Because the alternatives to neonicotinoids are broader-spectrum pesticides that affect other kinds of animal life, including mammals, as I've said repeatedly on the thread.
I don't know why you insist on being so overtly hostile, but whatever the reason, let me promise that it doesn't make you more persuasive.
>Because the alternatives to neonicotinoids are broader-spectrum pesticides
Well 'ere's yer problem! ;)
You're starting off by assuming that agriculture must use pesticides to grow food. But is that really true?
I submit to you that it is not. Furthermore, I submit that a food system that depends on pesticides is doomed to self-destruct (because of inevitable biogeophysical processes). Pesticides destroy the nutrient cycling microorganisms in the soil leading to infertility, erosion, and ultimately desertification. Again, soil microbiologist Elaine Ingham explains the process better than I could: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2H60ritjag
>I don't know why you insist on being so overtly hostile
