Farmers in India use Pepsi/Coke instead of pesticides | Hacker News Reader

Farmers in India use Pepsi/Coke instead of pesticides

news.bbc.co.uk

39 pointsneeharc19 comments

Did this news precede the allegation that both Pepsi and Coca-cola (at least in India) contained pesticide in their drink?

I remember there was a huge uproar when that news broke and both companies had to invest heavily into PR campaign (involving several movie mega-stars) to play it down.

Update: Looks like it is. The Pepsi/Coke pesticide brouhaha took place in 2006.

http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2006-08-09/india-pestici...

http://www.occupymonsanto360.org/2013/03/06/india-press-repo...

Update #2: News of Pepsi/Coke being used in lieu of pesticides is also making the rounds...

http://consciouslifenews.com/coke-pepsi-being-pesticides-ind...

This is really very old news. This bbc news article is from Wednesday, 3 November, 2004.

Tip to those farmers: you can now sell your products as organic food, at a higher price.

The article is quite misleading, though. Sugar isn't used as a pesticide. It's a way to control the ecosystem, like introducing a new species to prey on another. Coke doesn't directly kill the insects (as far as we know).

It just gives them type 2 diabetes :)

The article does say that Coke doesn't actually kill insects:

[Agricultural specialist Devendra Sharma says] the drinks are effectively sugar syrups and when they are poured on crops they attract ants which in turn feed on the larva of insects.

This seems very reasonable to me, because this is how the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gr%C4%81pple was accidentally discovered. Birds don't like the taste of artificial grape flavoring.

If you're looking for an interesting, but light read, I'd highly recommend http://www.amazon.com/Fruit-Hunters-Adventure-Commerce-Obses...

It would be very interesting to try sugared water vs cola vs pesticides - scientifically. It should be some public-funded research though, as no private company could benefit from this study (unless it is to disprove that sugar works).

Idiocracy anyone?

But Brawndo's got what plants crave. It's got electrolytes.

Hehe, first thing that came into mind when I read this title. It's a bit disturbing.

Three IMHO relevant things: a) High phosphoric acid content in the Coke b) Importance of phosphorus in a organic life: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphorus#Biological_role c) "Phosphorus is a scarce finite resource on earth" && "recycling" -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_phosphorus

My mom uses Coca-Cola to remove mineral stains from toilet. She says works better than chemicals.

Put a litmus paper in it, and you will be delighted by the red color that you will see. When you clean something you need either base or an acid. Vinegar will do just fine too.

This is precisely what I came in to post. I've heard people in India talking of cleaning their toilets with Coke better than pesticides -- don't know about cost since I don't drink.

Well if that really works, then Indian farmers have done a good hack at pest control. But how that excess sugar affect soil, plantation and local ecology than those other pesticides, should be further studied.

Unsurprisingly, Pepsi and Coca-Cola strongly disagree, saying there is nothing in the drinks that can be used in pest control.

Coming soon: You drink Coke? Are you nuts? It's so toxic, they use it as a pesticide.

Not referring to you/HN, but I tend to filter out anyone who uses the word "toxins" without understanding what they are.

In my defense: I didn't try to write a scientific paper, it was about what could be a commercial against drinking coke /pepsi. In reality, perception matters so no matter what toxins and toxic mean scientifically, once you link something to pesticides it's close enough for the average Joe and Jane. But I understand your point, people use them very loosely.

Coka-Cola needs to quickly bring to market a sugar-based pesticide under a different name that costs less than Coke.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com