On June 13, Swiss citizens will vote on whether to ban synthetic pesticides in agriculture. Are you for or against a ban, and why?
Let us know in the comments below!
From the article Calls grow louder for pesticide-free food and water
I am in favour of banning synthetic pesticides in Switzerland, we should turn to a healthier and environmentally friendly agriculture.
Je suis pour l'interdiction des pesticides de synthèse en Suisse, on devrait se tourner vers une agriculture plus saine et respectueuse de l'environnement.
I feel it's important that journalists go the extra mile and do the research, inform and educate the public about the details behind important issues being voted. Not just parrot what is being released by the for and against campaigns.
My son met with a "member of parliament" around the time of this vote. When asked why the public were NOT being informed about the actual numbers and economics behind banning pesticides, he was told that statistically the majority of Swiss vote in line with govt. recommendations. In other words, there is insufficient data, informing and education of the public on key factors affecting a decision. Also given a bias like this, favours govt. and incentivizes them to not inform and educate.
Journalists should also be aware of certain words used. For example, this vote was not about banning pesticides. It was about limiting pesticides to natural ones. It also need to be stressed that the change would be phased in over a 10 year period... how many lifetimes does the farming industry need to reverse their catastrophic use of health degrading chemicals!
So what could journalists have done?
As an example:
1. give details of water pollution levels, trends
2. give details of natural alternatives (used generations ago)
3. provide an example of the financials of an organic farm vs an inorganic farm (how is that organic farms are doing ok?)
4. show the profitability and balance sheet of the two types of farms.
5. explore the possibility of all food being sold in CH being organic (we can send people to the moon, but we can't grow great food...duh...!)
6. follow the money and at least attempt a full-lifecycle cost - calculate the cost of healthcare treatment assuming these chemicals cause breast cancer (rates are 4/10 women in Europe and assume each treatment costs 20,000chf, and assume a conservative 15% is due to unhealthy agri-chemicals in our food - ouch ...we are talking billions - now that hurts!). This is money that could be used to switch to 100% organic (helping conventional farmers to switch) and/or counterbalance the lack of access to the EU Horizon Research ...! What about allergies - the cost of treatments, the lost productivity etc.
Yes, we are making assumptions here, but they are reasonable and its the way of thinking that is so essential to informed decision making/voting
We recently switched to organic food. It's expensive but the reduction in calorie consumption has improved our health, we have lost weight and the food tastes better. But best of all, fruit and veg now decays and doesn't stay "perfect" for weeks and weeks. We are definitely ingesting chemicals with treated foods.
Finally, I would pay for informed journalism.
I am against a ban on pesticides in Switzerland, as this would make farmers even less competitive with imported products. But I am in favour of stricter standards and controls on the products used. Let's first try to control them properly before banning them for good.
Je suis contre une interdiction des pesticides en Suisse car cela rendrait les agriculteurs encore moins compétitifs par rapport aux produits importés. Mais je suis pour un renforcement des normes et des contrôles sur les produits utilisés. Essayons d'abord de les contrôlés correctement avant des les interdire pour de bon.
A reinforced and still to be reinforced control of the cultures is on the way since more than 30 years. It is very important to maintain a productivity of agriculture, in order to avoid that only the rich can afford food. Read the book by Sylvie Brunel. Farmers will save the world. Agriculture must separate itself from the too many agronomists, who ignore the realities of the field and the economy. Give priority to proximity, fight against the concreting of agricultural land.
Une maitrise renforcée et encore à renforcer des cultures est en route de puis + de 30 ans . Grande importance de maintenir une productivité de l'agriculture, afin d'éviter que seul les riches puissent se payer la nourriture. Lire le livre de Sylvie Brunel. Les paysans vont sauver le monde. L'agriculture doit se séparer des trop nombreux ingénieurs agronomes, ignorant les réalités du terrain et de l'économie. Privilégier la proximité, combattre le bétonnages des terres agricoles.
There is only one answer: relearn sobriety, stop stuffing ourselves with products that are useless for the body, go back to a healthy, limited production that is profitable for farmers. There is no point in crying over a pandemic if our bodies are full of chemicals, plastics, nanoparticles, in short, everything that "sells" more. Man has ceased to be human, he is now only a consumer
Il n'y a plus qu'une seule réponse : réapprendre la sobriété, cesser de se gaver de produits inutiles pour le corps, revenir à une production saine, limitée, rémunératrice pour les agriculteurs. Inutile de pleurer sur une pandémie si nos corps sont remplis de substances chimiques, de plastique, de nanoparticules, bref de tout ce qui fait "vendre" plus. L'homme à cessé d'être humain il n'est plus qu'un consommateur
It is not a question of being for or against.
The question is to know for how long our body will be able to assimilate all the products we have been ingesting for a long time; eating our steak, chicken, milk, etc., not to mention our fish fed with plastic waste and others. Not to mention our fish, which is fed on plastic waste and the like.
Bon appétit and good future
Ce n'est pas la question d'être pour ou contre.
la question c'est de savoir pendant combien de temps encore, notre corps pourra assimiler tous les produits que nous ingérons depuis pas mal de temps; en mangeant notre steak, notre poulet, notre lait, etc. ,etc., sans oublier notre poisson nourrit aux déchets plastiques et autres.
Bon appétit et bon avenir
I am against banning pesticides. Because at the moment there is no alternative that would allow sufficient food production. Without treatment against diseases, pests and dangerous plants, production will decrease by 30 to 50% and food prices will increase. This applies to the rich. According to the pros, we must also eliminate drugs for animals and humans. What a disaster! But good for the planet.
Je suis contre l'interdiction des pesticides. Parce que pour l'instant, il n'y a pas d'alternative permettant une agriculture nourricière suffisante. Sans traitement contre les maladies, les insectes nuisibles et plantes dangereuse, diminution de 30 à 50 % de production et augmentation des prix de la nourriture. Valable pour les riches. Selon les pour, il faut également supprimer les médicaments pour les animaux et les hommes. Quelle écatombe ! Mais bon pour la planète.
I'm for it if they actually implement an honest tax. Make it 95 percent more expensive for GMO and pesticide based food and give all the collected money to the people residing here so the farmers can use it to plant more while the locals can use it to buy more expensive local products.
Otherwise the money availability will win. People buy what they can afford and most cannot afford much so they buy the cheapest products. It is an economical decision, not a health based decision because most peopel cannot afford the cost of being healthy.
No, in principle yes, but as so often the whole thing is written too woolly and leaves too many possibilities open. Some of them where I am clearly against. For example, so-called pesticides that are needed for cleaning plants, there I see too few alternative options. Which then again with the Swiss bureaucracy takes centuries to find a common solution. There are countless things where the new regulations have too many ? Has. Therefore here no and in all other votes YES
Nein, im Prinzip Ja, aber wie so oft ist das ganze zu schwammig geschrieben und lässt zu viele Möglichkeiten offen. Einige davon wo ich klar dagegen bin. ZB. Sogenannte Pestizide die man zur Reinigung für Anlagen braucht, dort sehe ich zu wenig Ausweichmöglichkeiten. Was dann wieder mit der Schweizerbürokratie Jahrhunderte dauert bis man eine gemeinsame Lösung findet. Es gibt zig Sachen wo das neue Reglement zu viele ?? Hat. Deshalb hier Nein und bei allen anderen Abstimmungen JA
For!
Für!
I am for the ban.
Bio-dynamic farming is about not using artificial 'things' but some people are against the ideas rather than the results!
I think voters here fear the unknown, so they will usually vote to maintain the status quo. Me, I always challenge the norm, which is why I've changed jobs so often, as my CH boss's response has always been "if you don't like it, leave".
What the heck!! Yes of course we need to ban pesticides ..why would anyone want to compromise water quality and health.
Medical companies in Switzerland have relaxed rules which allow them to put medical by products into water ways..the cleanliness of water is tested but not for medical by products so they always come up as being a good standard but if the standard is biased then the result will not show the actual levels of chemicals present.
We always bought things from the local farmers who do not use pesticides, but we just did it because we wanted to help a local business.
I guess in the case of bigger producers no pesticides will mean higher prices because they produce less as vermin will destroy part of the products
Absolutely FOR the ban. Farmers don't seem to realize, or care, that with these pesticides, not only are they endangering their lives, but ours too.
Against the ban - We will end up importing foods treated with the same, if not worse pesticides. When other countries talk about this their politicians are usually lying to get elected. Do we want Switzerland to be totally dependent on foreign countries for produce?
It will only work if the Swiss insist that all imported goods adhere to Swiss rules. All it takes is one country to start a revolution.
I am for a ban on synthetic pesticides because the people who sell them are not the same as those who suffer the health and medical consequences (farmers, consumers, water, earth and air).
I want the people involved in our food to act as responsible people who are aware that food is the basis of our life, and therefore of our health.
Thank you to all those who seek and apply natural methods out of respect.
Je suis pour une interdictions pesticides de synthèse car les personnes qui les vendent ne sont les mêmes que celles qui en subissent les conséquences sanitaires et médicales (agriculteurs, consommateurs, l'eau, la terre et l'air).
Je désire que les acteurs de notre nourriture agissent en personnes responsables et conscientes que la nourriture est à la base de notre vie, donc de notre santé.
Merci à toutes celles et tous ceux qui cherchent et appliquent des méthodes naturelles par respect.
For - but I think the result will be against. Nobody thinks about what poisons are going into our food, but if it means cheaper products as a result, do the voters care?
Money wins. If non-pesticide food is 50% more expensive people will still buy the one with pesticides as nobody gives you 50% more for your salary so you can buy the food without chemicals.
The earth is (lent) to us for the time we spend on it, we have the responsibility to respect it to allow other generations to have the same chance. To continue to do as if nothing was wrong, when pesticides are already everywhere, is to go straight to the wall. It is not only humans who are in danger, all living beings are. You have the chance to decide your future in Switzerland, seize it, here in Canada, I have to pollinate my squash by hand, and can no longer produce my own seeds in the garden, because the farmer has screwed up the bees and other pollinators with chemicals. Nature has a price, be ready to help the professionals of the land by paying their products at their true value
La terre nous est (prêtée) le temps que nous y passons , nous avons la responsabilité de la respecter pour permettre à d'autres générations d'avoir la même chance. Continuer de faire comme si rien n'était , alors que les pesticides se trouve déjà partout, c'est aller droit dans le mur. Il n'y a pas que les humains qui sont en danger, tous les êtres vivants le sont. Vous avez la chance de pouvoir décider de votre avenir en Suisse, saisissez la , moi , ici au Canada, je dois pollinisé mes courges à la main , et ne peut plus produire mes propres semences au potager , parce que l'agriculteur à bousillé les abeilles et autres pollinisateurs avec la chimie. La nature à un prix, soyez prêts à aider les professionnels de la terre en payant leurs produits à leur vraie valeur
bravo, you said it all!
bravo, vous avez tout dit!
We must not wait for nature to impose the solution on us.
Il ne faut pas attendre que ce soit la nature qui nous impose la solution.
In order to make an opinion on this subject, we need to know the efforts that have been made by research and farmers. Every year, new solutions are tested by farmers. It is very complicated to create a new product that is effective against invasive weeds, or plant diseases, without reducing yields and quality too much. All this has a cost, the agricultural land in Switzerland is rare, the topography of the ground, the weather conditions, all that requires very pointed research, in order to preserve the health of the producers and the consumers.
Pour se prononcer sur ce sujet, il faut connaitre les efforts qui ont été consenti, par la recherche, les agriculteurs. Chaque année de nouvelles solutions sont mises à l'essai chez les paysans. C'est très compliqué de créer un nouveau produit efficace contre les herbes envahissantes, ou contre les maladies des plantes, sans trop baisser les rendements et la qualité . Tout cela a un coût, la terre agricole en Suisse est rare, la topographie du terrain, les conditions météo, tout cela nécessite des recherches très pointues , afin de préserver la santé des producteurs et des consommateurs.
You can find an overview of ongoing debates with our journalists here . Please join us!
If you want to start a conversation about a topic raised in this article or want to report factual errors, email us at english@swissinfo.ch.