Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Edinburgh, UK
    Posts
    223

    Default Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    This is Counter-Motion submitted to the AGM of Bayer - and read to over 4,000 shareholders, with the support of a petition signed by 1.3 million people world-wide.



    Press Release, April 11, 2012
    Coalition against BAYER Dangers (Germany)
    Countermotion to shareholder meeting:

    BAYER Pesticides causing bee decline

    http://www.cbgnetwork.de/4324.html

    The German Coalition against BAYER Dangers, has introduced a counter-motion to the BAYER Shareholder Meeting demanding that the BAYER Board should not be ratified, for knowingly endangering bee populations around the world. The proposal was discussed at the meeting which took place on April 27 in Cologne (Germany). Beekeepers from all over Europe made their protest at the venue.

    BAYER pesticides Gaucho (imdacloprid) and Poncho (clothianidin) are responsible for bee mortalities throughout the world. In the past months, several important studies were published that, once again, show the high risks they pose for bees and wild insects. Despite this, BAYER has not stopped marketing these agrochemicals, for mere profit reasons.

    Philipp Mimkes, spokesperson of the Coalition against BAYER Dangers:
    “Bees are of key importance for the pollination of numerous plants. Bee mortality has far-reaching consequences for global ecology and puts the world's basic food supply at risk. Environmental groups have collected 1.2 million signatures in favor of a ban on Gaucho and Poncho. Nevertheless the BAYER Board has done nothing to ensure that these dangerous pesticides are withdrawn from the market to protect nature and biodiversity. For this reason, the actions of its members should not be ratified.“


    In December 2010, Dr. Jeffery Pettis, head of the Bee Research Laboratory at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, published a long-awaited study. The findings of the study were that Pesticide exposure in honey bees results in increased levels of the gut pathogen Nosema, and confirms the long-term experience of beekeepers from all over the world: that minute, sub-lethal exposure to the pesticide Gaucho (imidacloprid) leads to honey bees being infested significantly more often by parasites. Parasites such as Nosema or Varroa reduce the survival of bee colonies. Contrary to BAYER's repeated assertion, however, parasite infestation is not the cause of bee deaths but results from the weakening of the insects' immune system by pesticides.

    In the same month, a study published in the Journal of Environmental & Analytical Toxicology proved that the studies submitted to the authorities by BAYER grossly underestimate the risk of Gaucho and Poncho. Toxicologist Dr. Henk Tennekes, one of the authors, called for a ban on this class of substances to prevent further bee and bird mortalities.

    In January 2012, a study entitled Multiple Routes of Pesticide Exposure for Honey Bees Living Near Agricultural Fields was published by researchers at Purdue University (U.S.). The study shows that bees ingest pesticides such as Poncho in several ways, including via pollen, nectar or as dust from seed abrasion. The researchers found the toxin in all the examined bees. This refutes BAYER's assertion that bees do not come into direct contact with Poncho. According to the authors, exposure to the pesticide can either lead to immediate death of the bee or to a loss of orientation and interference with communication among the bees themselves. Because of its high persistence, the active ingredient of Poncho remains in the soil for many years and accumulates in wild plants such as the dandelion. The dandelion is an important source of food for insects in spring and autumn. The bees are therefore exposed to the toxic substance throughout the year. This chronic exposure has devastating consequences.

    Another study recently published by scientists at Stirling University in Scotland found that bumblebee colonies exposed to the pesticides were smaller and produced 85% fewer Queens than un-exposed colonies; young queens are crucial to bumblebees' survival, as the new queens normally hibernate through the winter and create new colonies in Spring.

    Only last spring, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) published a report on bee-mortalities around the world. Poncho and Gaucho are listed there as a threat to numerous animals. According to the report:
    "Systemic insecticides such as those used as seed coatings, which migrate from the roots through the entire plant, all the way to the flowers, can potentially cause toxic chronic exposure to non-target pollinators. Various studies revealed the high toxicity of chemicals such as Imidacloprid, Clothianidin, Thiamethoxam and associated ingredients for animals such as cats, fish, rats, rabbits, birds and earthworms. Laboratory studies have shown that such chemicals can cause losses of sense of direction, impair memory and brain metabolism, and cause mortality."


    An internal evaluation by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that was made public in 2010 condemned the so-called 'lifecycle' studies submitted by BAYER as "inadequate". According to the EPA memorandum, honey bees in particular are at considerable risk. Because the product’s registration in the United States is based precisely on these studies, numerous U.S. environmental and beekeeping associations are demanding the registration be withdrawn immediately.

    Honeybees pollinate over 70 out of 100 crops that provide 90% of the world's food. They pollinate most fruits and vegetables-including apples, oranges, strawberries, onions and carrots. The declining bee population thus has potentially serious impacts on food security and livelihood of farmers. It can also affect the range of food crops that can be grown and consequently the nutritional value and variety of our food supply.

    Philipp Mimkes continues:
    “Although the problems have repeatedly been brought to BAYER’s attention for many years, the company has taken no action, purely for profit reasons. Although the most dangerous uses for Poncho and Gaucho have been banned in France, Italy and Germany, this does not prevent the corporation from continuing to export these toxic substances to more than 100 countries.”


    For many years Gaucho and Poncho have been among BAYER's top-selling pesticides. In 2010, Gaucho sales were valued at US$ 820 million while Poncho sales were valued at US$ 260 million. Gaucho ranked first among BAYER's best-selling pesticide, while Poncho ranked seventh. It is striking that in the 2011 Annual Report no sales figures for Gaucho and Poncho are shown.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Sacramento, Calif. USA
    Posts
    272

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Dr. David Fischer, Bayer's Director of Environmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment explains why the idea that
    colony collapse started in 2006 and coincided with the introduction of neonicotinoid insecticides is a myth:
    http://tinyurl.com/82pxfg4

    May 3, 2012

    Bayer CropScience responds to recent criticism on Forbes.com

    As an environmental toxicologist with 25 years of experience – and current
    employee of Bayer CropScience – I feel it is important to share a different
    perspective on bee health and Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) with you
    and your readers.

    You state that “despite a lot of research since CCD was first recognized
    in 2006 the causative factors have not been identified.” However, it is
    important to note that CCD is a symptom, not a disease. Just as a fever
    is symptomatic of a many different illnesses in humans, the rapid
    disappearance from colonies of worker honeybees (i.e. CCD) appears
    to be a symptom that can occur during the end-stages of multiple bee
    diseases. What is clear is that the occurrence of CCD, and honeybee
    colony losses in general, are not correlated with exposure levels to
    agrochemicals (van Englesdorp et al. 2009).

    CCD has been reported from organic beekeeping operations and in
    locations far away from agricultural lands. It is also important to
    understand that CCD is a newly coined term for a symptomology that
    has been observed by beekeepers for more than 100 years. In their
    descriptive study of CCD, van Englesdorp et al. stated “since 1869,
    there have been at least 18 discrete episodes of unusually high colony
    mortality documented internationally. In some cases, the descriptions
    of colony losses were similar to those described above.” The idea that
    it all started in 2006 and coincided with the introduction of neonicotinoid
    insecticides is a myth.

    Interestingly, there does seem to be a correlation between recent
    occurrence of CCD and the presence of residues of Varroa control
    chemicals. In these situations, hives with lower rates of CCD generally
    have higher varroacide residue levels. This suggests that beekeepers
    who are more vigilant in controlling Varroa are less likely to have
    CCD in their colonies. Varroa mites weaken bees’ immune systems
    and are themselves vectors of pathogens that may cause severe
    sickness in bees and trigger the CCD response. While I believe
    existing data suggest this hypothesis is true, more experiments
    need to be run in order to definitively test it.

    Ultimately, there is no credible scientific evidence demonstrating a link
    between the use of neonicotinoid insecticides and the occurrence of
    widespread honey bee colony losses, including CCD. Imidacloprid,
    and neonicotinoid insecticides generally, remain safe and effective
    management tools to control a wide range of destructive insect pests.
    There have been a few incidents of acute poisoning of honey bees
    from the use of neonicotinoids, though far fewer compared to other
    major classes of insecticides. Still, in these cases, the affected colony
    typically recovers to normal health and population levels within a few
    weeks.

    It is not just my opinion that neonicotioinds are generally safe for bees,
    when used properly. This has been the conclusion of many recent
    peer-reviewed scientific publications where the authors have either
    reviewed all of the pertinent evidence (see, for example, Cresswell
    et al. 2011) or conducted multifactorial studies of bee health in
    various regions of the world (see, for example, Chauzat et al., 2009;
    Nguyen et al., 2009; Generisch et al., 2010; van Englesdorp et al., 2009,
    2010). This is also the conclusion of the EPA, whose position is based
    on their review of hundreds of research studies conducted by
    independent researchers as well as chemical manufacturers.
    Bayer has been actively involved in finding solutions to improve
    bee health for more than 25 years. As a company, we also are
    committed to environmental stewardship and sustainable agricultural
    practices, including the conservation of beneficial insects such as
    honey bees.

    David L. Fischer, Ph.D.
    Director, Environmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment
    Bayer CropScience LP
    Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Baytown, TX., USA.
    Posts
    651

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    "The idea that it all started in 2006 and coincided with the introduction of neonicotinoid
    insecticides is a myth." Fischer.

    OK, that should clear that up, move along, nothing to see here.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Utica, NY
    Posts
    8,973

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueDiamond View Post
    Dr. David Fischer, Bayer's Director of Environmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment
    When you speak of "Risk Assessment" the concern is money even when it involves drugs designed for human consumption. Environmental toxicology would be at odds with risk assessment so how could you be Director of both if one wasn't a smoke screen? It is pretty clear which job he is focused on.
    Brian Cardinal
    Zone 5a, Practicing non-intervention beekeeping

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Stilwell, KS
    Posts
    1,716

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Acebird View Post
    Environmental toxicology would be at odds with risk assessment so how could you be Director of both if one wasn't a smoke screen?
    Where did you come up with that idea? Most risk assessors that I know have a background in toxicology. The 2 fields are not at odds with one another. In fact, if you didnt know anything about toxicology, you would not make a very good risk assessor.
    Honey Badger Don't Care ಠ_ಠ ~=[,,_,,]:3

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Poplar Bluff, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    2,280

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    We all do risk assessment. Which queen will do the best job for me? Do I feed now, or later, or let them do their own thing? Do I spend time to management intensively, or practice let-alone beekeeping? Smart folks do risk assessment all the time, even if unconsciously.

    Seems to me environmental toxicology and risk assessment go hand in hand. Just what are the risks to the environment of a particular chemical, or combination of chemicals? And for the more sceptical of you out there, "what are the risks to our bottom line if we release this particular product into the environment? So neither one nor the other is a smoke screen.
    Regards,
    Steven
    "If all you have is a hammer, the whole world is a nail." - A.H. Maslow

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Utica, NY
    Posts
    8,973

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenG View Post
    :"what are the risks to our bottom line if we release this particular product into the environment?
    There you go. Now you are starting to understand "risk assessment". Virtually nothing to do with toxicology. You would just hope it would and that is why it is part of the title.
    Brian Cardinal
    Zone 5a, Practicing non-intervention beekeeping

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Maryville, tn, usa
    Posts
    208

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenG View Post
    Seems to me environmental toxicology and risk assessment go hand in hand. Just what are the risks to the environment of a particular chemical, or combination of chemicals? And for the more sceptical of you out there, "what are the risks to our bottom line if we release this particular product into the environment? So neither one nor the other is a smoke screen.
    Regards,
    Steven
    Laugh well that depends on what the Risk Management is are you managing the risk to the environment or to the company. As long as we finance enough research to show some hives crash in areas where our pestacides aren't used and tell everyone that this isn't our problem and the FDA whom we lobby agrees with us (won't talk about the European countries that have put a band on our poison) seems like he is doing a great job of risk management or PR...

    Daniel
    Maryville, Tn

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Maryville, tn, usa
    Posts
    208

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Oh the no creditable research...
    Commonly Used Pesticide Turns Honey Bees Into 'Picky Eaters'
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0524092926.htm
    Corn Insecticide Linked to Great Die-Off of Beneficial Honeybees
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0314170511.htm
    How Bees Are Harmed by Common Crop Pesticides
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0329141912.htm
    Honeybee Deaths Linked to Seed Insecticide Exposure
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0112112722.htm

    These are all located on a single site but they are from multiple sources with research being done from the UK to USA and the conclusion is clear not only in what causes CCD but how it effects the bees and how low levels of the insectacide bio accumulate. Of course if I worked for Bayer I'd claim otherwise over and over and over again think the tobacco companies did the same thing...
    Daniel

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Massillon, Ohio
    Posts
    3,380

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueDiamond View Post
    As an environmental toxicologist with 25 years of experience – and current
    employee of Bayer CropScience
    That's about as far as I got.
    To everything there is a season....

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Stilwell, KS
    Posts
    1,716

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by danmcm View Post
    Laugh well that depends on what the Risk Management is are you managing the risk to the environment or to the company.
    I work in the environmental field with several toxicologists/risk asssessors. When somebody signs their name Director of Environmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment, I guarantee it means Environmental Risk Assessment, NOT business risk management for the company. All of the perceived problems with Bayer aside, some of you guys are really barking up the wrong tree when you overlook the obvious and equate environmental toxicology with business risk management.
    Honey Badger Don't Care ಠ_ಠ ~=[,,_,,]:3

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Stilwell, KS
    Posts
    1,716

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Back to the OP.

    Does anyone actually think that the Bayer shareholders are not going to ratify the Board of Directors because of a petition by the "German Coalition against BAYER Dangers", or by any group for that matter?

    Seriously folks, this whole thing is a farce.



    Also, does anyone else find the following quote a bit suspect?: "Honeybees pollinate over 70 out of 100 crops that provide 90% of the world's food". I would hazard to guess that 90% (plus or minus 10%) of 90% of the worlds food consists of the the following crops:

    • rice
    • corn
    • wheat
    • soybeans
    • yams
    • sorghum
    • taro
    • potatos
    • cabbage


    Do honeybees polinate these crops? Or more to the point, are honeybees needed to polinate these crops? (I know some of you will jump at soybeans. Bees may forage on soybeans and provide some polination, but they are not needed for polination).

    Distortion of the truth is propaganda, even if you think that you are doing it for a good cause.
    Honey Badger Don't Care ಠ_ಠ ~=[,,_,,]:3

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Massillon, Ohio
    Posts
    3,380

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Nabber86 View Post

    Distortion of the truth is propaganda, even if you think that you are doing it for a good cause.
    Very true.
    And to a neutral observer who has no vested interest, it becomes very obvious on both sides of the argument.
    To everything there is a season....

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Stilwell, KS
    Posts
    1,716

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Gillmore View Post
    Very true.
    ...it becomes very obvious on both sides of the argument.
    Amen to that.

    I just actually looked at the picture in the OP. Is that Norm Macdonald with the scythe?
    Honey Badger Don't Care ಠ_ಠ ~=[,,_,,]:3

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Old Town, Maine, USA
    Posts
    99

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Nabber86 View Post
    Amen to that.

    I just actually looked at the picture in the OP. Is that Norm Macdonald with the scythe?
    No, think it's Adam Corolla.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Maryville, tn, usa
    Posts
    208

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Nabber that's called tongue in cheek we know what his work title is supposed to mean but I'm questioning scientific evidence from where I'm sitting is mounting rather high and other countrys have place a ban but bayer keeps at the its safe... Tobacco companies said the same thing. Do we think a group of any sort will get them to... I don't I think its going to take a class action lawsuit and or the fda getting some new leadership. but that happens after this is forced into public view.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    DeSoto County, MS, USA
    Posts
    136

    Default Re: Motion Put to the Bayer Shareholders Meeting on 27th April 2012

    Gee a toxocologist working for Bayer Crop Sciences, telling us their poison is ok. Isn't that a bit like the fox telling the farmer why he shouldn't close the door on the hen house?

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Ads