Philosophical Vegan Forum

ok thanks
you seem to know more than me about pesticides, I gonna study it a bit when I get the time, thanks for this explanations, it's very interesting
I based my thinking on a couple of french scientifics called "couple bourguignon" that are specialized in "soil microbiology" and there is several documentaries about their researches, where they explains that pesticides kills all life in the soils and so this is very bad for plants and that farmers are too agressive and labour too deep and too often

eloine wrote: I based my thinking on a couple of french scientifics called "couple bourguignon" that are specialized in "soil microbiology" and there is several documentaries about their researches, where they explains that pesticides kills all life in the soils and so this is very bad for plants and that farmers are too agressive and labour too deep and too often

Documentaries are not usually reliable sources of information, particularly on Organic agriculture, the principles of which are not based on science. Anybody can say anything in a propaganda piece, what matters is real research and scientific consensus, and I can not find any peer reviewed and published research from these people.

It sounds like the Bourguignon couple are practicing pseudoscience, not science.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience

I found details about his book:
Claude Bourguignon, Regenerating the Soil: From Agronomy to Agrology, Other India Press, 2005

Other India Press is a small publication house which specializes in pseudoscience and spiritual stuff. So, based on that, it is fair to assume Claude Bourguignon is not a credible scientist, if he is any kind of scientist at all.
It's kind of like if you found something published by a publishing house that mainly published Nazi or white supremacist things: it's an indication of the quality and content of the book. Guilt by association is a valid default assumption when it comes to science and publishers.

I can not find the book for sale anywhere but vedicbooks dot net (vedic, as in the system of Indian mysticism) as print on demand, and I can not find any review on the book: which also usually means it is of very poor quality, and of no academic value.

A wikipedia page on him is only available in French, and contains a number of references to pseudoscience.
Here's the criticism section:

Claude Bourguignon est critiqué par une partie du milieu scientifique et agricole pour des propos considérés comme simplistes, exagérés, catastrophistes ou dépourvus de sens. Parmi les propos critiqués se trouvent notamment des citations comme « le sol est mort » ou « Nous ne faisons plus d’agriculture en Europe. Nous essayons de maintenir vivantes des plantes qui ne demandent qu’à mourir ».9,10

Il lui est également reproché un manque de rigueur scientifique allégué, d'intervenir hors de son domaine d'expertise, ainsi que de soutenir la biodynamie, une forme d’agriculture considérée comme non-rationnelle par ses détracteurs11,12,10.

Enfin il lui est reproché d'avoir une posture « seul contre tous », qui ne tiendrai pas compte des travaux des autres spécialistes de science du sol9.

He supports biodynamic farming: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodynamic_agriculture

You should probably read this, and search other criticisms of him in French: http://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article833

As far as I can find in English, the things Bourguignon says are wildly incorrect, and disagree with the consensus in agricultural science. He shouldn't be regarded as a credible source.

All of my research has shown me that "organic" food is potentially dangerous, since it is often covered in more poison which harms human beings, and it's harmful to the environment because it produces lower yield which wastes land and costs potential food.

this is the laboratory of the bourguignon, but all is written in French:
http://www.lams-21.com/
and this is the wikipedia (but I didn't find the english version
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Bourguignon
Claude bourguinon created the "American Society for Microbiology"
They made some publications in soil micobiology and they are the only scientifics in the world to study it, but I read that they are critisized a lot because they claim that pesticides kill microbiology lives in the soils
they did some publications too

brimstoneSalad wrote:

eloine wrote: I based my thinking on a couple of french scientifics called "couple bourguignon" that are specialized in "soil microbiology" and there is several documentaries about their researches, where they explains that pesticides kills all life in the soils and so this is very bad for plants and that farmers are too agressive and labour too deep and too often

Documentaries are not usually reliable sources of information, particularly on Organic agriculture, the principles of which are not based on science. Anybody can say anything in a propaganda piece, what matters is real research and scientific consensus, and I can not find any peer reviewed and published research from these people.

It sounds like the Bourguignon couple are practicing pseudoscience, not science.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience

I found details about his book:
Claude Bourguignon, Regenerating the Soil: From Agronomy to Agrology, Other India Press, 2005

Other India Press is a small publication house which specializes in pseudoscience and spiritual stuff. So, based on that, it is fair to assume Claude Bourguignon is not a credible scientist, if he is any kind of scientist at all.
It's kind of like if you found something published by a publishing house that mainly published Nazi or white supremacist things: it's an indication of the quality and content of the book. Guilt by association is a valid default assumption when it comes to science and publishers.

I can not find the book for sale anywhere but vedicbooks dot net (vedic, as in the system of Indian mysticism) as print on demand, and I can not find any review on the book: which also usually means it is of very poor quality, and of no academic value.

A wikipedia page on him is only available in French, and contains a number of references to pseudoscience.
Here's the criticism section:

Claude Bourguignon est critiqué par une partie du milieu scientifique et agricole pour des propos considérés comme simplistes, exagérés, catastrophistes ou dépourvus de sens. Parmi les propos critiqués se trouvent notamment des citations comme « le sol est mort » ou « Nous ne faisons plus d’agriculture en Europe. Nous essayons de maintenir vivantes des plantes qui ne demandent qu’à mourir ».9,10

Il lui est également reproché un manque de rigueur scientifique allégué, d'intervenir hors de son domaine d'expertise, ainsi que de soutenir la biodynamie, une forme d’agriculture considérée comme non-rationnelle par ses détracteurs11,12,10.

Enfin il lui est reproché d'avoir une posture « seul contre tous », qui ne tiendrai pas compte des travaux des autres spécialistes de science du sol9.

He supports biodynamic farming: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodynamic_agriculture

You should probably read this, and search other criticisms of him in French: http://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article833

As far as I can find in English, the things Bourguignon says are wildly incorrect, and disagree with the consensus in agricultural science. He shouldn't be regarded as a credible source.

All of my research has shown me that "organic" food is potentially dangerous, since it is often covered in more poison which harms human beings, and it's harmful to the environment because it produces lower yield which wastes land and costs potential food.

ok yeah
I replied before I read all your message!
makes me realise I must study it more carefully, they were the first scientifics I became aware of as they seem quite persuasive. But I don't have much knowledge of chemicals and physical science, gonna try to learn more on it

something I started to wonder about vegan nutrition, how can I get enough DHA-EPA? and isn't it higly recommended to get some Taurine, Creatinine, Carnitine, Carnosine?

but most scientific researchs are financed by the big industrial groups, so that's why they are not to be trusted either, and their interest is to qualified independant scientifics like claude bourguignon to be not credible because he makes researches that goes against big industrial compagnies interests...And he used to be member of INRA so he is qualified as a scientific, he created his own laboratory research because he was horrified by the researches he had to make for the AGRO
And often documentaries say a part of the truth that they don't want to admit in any big industrial group because they don't want that people stop eating their products and so to loose money, so the researches they make are never going to go against their interests, and as they are the most powerfull they can easily discredict independant scientifics that goes against their own interest, that's why I don't think claude bourguignon is less reliable than other published researchs coming from the big industrials that are probably hiding a lof of things,
they are not going to admit that pesticide is dangerous and pollute even if it's the truth, because they want people to buy their product so they gonna invest a lot of money to pay scientific to say that it is healthy.
I also saw a documentary on the internet once, from a scientific working for big compagnies like "danone " and "nestlé" , she was paid to say that sodas doesn't increase diabete. And so she made the researches to prove it, even if it's common sence and everybody knows that soda does increase diabete, But it was making nestlé loose too much money so they needed to invest money to prove that sodas doesn't contribute to diabete

keep on eating food full of pesticides if you think it is healthy and good luck
when you get a cancer you will think it came from the organic produce hahahahah

I just realise that it is very silly to say that organic produces are harmfull to human, since they can't put what they want on the foods, it is controlled by labels like "ecocert" for instance, and so to be certified when you buy a organic produce that this one respect nature and environnement and health you should buy the ecocert standart

in fact it's the opposite! all the non organic food is really dangerous, since they can put what they want and then they just pay scientifics to say that their food is not dangerous, "ecocert" is one of the organic labels that certified organic quality and environnement protection

I think you missunderstood, claude bourguignon doesn't support biodynamic, this is the big industrial groups that say he support this to make him less trustable and his scientific research less valuable