> Although data in field tests are often inadequate to demonstrate 
causation unambiguously, the
 > loss of the colonies could not  be verified for imidacloprid under 
field conditions, where no effects
 > on hive development have  been detected.

I tend to question the collection and use of data in such field studies 
and wonder if the methods may
discard or discount the very effects that beekeepers claim.  A big one 
is increased variability in
managed hives.

Comment

I find it ironic that one of the most common responses by laypersons to scientific works is to question the methodology. As laypersons, we have no choice but to rely on experts. WE cannot take these measurements, so we must accept that they are done correctly. The best way to assure this is to compare the various reports and if they consistently agree, then we can begin to accept that there may be a consensus. Either that, or a conspiracy to cook the data to support the industry's wish to cover up the facts. Quoting from  Ecotoxicology (2012) 21:973–992

This review summarizes, for the first time, 15 years of research on the
hazards of neonicotinoids to bees including honey bees,
bumble bees and solitary bees.

An extensive inventory of imidacloprid in bee-collected
pollen, honey and bees was performed by Chauzat et al.
(2006, 2009, 2011), involving five sites across France with
sampling of bee hives of five beekeepers in each area for
3 years and with four sampling events per year. Imidacloprid
was found in 40.5 and 21.8% of the pollen and
honey samples, respectively. The metabolite 6-chloronicotinic
acid was present in 33.0 and 17.6% of the respective
samples. The sampling took place in four agricultural
areas and one natural area. 

No significance difference was found in the frequency of
pesticide residue detection in pollen and honey between the
different sampling areas

Many lethal and sublethal effects of neonicotinoid
insecticides on bees have been described in laboratory
studies, however, no effects were observed in field studies
with field-realistic dosages.

Finally, during the preparation of this review it was
observed that results/data on concentrations, side-effects
and risk assessment studies are available, but that many
data are scattered and/or not publicly available. A better
communication between industry, academia and government
may help for a "better" risk assessment. The latter
can also help to provide answers to the questions/concerns
as present in the public media/society.

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