Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

ocba - Re: [ocba] Bayer CropScience and bees

ocba AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Orange County, NC Beekeepers

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Brian and Lanette Fee" <fee436 AT att.net>
  • To: "'Kitty Cunningham'" <klparmley AT gmail.com>, <ocba AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [ocba] Bayer CropScience and bees
  • Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2012 01:37:25 -0400

Hi Kitty,

     My point was not that neonicotinamides are nonlethal.  It was that there was inadequate evidence given by Dr. Lu in his article to support the title “in situ replication of CCD”.  They did not recreate the disease.  I think there is strong evidence that neonicotinamides are very bad chemicals and are particularly hard on social insects (which tend to be beneficial insects).  To me, they recreated what would be classic toxic symptoms for this pesticide, not CCD.   Just because it’s toxic doesn’t mean it causes CCD.  It may be a big component, but I think the issue of CCD is far more complex than this and their data did not support their thesis statement.  They did not have adequate numbers of either test or control samples, - even with the 20 colonies.  (Thank you Chloe for pointing out my error.)  One control per site is woefully inadequate.  If we put forth an argument it should be based on the same rigor and scientific merit that we expect from Bayer.  We wouldn’t agree with this study if it was done by Bayer so we shouldn’t agree with it just because it supports our hypothesis.

     I share your concern for the environment and the sheer number of chemicals we are pouring into it.  I go to Lowes on the weekend and I am deeply dismayed at the amount of chemicals leaving the parking lot.  The amounts, nonjudicious use, and types of chemicals being put on yards and crops is truly concerning and agribusiness is set up so that the average farmer doesn’t have a lot of choices.  This is all overload, it all washes out of the yards and fields into the streams from which we drink, swim, and feed our animals.

     As for the website that you asked me to look at, some of the statements are quite valid and as I said, I agree that neonicotinamides are bad.  Is Bayer entirely to blame for this?  I’m not sure that is fair.  Marty’s question of “why Bayer alone?” is a good one.  It would be fair to question practices from many agribusiness companies – Monsanto, Syngenta, BASF, DuPont?  

 

Warm regards,

Lanette

 

 

From: Kitty Cunningham [mailto:klparmley AT gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2012 10:35 AM
To: Brian and Lanette Fee
Cc: Orange County Beekeepers Association
Subject: Re: [ocba] Bayer CropScience and bees

 

Whzat is your response to this?

 

On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Brian and Lanette Fee <fee436 AT att.net> wrote:

I am not a fan of Bayer. I am not a fan of imidacloprid.   I am a fan of treating bees with as few treatments and with the lowest doses of those treatments that I can manage.  But we need to hold Mongabay and Dr. Lu to the same standards we hold Bayer.  We expect Bayer to do studies with more than 2.5 acres of crop, but this guy only studied 5 hives, 4 test hives and only one control.  One of the standard procedures of science is that tests be done AT LEAST 3 times.  He didn’t even follow this basic tenant of scientific procedure.  These studies were done only once.  The hives were treated with other chemicals as well as imidacloprid.  They also show pictures in the proof of the article of the frames from the treated and nontreated hive.  The nontreated hive has lots of brood, but the treated hive has very little brood.  One of the hallmark symptoms of CCD is missing bees with lots of brood still left. 

     This researcher is at Harvard.  The reality is that he is under the same pressures as any other researcher in the US to publish in the best journals that he can.  He chose to publish in a hidden away journal with an impact factor of 0.34 instead of Science or Nature with an impact factor of 30.  An  impact factor rates how often articles from those journals are cited – essentially how trusted the journal is.  Why did he only do his studies with 5 hives?  Why  only one control?  Why didn’t he get into Science or Nature?  The other studies did and they couldn’t pin CCD on imidacloprid alone.  This is a complex disease.  Chances are it isn’t going to have a simple answer.  More than likely there is a number of factors contributing to the disease and imidacloprid may indeed by one of them, but it isn’t the only one.  Dr. Lu may be on to something, but the studies need to be repeated with better controls and symptoms from the treated hives that represent the classical description of CCD.

 

Lanette Fee

 

From: ocba-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:ocba-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Kitty Cunningham
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2012 8:12 AM
To: Orange County Beekeepers Association
Cc: NaturalBeesinNC AT yahoogroups.com


Subject: [ocba] Bayer CropScience and bees

 

I will not be attending any more meetings that have Bayer CropScience PR representatives unless they have announced that they are on a tour to apologize for the behavior of their company.

 

This article is just one of far too many that I have read recently indicting that company for biological terrorism and there is no way a couple of research bee yards will ever repair this damage.

 

 

 


_________________________________________
ocba mailing list | North Carolina Beekeeping| http://www.theocba.org/
Manage Your Subscription: http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/ocba/




--
http://mebanelabyrinth.blogspot.com




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page