There is a an issue in all statistics: "the seen and the unseen". It basically means "measuring benefits but not measuring costs".
Even if the statistics is accurate.
Even if denying people the right to self-determination is a positive in your ethical system.
Even if X, Y, Z are true... I still have to ask: what about the COST? Pesticides exist because they do something useful - kill off pests. They increase food production and decrease labor.
What if we've saved some lives...but also made 200,000 farmers each spend an extra five hours a week bent over in their fields, picking bugs off leaves? Or made them plant more land in order to harvest the same amount of food?
Even if the statistics is accurate.
Even if denying people the right to self-determination is a positive in your ethical system.
Even if X, Y, Z are true... I still have to ask: what about the COST? Pesticides exist because they do something useful - kill off pests. They increase food production and decrease labor.
What if we've saved some lives...but also made 200,000 farmers each spend an extra five hours a week bent over in their fields, picking bugs off leaves? Or made them plant more land in order to harvest the same amount of food?