>I now begin to understand why some on the list only find errors in the

> research of scientists who are warning against the dangers of
> neonicotinoids
> and never in those of the pro's.


Ghislain, how about citing some of the above so that we can tear them apart
too!  I don't play favorites myself.

>The only risk assessment that could be completed
> was for maize treated with thiamethoxam.


Actually, I've read three different field studies on guttation--all of
which concluded that bees don't under field conditions appear to take the
fluid.  My own brief checking of guttating (sp?) corn with hives nearby did
not find any dead bees near the corn.  Girolami showed that they drop like
rocks.

>Believe me, EFSA is not a collection of environmental NGOs.


Ghislain, one would be naive to think that studies by the pesticide
companies would be completely devoid of bias.  One should also realize that
EFSA is a political body under political pressure, and its conclusions are
carefully worded to satisfy the activists.  I've personally read every
study that they have in detail.  I draw my own conclusions. I summarized in
a recent article.  There are clearly some problems with neonics.  But there
are also some uses that all data to date support that they are an
improvement over the alternatives.

-- 
Randy Oliver
Grass Valley, CA
www.ScientificBeekeeping.com

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm