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:
randy oliver <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:39:39 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (53 lines)
>(Written from MacDonalds on I95).

Well, that then explains a lot, Allen  : )  We must now put your posts into
the perspective of coming from someone under the influence of a MacDonalds
diet.  Such a diet has been clearly demonstrated to have significant
negative long-term effects on human beings, and is suspected to have
negative impact on human cognitive processes.

Since you have obviously forgotten that you had stated that you were going
to wait for the full study to be published (perhaps your MacDonalds diet is
also having an effect upon your long-term memory, likely due to the sugar
rush from the HFCS), I guess that I will return to the fray...

>I'm much more inclined to believe a presenter who finds what his/her
study was unable to do and where it was grey more interesting than
what appeared to be proven.

Allen, I am disturbed by your continued dissing of Dr Rogers.  The
beekeepers in the trial have told me how impressed they were with his data
collection, and his working with them.  Last I spoke with them, they were
looking forward to working with him again!

And he did indeed report on what he was unable to do--to find any measurable
negative effect upon broodrearing in the treated group.  This was a
surprise, since such an effect was expected!

  >I am also alarmed by the amount of cheerleading I see for this (IMO)
superficial and flawed superficial study.

Allen, I don't know how many other Movento studies you've read (it has been
well tested in your country), but "cheerleading" for a pesticide that
doesn't harm bees sounds reasonable to me!

Again, I'm disturbed by your repeat (literally) of the words "superficial"
and "flawed."  I thought that we agreed that you would refrain from judging
the study until you saw the full data.  When you use those words, you have
prejudged it, and taken a position.

The study was designed to detect any negative effects upon colonies under
normal field application on a specific crop.  It didn't find any that I can
see.  I've asked you how you would suggest improving on the experimental
design, and am still waiting for an answer.

Randy Oliver

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

Access BEE-L directly at:
http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A0=BEE-L

ATOM RSS1 RSS2