> No real scientist would ever make a categorical claim like that.

This statement could mean either A) they are not real scientists. or B) they didn't make such a claim. They are real scientists: G. CHRISTOPHER CUTLER and CYNTHIA D. SCOTT-DUPREE, Department of Environmental Biology, Ontario Agricultural College. Canadians, too!

So, did they make the claim? 

> We conducted a long-term investigation to ascertain effects on honey bee, Apis mellifera L., colonies during and after exposure to ßowering canola, Brassica napus variety Hyola 420, grown from clothianidin-treated seed.

> Assessment of overwintered colonies in spring found no differences in those originally exposed to treated or control canola.The results show that honey bee colonies will, in the long-term, be unaffected by exposure to clothianidin seed-treated canola.

Are they saying that no effect will EVER be seen? Of course not. They are contrasting short term (acute) to long-term (chronic) effects. Their definition of long-term in this study is one season. 

Maybe they should do two years, or four. The study in Belgium was a lot longer, and still showed no effect. Somebody will always come forward and say "you call that long-term?" no matter how long it is. 

PLB

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