Peter Dillon wrote:
>I suggest that you ask the relevant authorities to supply to the
>responsible Beekeeping Authorities a copy of :
>1. The dossier that Bayer presented to get authorization of their
>product relating to each crop that is to be treated, i.e. Maize, Canola,
>Sunflower etc.-- including support material.
>2. Find out the time period for residual activity of Imidacloprid and
>its resulting metabolites. - and find out on what basis it was
>calculated.
>3. Find out if they have presented documentation "sub lethal effects".on
>bees.
>4. Check all documentation for dates and places, whether it is truly
>independent info. or from people working for Bayer.
>
>If the info. is not given then ask yourself why - to my mind if they are
>proud of their product they will not hide the true facts.
This list is worth having handy. It seems logical, and in some
ways it is. But far more work is involved than many think; and, worse, the
resulting paper image is in any case not reliable. I have bad news about
this approach to ecology of pesticides.
A decade advising successive NZ ministers of health on poisons
showed me that the approach Peter outlines, while logical, is likely to be
frustrating, complex, & expensive (especially as more individuals get
involved).
The senior executives of Industrial Biotest, a corporation which
generated many of the data such as Peter envisages (e.g. for registration
of Roundup“®), served considerable gaol sentences for fraud - the
"measurements" were forged. Transnational accountancy & management
corporations can today similarly print out (after stalling you off for
months) overwhelming batches of alleged toxicology which require scarce
expertise, probably expensive, to understand; and you safely assume that
the tests reported will be inadequate in design, omitting many questions
which informed beekeepers would want answered.
I could write much more (and have done); but my conclusion is that
the design of such testing is generally inadequate. Fluvalinate is a fair
example - many are worse - the measurements that have been reported are
very limited compared with what thorough testing would require. I have no
opinion on whether any of those particular results are forged, but the
Industrial Biotest debacle must stand as a warning that forgery on a large
scale has been known in this dark corner of science. Some rodents are
metaphorical, some are virtual!
The recent observations of French beekeepers on toxicity of Gaucho®
are worth vastly more than all the printouts you could get from its
manufacturer.
Having said all that, an active beekeepers' assn would get from the
USEPA a formal statement of the toxicology, with special regard to bees, of
Gaucho.
R
-
Robt Mann
consultant ecologist
P O Box 28878 Remuera, Auckland 1005, New Zealand
(9) 524 2949
|
