BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Gavin Ramsay <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:36:01 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (45 lines)
> "[It] was completed almost  two years ago but it has been too long in getting 
>out," he said. "I have  submitted my manuscript to a new
> journal but cannot give a publication date or  share more of this with you at 
>this time."


That tends to imply that the Pettis paper was rejected, and so this journalist 
has gone too far.  The paper would be classed as relevant science presumably, so 
if it was written well that implies that maybe the methodology or the 
conclusions did not meet with the approval of the reviewers.  The same newspaper 
journalist picked up on some other stuff given to him by some of the shriller 
anti-pesticide people in the UK, so he has a history of siding with the 
campaigners.

I've read the French work (Alaux et al) and although it is interesting, 
apparently showing a modest rise in deaths of bees in the test above the greater 
lethality of Nosema alone, there is something you make you hesitate before 
accepting it at face value.  Imidacloprid was delivered to the bees at three 
levels over a 100-fold range of concentrations.  Why was there no dose-response?

I think that - for now - you have to fall back on the several studies which 
looked and failed to find an association between colony losses or ill-health and 
pesticide residues in colony samples.

Two sides to the Precautionary Principle: 

1.  Bin the whole class of pesticides even though there is no evidence of much 
or even any harm from them, but lots of people seem to suspect that there might 
be.
2.  Keep them as the pesticides they are replacing are apparently nastier, and 
cause real harm to humans and to wildlife.  Besides, global food prices are on 
the rise, indicating that the world just can't afford the luxury of ditching 
major classes of crop protection products without good reason.

Gavin


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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2