a Peter Borst snip..
Maybe scientists aren't good at communicating. Maybe the public is not good at paying attention.

my comments..
well some are and some are not although at the end of the day both groups of academics primary skill should be the art of rhetoric.  quite often folks miss the fact that some folks write for different audiences and if you play by the rules of the road (according to the science crowd) the language is stilted and full of jargon that likely few people outside that particular field of study understands.  to confuse the matter more the definition of words between academic fields is often quite different with particular words conveying quite different ideas.  I have found that quite often academics do a poor job in conveying ideas to other academics and quite literally some of these have little motivation to care if the unwashed massed understand what they say or not. in the current state of how things are the public is not paying the bill so why should what they understand or not understand matter?

as to the title of this thread..... I have always suspect that fresh nectar and fresh pollen can influence this directly.  both will resolve some significant hive health issues.  the benefits of fresh 'whatever' does decline constantly and therefor stored nectar or stored pollen I don't view in the same light as 'fresh'.

and finally I am always confused by when folks mention pollen in that I always wonder if they are using pollen or a pollen substitute and if either how fresh are either of these choices.

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