I forwarded Jerry's mail to a friend and her response is thus (with a  little 
light editing!):
 
Chris
 
 
"Poor chap. Sadly, I have agree with his position on the dismal basis most  
research (and regulatory tests too come to think of it), are conducted and  
reviewed. And actually beekeepers are some of the worse practitioners and  
beneficiaries of 'applied science'. For example we know the hive is a complex  
chemical world and we know we do not understand and cannot yet explain  all the 
hows and whys. Regardless man made chemicals are approved  and licensed for use 
in the hive, without a full and proper understanding  of the effect of the 
insertion on the bee base. Man made  chemicals are approved on the basis that they 
kill the mite and do not kill  the bees outright. Very scientific.... I think 
what we are seeing now  maybe the result of too many sub lethal combinations 
i.e chemical upon chemical  from source after source, from the beekeeper 
direct, pesticides from the farmers  & gardeners etc etc
 
And the students, well, I am afraid there is always a 'brittle' contingent,  
who have learnt all they know by rote - that is what they know and understand  
and that is all there is. I can think of many fully fledged professors and  
scientists in the same mould with inflexible and unimaginative minds, unable to 
 process alternative thoughts from current information. Science for science 
sake  = fake science. Rxxxxx and Dxxxxxx spring to mind.
 
Sounds like he behaved in a perfectly proper professional manner with his  
audience. New news is not always popular as people have to re think or re learn. 
 For what it is worth, I for one think he is far down the right track. Most  
interesting. Thanks".


*******************************************************
* Search the BEE-L archives at:                       *
* http://listserv.albany.edu:8080/cgi-bin/wa?S1=bee-l *
*******************************************************