On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 09:34:28 EDT, [log in to unmask] wrote:

> I've some reservations about a couple of the papers you cited - yes, they saw an effect,  
but that could have been a reflection of a generalized susceptibility 

Spoken like a true scientist! I am the last person to try to claim cause and effect, however. 
I was very circumspect and liberally used the words could and may. These are not wiggle 
words, of course, but an expression of uncertainty. Only the foolish are certain of anything.

However,-- and this would be the key point: changing, limiting, or forgoing chemicals in our 
hives is something WE CAN DO. I am not suggesting blaming beekeepers any more than 
blaming Bayer. I am not looking for a scapegoat but for something WE CAN DO. 

I have written till I am blue in the face about what to do about neonics. In a nutshell: stay 
the hell away from cropland or any place they use them! If you are getting killed 
pollinating, then better add replacement costs to the pollination fee, or don't do it.

pb

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