[log in to unmask] (mailto:[log in to unmask])   
writes:

I have  read the book a couple times and have referred to the book as
Christina did  on BEE-L before but I think Jerry will remember when I
suggested the book  needed a new edition as the book was written 23 years
ago. Still excellent  information.
Dan and I will both agree.  It needs updating,  Couple years ago,  there 
was a group talking to Dan about an update. (FYI - Dan retired to live in  MT 
just up the valley from where I'm at and he's still involved with  bees).  
 
What's missing from the book is the type of tests that may be  appropriate 
in light of current chemicals being used - and I don't necessarily  just the 
neonics.  The information in the book is based on solid  information which 
is still relevant, and the book clearly illustrates the  complexity of the 
issue, as well as a tiered approach to testing, and lots of  other things.
 
Also, far as I'm concerned, the acute toxicity LD50 approach was a  
reflection of what was possible in the 70s.  New technologies make lots of  new end 
points accessible - question is, which are most suitable?
 
Also, since Carter/Reagan pushed pesticide label registration out of  
academia and into private labs, no one today has ready access to the  information 
that would allow the updating of the risk levels (comparative  toxicities, 
etc.)  such as are published in the appendices of the  book.
 
Dan, Carl, and Larry Atkins used to test most of the chemicals that were  
eventually registered, and they in turn put out frequent updates through  
extension publications.  Now, one has to go through Freedom of Information  to 
get much of the data, and that's only accessible if you can specify the 
EXACT  formulation - or at least, that's what I'm told.  Ready access to  
comparative tables for beekeepers and growers to reference regarding newer  
chemicals just isn't there - so even though some of these products may be more  
'safe' in terms of human and/or bees, it is hard to find a list.
 
Basic difference - information dissemination is a key component of  
university research.  Private companies, on the other hand, often  specialize in 
proprietary information.  Moving testing out of academia and  into the private 
sector has had a downside in terms of information  availability.  And, EPA 
used to fund some of the testing. 
 
Unfortunately, it takes time and money to re-do a technical book like that  
of Mayer and Johansen.  I'm reasonably sure Dan would be up for it, if the  
resources were there.  Might be fun to produce  the book by Mayer and  
Bromenshenk - before one or both of us passes away of old age.  In the  
meantime, I'm heading off next Saturday for three weeks in New Zealand to pursue  
some new research interests.
 
 
 
Jerry

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