> Maybe neonics all by themselves don't do much to bees.  But when we add
> everything else the bees are exposed to, simultaneously, into the mix?
>  That is what matters.  We see differences in different agricultural
> settings.  It's not only about beekeeper applied miticides...the same
> beekeeper loses bees in one yard, and sees success in others.  That is very
> telling, in my opinion.
>

Interesting that so many want pesticides to be tested against just about
every variable that is out there while the FDA approves drugs which are not
under the same restrictions. Yes, some interactions show up after approval,
and they are dealt with as they happen.

Anything can have an effect on anything, but to try and narrow that down
would be cost restrictive. And, if you impose such a stratagem, many will
not have the benefit of the new drug or pesticide- ever. Because you can
never test for everything. And even if there are interactions, they may be
benign or even additive to the effectiveness of the drug. Interactions are
not always harmful.

As it is, the hoops that both drug and pesticide companies go through are
extensive enough to delay most for any early entry into the market.

The post seems to be just another variation of the precautionary principle,
a principle only applied to things that one disagrees with.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

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