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:
Charles Linder <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 22 Jan 2017 09:12:43 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
> One should also note that the OSS in itself  does not seem to be a problem,  hence the inert classification.

Wrong again. You have missed the entire point, these substances are not inert. 


No Pete,  respectfully I think you missed the point.  

 
First, Mullins work as cites  shows Statistically no difference in the control and the bees doused with 10 ppm of OSS alone.  Look at the data presented. Not just the summary. The Graphs with control and with OSS alone are not statistically different.
  

Second,  the dose Mullins choose is almost 1000 times the dose know to have been found in hives which have been recorded as high as 390 PPB   a far cry from 10 PPM
 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23898941 (only reference I could find)

 Third, I fully agreed added to the dose of virus's dosed to the bees its bad.  The smart take away from that is that bees with virus problems are going to suffer,  even worse when added to other problems.  Not to take away from Mullins work,  but frankly any fool knows that.  Somebody with a weak immune system is always going to be at more risk to virus problems  This is not ground breaking news.

Forth,  Much smarter minds than I at the EPA and many, many research labs have legally determined its safe.  You can debate that,  but at the moment the law says other wise.


Fifth,  You don’t seem  to accept the reality of what these surfactants do for us,  that is allowing a smaller more targeted and well applied pesticide, allowing for safer uses overall.  Less usage to get the same job done is always good. If with the use of a "fairly safe" surfactant we can cut the active ingredient, that is an excellent thing.


And last but not least,  I completely agreed that this research is good,  and is in FACT changing the way we think and apply fungicides and herbicides,  currently ESPECIALLY in almonds where we as beekeepers actually have the most support. 
 
I completely support your thought,  even though it sure seems the practical application has been quite convoluted in its reality.

Charles

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