BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Adam Ritchie <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 18 Oct 2015 21:11:13 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (7 lines)
Fair enough.  It wasn't my intent to impune the researchers themselves, it was only to suggest that perhaps there was a reason why Bayer, et al were choosing canola for their studies for the PMRA, when it was clear (particularly for the second study) that the issues weren't with canola, but instead with corn and soy.  There is a lot of anecdotal evidence from western Canada that neonic coated canola isn't an issue for bees.  In fact they seem to thrive on it. I haven't experienced the high losses that some Ontario beekeepers south of me have, but I have a hard time equating their high losses to malnutrition alone.   We all seek the truth here. 

             ***********************************************
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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2