Wow! 16 pages while I was gone ... how did you do that without me?
Vance, this nonsense about starvation that keeps coming up, how is it that when Europe closes its borders to American produced food that they all don't starve? Something is twisting your logic. Maybe you have been breathing too many of those chemicals that you are now dependant on them. Personally I am not dependant on them and I would like to keep it that way. I promise you, I won't starve.
Listen up beekeeps, continue to study the issue at hand. Learn it well. It is clear what Monsanto has planned, and it is clear significant and material loss of our genetically diversified honey bee will be suffered by beekeepers around the world.
Once this new bee has been loosed, and since the Monsanto product can not be contained, this product will result in a trespass on our property without permission, effecting every single beekeep.
So, a class-action lawsuit will be in order.
I am trying to formulate just compensation, and so far my best idea is a dollar for every bee infected, plus damages for significant mental anguish.
Now, any beekeep that agrees to allow this product to be loosed, should also be named in the lawsuit.
My opinion, of course.
I bet we would have attorneys begging to file this thing on our behalf, at a commission only basis.
Once this new bee has been loosed, and since the Monsanto product can not be contained, this product will result in a trespass on our property without permission, effecting every single beekeep. So, a class-action lawsuit will be in order. I am trying to formulate just compensation, and so far my best idea is a dollar for every bee infected, plus damages for significant mental anguish. Now, any beekeep that agrees to allow this product to be loosed, should also be named in the lawsuit.
My opinion, of course. I bet we would have attorneys begging to file this thing on our behalf, at a commission only basis.
Seeing how you've not yet answered my question, I'll chalk it up to being unable to defend the quote.
I've got a brother who's a trial attorney, and leftie one at that. Much like companies and new products, attorneys spend millions and sometimes billions trying to get class action lawsuit success. Like the "evil" Monsanto they expect to make substantial profit on their investment of time and money. If they don't feel they can they move to another lower hanging fruit of a class action lawsuit. So far the market forces indicate the evidence is simply too weak and biased for any lawyer to think they've got a chance. Bet all you want, but there was enough evidence to support all these outlandish claims the attorneys would already be on this like bees on honey.
ok since you don't think that pesticides don't affect your bees remember the residue left on the flowers stay. build two observation hives keep one healthy and spray another with anything Monsanto makes not too much then watch the bees they will start to have epileptic seizures eventually the population will dwindle and eventually the hive will die.it may take a season or sometimes a few months.ccd no bees left in hive i have been studying now for two years.no with gm treated seeds it effects pollen and nectar .so you can eat that product what do you think is going to happen with your body....
I believe the risks outweigh the benefits when it comes to GMO’s and that the last thing we need is for Monsanto to expand their reach into honeybees. The Africanized Honey Bee is trivial in comparison to the problems that GMO’s could cause in the plant and animal world.
There are no assurances that genetic engineering is safe or that Monsanto can be trusted to value the public’s interest as well as their corporate profits. They will point out the improvements of genetic research but will they also own up to negative aspects of their work (that’s if they even know what they are)? When hybrid tomatoes were first developed they were praised for their disease resistance but did the breeders admit that they no longer tasted like tomatoes?
Population growth and hunger are not good arguments to justify the use of GMO’s. Increases in agricultural production predate the use of GMO’s and there are arguments that GMO’s have actually resulted in decreased production. Then there is the issue of nutrient decline. I saw a report recently that stated in less developed countries the adoption of high yield wheat and rice crops has led to “hidden hunger”… people were getting enough calories but fewer nutrients which leads to malnutrition and disease.
So it’s not as simple as comparing the quantity of food being produced. A study by Dr. Donald Davis at the University of Texas found that nutrients are decreasing in fresh produce while starches and sugars increased as a result of farmers planting crops designed to improve specific traits such as yield.
Why rush blindly into anything that has the potential of creating a nightmare with the bees or our food supply that could even be irreversible? And why let a corporation or a government agency make those decisions for us all?
"I believe the risks outweigh the benefits when it comes to GMO’s"
Don't forget the complementary pesticides that are usually packaged with the GMO.
What's so unusual about Remembee, the RNAi product developed and patented by Beeologics and now owned by Monsanto, is this: it straddles the line between a GMO (because it's a patented nucleic acid sequence) and a pesticide (it can kill target pests/pathogens).
It blurs the issue in unexpected ways. So, this thread isn't quite about either GMOs or pesticides.
It's a very new environmental issue. RNAi.
That's an interesting point and I really don't know anything about the work that Beeologics is doing or how Remembee functions in particular.
In the plant world Monsanto has done things like genetically modify corn to include the Bt gene for insect control. The problem with this approach is how do you administer the proper dosage and prevent insects from developing resistant strains? We may well wind up taking a safe organic pest control that has been used for decades and making it ineffective (everywhere) for the sake of Monsanto's short-lived use in a GMO. What's at stake for Monsanto compared to the organic farmer, and when Bt no longer works will the farmers be out of luck and forced to turn to a more toxic or chemical control?
Also how do you ensure that other insects are not impacted by Bt that is contained in all parts of the plant including the corn's pollen rather than if it was merely sprayed onto the surface area and specific parts of a plant being attacked by the insect pest?
Would the same type of risk in the form of the development of resistance be an issue with Remebee and the honeybee pests? What would prevent resistant strains of pathogens from developing or is that a gamble that would be taken?
Each side of the argument is already made up in the minds of those discussing that is for sure. No one is going to change their mind based on what is said on this forum. The good part is the longer "money" keeps dragging the thread along the more the topic stays on top for those new to the discussion that may not be aware of what money is doing.
I'm just a simple beekeeper with a question. It is my understanding that the drug being tested by remebee treats only the bee fed. the next hatch of bees also have to be fed for the drug to continue on. this was explained to me by randy oliver a year ago. maybe I misunderstood him. If this is the case how is this creating a new bee without changing the genetics of the queen? If only one feeding is required how can montsanto make any money?
now what is needed to confirm that gm plant is killing the honeybee what we call "CCD" need to have a control test isolated yard with only gm crops.....not only that also more tests with control pesticide observation hives thru spraying only the crops....my conformation on known spayed hives 2 years in a row all bees was removed from sprayed comb and placed in new hives and allowed to rebuild new comb with there queen confirm that after a 4 months the hives population diminished and no bees left in hives. bees in contaminated hives noticeably had epileptic seizure like symptoms, as contaminated hive continue the larva stopped getting capped and bees pulled them out also queen stopped laying viable eggs and bees unable to supersede her loss of queen due to balling hives total loss....next control next spring i will be adding new healthy bees to "ccd" contaminated hive from known pesticide sprayed bees lived.in theory the bees that will be moved in ccd hive bees should either abscond or rebuild and have the same fate as previous bees....as they clean out contaminated cells from the death of last larvae
'..how is this creating a new bee without changing the genetics of the queen?'
This isn't a classical genetics issue.
They initially discovered that a sequence fragment of the Isreal Acute Paralysis Virus had jumped into the Honeybee genome by retrotransposition. Retrotransposition just means that RNA from the virus was turned into DNA and inserted into the Honeybees DNA (by an unidentified retrotransposon). This provided resistance to IAPV for some of the bees so affected (by something called RNA interference).
If it gets into the germline (sperm or egg) than it can be transmitted classically. Otherwise, it's in tissues, like the gut. But, this isn't desirable because it can potentially damage tissues and worse, lead to dysgenesis (loss of viability).
It's the non-classical amplification that presents a new risk for contamination by this engineered RNA treatment (Remembee). Those RNA viruses that affect the Honeybee also carry an enzyme that duplicates RNA. They're not all going to be knocked down by Remembee. The enzyme is called RNA Dependent RNA Polymerase (RdRP). It makes RNA copies from RNA. So, it can copy RNA from viruses, and Remembee as well.
The real threat comes from a known feedback mechanism. Honeybees don't have their own RdRP.
But, if an RNA virus is present, the bees own RNAi system can couple with the RdRP from the virus to amplify all kinds of RNAi molecules, like the type found in Remembee.
Here's the kicker, if your bees rob another hive that has been treated with Remembee, or some bees drift into your hive from a Remembee treated colony, any Remembee RNA present can get amplified in your non-treated hive (if viral RdRP is present).
These RNAi sequences don't just amplify themselves throughout the tissues of a bees body, even thought they were introduced via ingestion in the bees gut.
They can also spread fom bee to bee, and colony to colony by the above mechanism.
So, like 'rogue' pollen, your hives can become contaminated, without the need for classical genetics.
This is far worse than pollen. Honeybees are in constant contact with other native pollinators.
There is the potential for non-target species becoming contaminated with these engineered RNAi sequences as well.
It won't necessarily be toxic to them, but it's still contamination by a 'Selfish Gene'.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Beesource Beekeeping Forums
1.8M posts
54.7K members
Since 1999
A forum community dedicated to beekeeping, bee owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about breeding, honey production, health, behavior, hives, housing, adopting, care, classifieds, and more!