Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Bee-ing Smart: Regulators Must Distinguish Activists' Bad Dreams From Good Evidence
Quote:
Important technologies commonly face opposition from various quarters – often from vested interests, societal Chicken Littles or overly precautionary regulators. Examples include vaccination, fluoridation of water, and the genetic engineering of crop plants.
.
.
.
Activists scored a minor “success” in January when the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) released a report that identified neonicotinoids as a possible cause of a decline in bee populations. But the analysis had obvious flaws. Rather than a comprehensive evaluation of all available research, EFSA cherry-picked the studies and proceeded to their conclusion in spite of an acknowledged gap in not only the data they analyzed but their understanding of it. The process seemed as though those involved in it – who were under intense political pressure to perform a quick risk assessment – began with preconceived notions about their conclusions.
From the same article, could someone explain why bee populations are thriving in Australia where Neonicotinoids are heavily used?
Quote:
The main suspects for causing bee deaths are viruses and other pests acting in tandem, especially the aptly named Varroa destructor mite. These parasites attach to honeybees and appear to be “both a disseminator and activator of a number of bee viruses,” according to a report on honeybee disease in Europe by the Food and Environment Research Agency. In countries experiencing bee decline, Varroa is a feared and growing presence among beekeepers – even if neonicotinoids are absent. For example, in upland areas of Switzerland where neonicotinoids are not used, bee colony populations are under significant pressure from the mites; and in France, declines in the bee population in mountainous areas are similar to those on agricultural land (although neonicotinoids are commonly used in the latter but not in the former).
Conversely, where Varroa mites are not present, bee populations thrive even when neonicotinoids are heavily used. For example, Australia, which is currently Varroa-free, boasts a thriving bee population in spite of widespread use of neonicotinoids. In fact, their bees are so healthy that Australian beekeepers export queen bees and nucleus hives to countries with declining populations.
Come on people, all it takes is a little reading to see through this anti-GMO propaganda....
oh no not the proof thing again.. bees are dying in their millions with this chemical.. or is someone out shooting them...Bees keep crops growing and us fed. Without bees the human race would be extinct within four years. according to the experts..
I wonder if the producers of the old pesticides are paying regulators to prevent the use of the newer and presumably more cost effective insecticide. That would make good business for the established producers. Regulation is too important to be left to the judgment of scientists and regulators.
In the meantime the bees are dying and we had better find out why and come up with something to fix that major problem.
My degrees are in entomology and my field of specialty was native bees when I was still working in the field. I've been following CCD closely, and when I worked at UC Davis for several years, I talked to their head honey bee expert, Dr. Eric Mussen about the issue. I don't think ANY bee experts think any ONE factor is the cause of the decline, but the neonicotinoids seem to be a large part of the picture.
As a side note, nicotine was used as an insecticide in the 20th century until it was outlawed for use. Always made me wonder why people would voluntarily smoke it.
I've been following Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) for some time now and during that time I've done quite a bit of research on the subject. While neonicotinoids have an effect on bee health, they are not the sole cause of CCD and I personally do not yet see enough evidence to support a full fledged ban on them.
Since a majority of commercial bee keepers have to move their bees around in order to continue making money throughout the year pollinating various crops, the stress of being moved further weakens bees' immune systems. Combine that with varroa mites, nosema apis, Israel acute paralysis virus, environmental change related stresses (think climate change), and malnutrition (many hives are fed high fructose corn syrup when their honey is harvested which is not as nutritious to bees as sugar water), and you end up with CCD. While neonicotinoids certainly play a role in CCD, I think it's too much of a knee jerk reaction to ban it when there are so many other factors at play and there's no conclusive evidence that neonicotinoids are the sole cause of CCD.
I've been following Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) for some time now and during that time I've done quite a bit of research on the subject. While neonicotinoids have an effect on bee health, they are not the sole cause of CCD and I personally do not yet see enough evidence to support a full fledged ban on them.
Since a majority of commercial bee keepers have to move their bees around in order to continue making money throughout the year pollinating various crops, the stress of being moved further weakens bees' immune systems. Combine that with varroa mites, nosema apis, Israel acute paralysis virus, environmental change related stresses (think climate change), and malnutrition (many hives are fed high fructose corn syrup when their honey is harvested which is not as nutritious to bees as sugar water), and you end up with CCD. While neonicotinoids certainly play a role in CCD, I think it's too much of a knee jerk reaction to ban it when there are so many other factors at play and there's no conclusive evidence that neonicotinoids are the sole cause of CCD.
The problem with chemical pesticides is that they are a scorched-earth method of pest control. They may kill the pests you don't want but they also end up killing all the helpful insects that you do want and need such as bees, worms, ladybugs, etc. that help you in growing your crops. It seems like a pretty stupid method of pest control.
To save a hostage from their kidnappers you don't burn the house down because you will kill everyone inside the house including the hostage.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll wager on the side of Nature, thank ya. 
