To wish people paid attention at school?

[drspouse]

And therefore knew what a chemical was?
Just had someone moaning on a gardening group that F1 seeds are made "with chemicals in a lab".
Well in that you'd be a bit stuffed without chemicals, yes, they are, as you'd have no body and seeds wouldn't exist.

Other than pointing out that we've had F1 seeds long before we had laboratories, you could also point out to them the list of rather nasty chemicals which are permitted in organic farming:
www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/7/205.601

My favourite is copper sulphate, which makes roundup look like water.

I didn't know that!
But for my money any garden is a lab, as is my kitchen.

any garden is a lab

I imagine the moaner pictures a lab as being full of evil, bald men in white coats. I did have an infestation of those in mine but vigorous application of the garden fork soon persuaded them to leave.

The ‘no chemicals’ brigade are particularly poorly educated. They seem to assume that some things are made of chepically while others are natural, that chemicals are somehow all bad and various other nonesense.

Shame we all have to drink that dangerous dihydrogen monoxide.

People get confused.

We are told not to use chemicals etc in the garden, to help the bees.

So it's neither here or there what's used in Farming.

Likewise some of the new 'double flower' versions of old garden favourites, are useless to wildlife.

At least they are trying to do their bit, even if they get the technical part wrong.

We are told not to use chemicals etc in the garden, to help the bees.
Are we?

I have no idea what an F1 seed is. And I did pay attention at school.

Formula 1 seed....?

Some people don't realise that all plastics and polyester fabric is made from oil.

People who use the word "chemicals" in the sense of "all horrible artificial thing made in a lab" (as opposed to, the stuff LITERALLY EVERYTHING, including the most organically grown, lovingly hugged from the ground, handwoven into toys for orphaned puppies hemp, is made from) are generally the ones who talk about certain foods being "full of TOXINS". Sure, if someone's trying to murder you with arsenic (a completely natural element, btw) otherwise no. You'd be dead or at best in hospital having your stomach pumped.

Shirley you don't need to know that to know that all life is made of chemicals. It's not really relevant.
If you're interested, is one that doesn't breed true.

OP, send them to this site about the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide and watch their heads explode.

Get off your high horse. Are you trying to come across as better than everyone else?

My sister is a science teacher and this really winds her up. I just roll my eyes. Everyone knows what is meant when people use the term chemicals in this context.

“Everyone just knows what this means and I don’t need to explain my thinking” has been codeword for muddled thinking since the fourth century BC. It is literally the plot of Platonic dialogues, but it keeps cropping up.

So, what do people mean when they use chemicals in this context RebeccaCloud9? And please explain ‘this context’ as well.

As much as you all think you’re amazing. It’s very true that we need to use less chemicals in the garden and in farming. We are killing too many insects which will be a downfall for the entire ecosystem.

I was a massive swot at school, so I can say with certainty that they never mentioned F1 seeds.

I think there are two points here. The first is one of semantics, and to be honest it's a bit pedantic and trivial. Yes, all matter is made of 'chemicals'. Of course it is. But that doesn't mean that we don't understand what someone means when they say "Don't drink the weedkiller, darling, it's full of nasty chemicals".

The second point is about factual accuracy and F1 seeds. And I actually think it's important to correct the misundertanding here and to explain that F1 hybridisation can be achieved by straightforward cross-pollination alone (though this is time-consuming), that this process has benefits for agriculture in terms of reliability and yield, but also to acknowledge the very distinct detriments, not least the patenting of seed lines and the control that this allows massive companies like Monsanto to develop over farmers. (There's a great documentary about the effects of this called The World According to Monsanto).

To put this another way, it's important to combat vague anti-scientism with precision and honesty. But it's also important to insist that scientists have a full understanding of the economic and social impacts of modern techniques, including the way that they are taken up by capital.

It’s very true that we need to use less chemicals in the garden and in farming.

So what do you understand by the word “chemicals“ in that sentence?

In the same vein, I defy anyone to come up with a food that is not organic. Before anyone says it, I don't consider Sodium Chloride to be a food.

"So what do you understand by the word “chemicals“ in that sentence?"

C'mon, we all know what she means. She means fewer applications of pesticide/herbicide. And yes, we can point out pedantically, like some kind of self-righteous A-level student, that water, soil and photosynthetic reactions all involve chemicals too. Of course they do. That doesn't invalidate her point that we are facing a crisis of terrifying proportions in terms of insect populations, and that industrial agriculture and herbicide/pesticide application may be partly to blame.

It’s very true that we need to use less chemicals in the garden and in farming.

Sort of. We need to use less of certain chemicals, such as the neoticotinoids. Without the chemicals nitrogen phosphorus and potassium however, plants would be pretty stuffed.

C'mon, we all know what she means.

I don’t. That’s why I asked.

JamPasty gave a good answer though.

FFS could someone please tell us what the fuck is an F1 seed?????

I think it's apt to quote the hilarious Tim Minchin here, and say, "EVERYTHING IS CHEMICALS!!"