? > Meta-Analysis is an approach used in epidemiology, medicine - when looking > at hundreds of papers - this is a VERY small set of papers to be subjected > to 'meta' analysis, and with small data sets, excluding any can have a > large effect on the results. Interesting opinion but not one I share. having read through twice only two studies were left out and I accept the reason why. The author has only a small amount of studies to work with. Perhaps the results will change in future Meta- Analysis studies but the conclusions are clear in the analysis we are looking at (at least in my mind) Yes! From the conclusions: "These findings raise renewed concern about the impact of the neonicotinoids on honey bees that forage in agriculturally intensive landscapes" What I see and also confirmed by all my fellow beekeepers which keep bees in both *agriculturally intensive landscapes *(row crops and areas where the neonics are used on 80-100% of the crops) is problems. Similar hives made up in spring thrive in the range country. I started seeing the above before Jerry named CCD. CCD only confuses the issue of the neonics (which delights the chemical companies). From the conclusions: "Given our current inability to resolve any of the preceding four complications, it is not currently possible to be precise about the impact of trace dietary neonicotinoids on the health & fitness of honey bees in the FIELD and these issues are targets for future research . "(Randy,s neonics study?) I think the Meta -analysis paper is valuable and would suggest doing again in a year incorporating new studies. Others opinions ? bob *********************************************** 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