Not sure where to post these data but it’s worth the read. http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/04/11/science-collapse-disorder-the-real-story-behind-neonics-and-mass-bee-deaths/
Please read Randy Oliver’s work (www.scientificbeekeeping.com) on this topic:
By “agree”, do you mean with Randy’s approach to critiquing the science vs emotion elements of the debate? or with his actual conclusions on what he understands the science to be saying about the impact of neonicotinoids on honeybees?
I like the idea of a scientific approach but some of his arguments are floored because some “facts” he is using are based on available information, but we have not been truthfully told the “real” results - and “results” coming out of America - no disrespect to the American People - are Fixed to reflect what the government, who are backed by Monsanto, so any information given is inherently floored.
There are very few if any studies that are truthful and factual that have not been forcefully quashed as they pull into question the blanket BS (Cow Dung), being fed by the Chemical companies.
What we need is full, factual, scientific and truly correct data, then we can fully see the damage the chemicals have caused.
Anyone who looks back over history can tell we are not being told the truth. Big companies make big profit by telling big lies. These companies are so short sighted they can’t see their profiteering is slowly poisoning and killing the world
It’s good to see that you support unbiased views.
I suffer from a disease that is caused by use of pesticides and GM crops. My immune system is compromised - I am in constant pain - if that makes me unbiased - fine but being slowly poisoned is not where I want to be
if you want to read it but basically some Snippets…
…industry regulators in Europe have known for years that glyphosate, originally introduced by American agricultural biotechnology giant Monsanto in 1976, causes birth defects in the embryos of laboratory animals…
Even so, the commission’s health and consumer division published a final review report of glyphosate in 2002 that approved its use in Europe for the next 10 years…
… “We can’t figure out how regulators could have come to the conclusions that they did [regarding the safety of glyphosate] if they were taking a balanced look at the science, even the science that was done by the chemical industry itself” (Graves 2011, quoting John Fagan, doctor of molecular and cell biology and biochemistry, and one of the founders of Earth Open Source).
e/ Our general and uninformed demands as spoilt consumers for technical/chemical wonders and symptom fixes, and the inherent toxic backgrounds to these synthesized wonders that we (the people) weren’t necessarily aware of.
• lead in paint;
• Agent Orange;
• flouride (see: http://dianabuckland.webs.com/);
• mercury fillings
• Stilnox/Ambien/Zolpidem, Warfarin, Heparin/Lovenox, Pradaxa, Plavix, Paracetamol, Phenazepam (Edlund 2011);
• Propoxyphene/Darvon, Meperidine/Demerol, Guaifenesin/Dilaudid with Hydromorphone, Oxycodone/OxyContin, Tylenol with Codeine, Hydrocodone/Acetaminophen/Vicodin/Norco (Stoppler 2014);
• NSAIDs or Advil/Aleve/Ibuprofen/Naproxen, Cox-2 Inhibitors or Celebrex/Celecoxib (Collins 2011);
• Vioxx, etc…
Anyone who believes that science “is real” is a fool. Science is what money says it is because money pays for science. No one is going to pay for a study that proves their products are dangerous, but by damn they’ll pay for one that shows that it’s safe.
Well, I’d argue against that. After all, companies have rivals… and rivals want nothing more than to see their rivals fall over (it helps their own bottom line) so indeed companies are willing to pay for disproving the claims of other companies. Plus government grants exist, and so do regulatory bodies that are well funded and pay for independent research. Sure some countries have more corrupt systems than others… but others are quite strong in their independence and well worth listening to when they perform scientific research.
Sure, there are dodgy paid-for “research” that you must be careful not to be taken in by, but don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater on this one.
I’m going to assume you are lumping the US government lobbyist system into the more corrupt systems you are talking about. Since there is no way our government representatives would ever allow grant money towards anything that would endanger their lobbyist paydays. If our representatives spent as much time worrying about running the country efficiently and responsibly as they did about weaseling their way into back room deals and quasi-corrupt special interest paydays we would be living in a utopia here in the US.
Just like honest journalism is dead, so is honest science. There is always an agenda.
CCD was first documented in 1869 and well documented in 1906, 1918, 1919, and 1965.and again in 1972. It’s been called other things like "disappearing disease, autumn collapse, spring dwindle, etc.
@Red_Hot_Chilipepper Hopefully lessons were learnt previously but I do feel the enormity of large crop pollination (and malnourishment from lack of diverse forage), Stress of being shipped from one forage site to another (3 or 4 perhaps more each season), Nerve disruption and poisoning from crop fungicides, pesticides and Neonicotinoids together with and the cross-contamination which is bound to happen at large crop pollinations all contribute to hives being weakened and then being seen off by Varroa Destructor, SHB (Small Hive Beetle), Nosema, AFB, EFB, etc it is a wonder bees see it through the winter…
and don’t forget climate change and loss of natural forage TBH the list is endless
My hives sit 100 feet from the neonicotinoids, fungicides, pesticides yet they thrive so I’ll cross that one out.
The only winter I experienced abnormally high losses was the one winter I tried treating with essential oil grease patties. Like an idiot, I went on YouTube and watched as some overnight beekeeper swore by it and suckered me in. Now I just use proven methods (oav) and don’t have the losses. If it was neonics my bees should be dead long ago. This current CCD is mostly the work of Varroa in my opinion
Hi @Valli, I couldn’t help notice you include TBH in the mix. I’m wondering what TBH does to cause hive collapse disorder. A bloke in Brisbane who builds & sells them recons TBHs are better for bees, end of discussion. I’m currently getting a colony & queen together for a customers warre hive. Apart from a few changes he needs to make to the inside of his hive, I can’t see how one of these hives can be detrimental to bees long term.
I think Jeff, that TBH meant to be honest…
But I may be wrong.
Hi Greg, that would be right. With all the abbreviations used, I genuinely thought Valli was talking about top bar hives. I got told off for using chat room abbreviations by one of the other moderators.
Really? Seems absurd but I suppose there must be a logical reason. :shrug: