Talk:Ethiofencarb

Toxicity
Article claimed it was not considered highly toxic. This was misleading so I changed it--Manky b (talk) 09:01, 26 November 2017 (UTC).

Unbalanced
For a pesticide to be approved by regulatory agencies, the potential benefits must be judged to outweigh the potential risks. This article currently focuses almost entirely on the safety and regulatory aspects. There is no mention of potential benefits, how it is used, why it is used, etc. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:04, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
 * It is not clear how useful it is, or even where it is still used, but I tried to make the article more balanced.--Manky b (talk) 19:53, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I could find no reviews that dwelt on this stuff via Scifinder. Hundreds of papers.  Ullmann's mentions it once in a list.  Like most pesticides, most of the literature is on detection, analysis, and tox.  It was apparently invented in Germany in the 1970's and applied to control of aphids.  Not many articles are ever written on the benefits of particular pesticides, consequently readers could draw the conclusion that they are only bad.  This predicament is a long-term problem for Wikipedia and science communication in general.--Smokefoot (talk) 22:23, 26 November 2017 (UTC)