usually from crop dusters), mainly because they don't do what they should, and farmers try to apply more to get the same effect, which further harms the environment.

As far as actual politics goes, there are many lobbyists from various chemical and agriculture companies and industries that represent the interests (money-making needs) of these groups by “investing” (providing needless wealth, bonuses and gifts) in people in various governmental positions, usually those centered in Senate. These lobbyists are basically out to make as much money as they can by making their products as widely available and required by the highest degree possible. They could care less about the problems that “aren’t based on reasonable judgments” and other huge problems that will soon concern everyone eating something from a farm or field that uses these chemicals. Basically, these people are evil and should be exiled to the far reaches of the earth, at the least. toc

My Opinion:
Pesticides are ungodly creations of death-providing crap that cause needless suffering and don’t do their jobs at killing pests, even though that’s supposedly their job (pesticides are meant to kill pests). They are expensive (an average of about 10% of a grower’s spending is spent on pesticides, which usually amounts to at least $10,000), and other methods of preventing pest contact with crops/goods, such as contained/elevated areas, screened goods and generally being more hard-working on the process that food goes through would do us a lot more good, in the end. In addition to their problems just through their direct use, they also cause insane amounts of other problems (Bald Eagles were kept on the endangered species list for an additional decade because of runoff from pesticides, and many species and numbers of fish have been reduced (directly) because of extremely poisonous pesticides exposing themselves (like flashes of death) to other environments. Legislators who are unaware of the extreme ramifications that these chemicals pose to their environments should, in my opinion, face a just punishment: be forced to live for a whole decade (hopefully longer for fun and seriousness) with pesticides everywhere, just like in the fields and streams where they can be most commonly found, showing how long it takes for a pesticide to be naturally flushed (in many cases, the time period is longer) from the ecosystem after just one use.