This topic has been created for discussion about what are or are not ‘organic’ pest control products and regulation of the term.
The organic tag can become confusing, DDT or other organohlorines, organophosphates, and carbamates, as well as the man made pyrethroids, are/can also be considered organic pesticides. So using the term organic by the firm would be legally correct usage even if the product was synthetically produced. Persistence and toxicity for some of these products can be quite high, organic does not mean safer as some might think when they see the term used. What they couldn’t say was that it was a naturally produced pesticide.
From PRCD - The Main Pesticide Types
"
The difference between organic and inorganic pesticides:
Most pesticide active ingredients are either inorganic or organic pesticides. From a scientific view, inorganic pesticides do not contain carbon and are usually derived from mineral ores extracted from the earth. Examples of inorganic pesticides include copper sulphate, ferrous sulphate, copper and sulphur. Organic pesticides contain carbon in their chemical structure. Examples of organic pesticides include captan, pyrethrin and glyphosate."
2 Likes
I would think that chemistry would disagree there. Organic chemistry deals with carbon compounds. Particularly carbon to carbon bonds. Of which the compounds mentioned have many.
2 Likes
Absolutely right, my mistake, badly expressed. It is organic by the definition of being a compound of carbon. By this definition almost any pesticide is organic. So why advertise it that way?
The people making the claim are being deceitful because they are deliberately confusing you with the other definition (which is what I intended, see my comment of 5 hours ago) of derived from living things, which is used by organic growers.
4 Likes
In terms of organic farming, they would be outside the regulations and so deceitful if used there. In terms of the law, the pest control industry, and the product they used, they are not. If they had said it was a naturally derived pesticide they would be deceitful. What this lawful use of organic shows is that people need to ask what product is to be used. Particularly if they want a naturally derived product before the product is used and/or if they have sensitivities to any of the organic pesticides or natural pesticides (noting some people have shown sensitivity to pyrethrum and the naturally derived pyrethrins).
A useful note, rotenone has been banned in Australia for organic plant farming since 2013. It can still be used in organic livestock production. There is some evidence that rotenone produces some Parkinson like disease in rats, this may be why it is banned in plant production particularly as it may still be present in the plant product. I don’t know the reason, so my comment as to why is some speculation on my part.
“Primary Production Requirements
25 OF 100 Australian Certified Organic Standard © AO Ltd
j. Mineral and biological balance within the soil;
k. Other approved substances listed in Annex I or II as A or R in restricted instances where
management practices are not effective. (Note differing criteria for other import markets
that may not permit some of these inputs).
4.5.4. Naturally occurring products prohibited in organic systems include nicotine, and rotenone for
cropping.” (my bolding)
3 Likes
Technically you are probably right. But I go back to the question: if all, or almost all, substances used to kill wasps are organic (by the chemistry definition) there is nothing special about their product, so why are they using the term at all? There is a difference between being deceitful and illegal.
“Organic” is misused almost as much as “natural”, mostly neither mean anything.
2 Likes
While it is correct from a scientific point of view, the use of the term organic is regulated in Australia:
The use of organic in marketing materials needs to comply with requirements outlined by the ACCC.
1 Like
As part of that link
"Businesses do not have to meet the requirements of this domestic standard to label and sell their products as ‘organic’ within Australia.
All organic claims, whether they reference a standard or not, should be able to be proved."
In the case of terming them organic pesticides for use, they are legally labelled, they do meet the scientific definition, they do have proof of claims. While it will be and is different for the standards of organic farming, the use of the term by them in this pest control situation is lawful.
1 Like
On pesticides, if they fall into a chemical under organic chemistry, they won’t say on the bottle it is ‘organic’. If any term is used such as classifying the group the chemical falls into, the prefix ‘organo’ will be used. This includes terms such as organophosphates, organochlorines and such like. Organo and organic shouldn’t be confused as being the same thing.
If they use the term organic on the label/marketing materials, they need to be organic as outlined in the ACCC link. Otherwise they will breach labelling/organic naming rules.
1 Like
The ACCC could not define itself out of a wet paper bag. Which by the way is organic since it is made of celulose. Carbon compounds. But then so are plastic bags, also made of carbon compounds.
Crude oil is organic, since it is made out of previously naturally living creatures. It is a natural product. Containing lots of carbon. Fits any criteria one could throw at it.
2 Likes
