?
> Meta-Analysis is an approach used in epidemiology, medicine - when looking
> at hundreds of papers - this is a VERY small set of papers to be subjected
> to  'meta' analysis, and with small data sets, excluding any can have a
> large effect  on the results.

Interesting opinion but not one I share. having read through twice only two 
studies were left out and I accept the reason why. The author has only a 
small amount of studies to work with. Perhaps the results will change in 
future Meta- Analysis studies but the conclusions are clear in the analysis 
we are looking at (at least in my mind)
Yes!

From the conclusions:
"These findings raise renewed concern about the impact of the neonicotinoids 
on honey bees that forage in agriculturally intensive landscapes"

What I see and also confirmed by all my fellow beekeepers which keep bees in 
both *agriculturally intensive landscapes *(row crops and areas where the 
neonics are used on 80-100% of the crops) is problems. Similar hives made up 
in spring thrive in the range country. I started seeing the above before 
Jerry named CCD.
CCD only confuses the issue of the neonics (which delights the chemical 
companies).

From the conclusions:
"Given our current inability to resolve any of the preceding four 
complications, it is not currently possible to be precise about the impact 
of trace dietary neonicotinoids on the health & fitness of honey bees in the 
FIELD and these issues are targets for future research . "(Randy,s neonics 
study?)

I think the Meta -analysis paper is valuable and would suggest doing again 
in a year incorporating new studies.

Others opinions ?

bob 

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