Just like the argument against pesticides causing CCD, why didn't this appear years ago? Cell phones (and any radiation they produce) didn't just appear on the market last year.
So let me see if I got this right, London's biggest beekeepers who use to have 40 hives now has 7 ? If this to be the case so I would say that this guy’s bees already disappeared long time ago
Last edited by forestbee; 04-16-2007 at 09:50 AM.
Can you believe the theories? I would be much more likely to blame solar storms, or magnetic poles of the earth changing before I believe the cell phone theory. Speaking of which has anyone here done any research on the changing of magnetic North?
Look at all of the enviromental factors that have drastically changed that bees may be atuned to and human are not.
well it could be a plateau was needed before the effects began to show. what I mean is there has to be a certain amount of radio energy in the cell phone frequencies, and then a certain length of time before the effect is seen by the bees, and then seen by us. it's not like a switch is thrown and we see results. I am only pointing out a possibility... one it seems, of many...
Keep in mind that individual bees do not live a particularly long time. Only the lifetime of an individual bee would be available for that accumulation to occur, in the case of bees and CCD. In other words that radiation could only accumulate for a few weeks to a few months in any given bee.
So, were there changes in the cell phone industry during the last part of summer 2006? Otherwise, why wouldn't those effects show up early in 2006, or late in 2005, or . . . any time earlier? I can see the difference between 2006 and 1980, for example, but not between 2006 and 2005.
And what about those "outbreaks" of something similar to CCD in the 1970s and 1960s and earlier?
I agree with concept of not eliminating any theory, but for this particular theory I think there are many other things needed to be looked at before turning off our cell phones, however it is nice to see some ideas are out of the ordinary because may be the root cause is really unusual.
Last edited by forestbee; 04-16-2007 at 10:48 AM.
Howdy, umm, it may be that radio noise is a possible cause, and we know that the amount of radio energy has been going up over the years (in a particular frequency), if there is a threshold that affects bees, it may have been breached. it's not that there is an accumulation in the bees, but that there is an accumulation in their enviroment
Mind you I'm not making a case for cellphones causing CCD though I would support legislation making it illegal for bees to use cell phones while foraging. People shouldn't use them when they drive, bees shouldn't use them when they fly.
Dulcius ex asperis
But it should (it does in my mind, anyway) rule out any specific pesticides or groups of pesticides (such as neonicotinoids) that were not around when CCD, or something similar, appeared years ago.
I think too many beekeepers are too eager to pinpoint a single, simple cause for a complex problem.
Also we would seen the CCD in Europe well before in the US not the other way around.
I agree.I think too many beekeepers are too eager to pinpoint a single, simple cause for a complex problem.
I generally ought to stay out of discussions like this, especially those involving pesticides because I'm not playing with a full deck- I don't come at it with a rational, scientific mind set. I come at it like an irrational hysterical old woman.
Exactly forestbee! Exactly! And we don't want them to have computers or other weapons of mass destruction.Well this will leave a loophole for the guard bees to use cell phones to warn other bees and hives of the beekeepers arrival, I would rather see it illegal for the bees to use Cell phones all together.
Dulcius ex asperis
Sure, George, but I've seen pesticide kills (even from neonicotinoids), and the pesticide kills that I've seen don't match the descriptions of CCD that I've read.
I'll confess that I have yet to see a hive killed by what even appears to be CCD.
Fair enough. Let's start with a few.As above, I'm not suggesting CCD is caused by pesticides, just that the logic used to discriminate between this possible cause and that possible cause needs to be carefully controlled. -George Fergusson
1) Neonicotinoids. They weren't around back in the 1960s or 1970s. They've been used in roughly the same amounts, in the same formuations, for that last five to six years. Careful logic: neonicotinoids are very, very unlikely to the cause of CCD.
2) Other insecticides. I don't know of any chemicals that were recently introduced and in widespread use that could cause CCD. At the same time, most of the specific chemicals weren't on the market the "last times" CCD or something like it appeared.
3) GM crops weren't on the market in the 1960s or 70s. The amount of GM crops grown has increased steadily, but the acreage grown in GM crops hasn't changed much in the last three to four years. IF (and it's a mighty big IF, to my thinking) GM crops are responsible for CCD, it will show up again this year, bigger than last year even. And the year after that, and the year after that.
Of course, just because CCD might appear again this year doesn't mean that GM crops are the culprit. It could be something else.
4) Cell phone radiation (which isn't all that different from any of the other radio-wave radiation that's out there), magnetic line intersections, etc. What changed? Were they around the last times such symptoms appeared in bees?
Maybe we should consider ethanol as a cause for CCD. After all, just recently all gasoline has ethanol added to it as an oxygenator in the U.S. It even coincides with the most recent onset of CCD. And the production and consumption of ethanol has increased greater in the last year or two.
Seriously, though, I still think CCD is a combination of too many factors to single out just one. If it was really so simple, the scientists researching it should have come up with an explanation long ago.
Last edited by Kieck; 04-17-2007 at 07:45 AM.
I'm not poking fun at you, honestly, but all I keep thinking when I read responses like this is, "Should we blame all lethal traumatic accidents among humans on automobiles?" I mean, the symptoms are similar (someone dies of massive, traumatic injuries), and automobiles can certainly play a role in traumatic accidents, so should we revise history and claim that people in the middle ages who died of traumatic accidents were killed by automobiles?That is right but given we are totally sure that the CCD we see now is the same CCD happened back then, even if it is the same it might be due some effects on the bees caused by something and may be that effect can be happened due to completely different causes, this is why I think nothing should be ruled out. -forestbee
I think I didn’t explain it well, so actually your example is what I meant to say, People died of traumatic accidents back in the middle ages and people die of traumatic accidents may have the same reason of death but completely different set of events which led to these reasons.
So the CCD in the 60’s may be due to the same reason for the CCD we see today but the root cause is different, so may be the root cause now is the neonicotinoids but back in the 60’s was some other chemicals.
I am not saying it is the neonicotinoids or even I think it is, I am just saying that at this time and with the amount of information we currently know “or we don’t know” about this CCD I don’t think anything should be off the table, whatever it is Cell Phones or neonicotinoids.
Again, I rule out pesticides as the cause for CCD, in part because I've seen numerous examples of pesticide kills. None of them matched the descriptions of CCD.
Also, the use of pesticides in general hasn't changed significantly from year to year. The use in 2005 was almost exactly the same as the use in 2006. Where was CCD in 2005? Where was it in 2004? If we look at different chemicals as the cause, going back into at least the 1960s, why haven't we seen it every year?
I believe if we start seeing CCD year-after-year, scientists will pinpoint the cause or causes. If CCD is an annual, recurring event, even if it's caused by a vast number of factors working in concert, scientists will begin isolating those factors.
I also believe that we will probably not see CCD this year, or next year, or probably the year after that, the furor will die down, and when CCD rears its ugly head five years or 10 years or whenever in the future, beekeepers will react the same way we are right now.
As far as a "solution" goes, first we need to figure out what CCD is. Is CCD the result of a pathogen or pathogens (like some form of Aspergillus, or a different form of Nosema, or a virus or viruses)? Is it malnutrition? Is it some form of poisoning? Most importantly, is it contagious?
Then, we can try to develop a strategy to avoid or reduce CCD outbreaks. Let's just say, hypothetically, that CCD is caused by a combination of a bacterium, a virus, malnutrion from limited pollen sources, and an unknown genetic factor. Antibiotics can be used to reduce bacterial infections. Perhaps malnutrition could be overcome by not using bees for pollination in years with limited resources because of drought, or supplemental feeding could expand the nutritional diversity. Viruses are difficult to combat, but the spread could be reduced perhaps by lowering the concentrations of hives in yards. Selective breeding could reduce the impact of the genetic factor. Even controlling a single factor of the group could be enough to tip the balance toward survival for hives.
Nice to see that a few folks have slogged through the same
process of elimination I did over here.
Not to say that logical deductions alone make any of us right,
but it does rule out a number of things as so highly unlikely as
to be impossible.