Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 245

Thread: CCD Research

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Manitoba Canada
    Posts
    5,787

    Default Re: CCD Research

    lips are flappen behind a tag name
    Ian Steppler >> Canadian Beekeeper's Blog
    www.stepplerfarms.com

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    26,230

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by WLC View Post
    He's a BeeWasher.
    Like a "whitewasher"? I would think that name calling would be below someone like yorself.
    Mark Berninghausen "That which works, persists."

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: CCD Research

    'BeeWashing' is a new term for the PR campaign denying that GM/neonics are harmful to bees.

    It's much easier to say BeeWasher, than the rest of the definition.
    Last edited by WLC; 07-01-2013 at 02:05 AM.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    syracuse n.y.
    Posts
    1,834

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian View Post
    lips are flappen behind a tag name
    and some people use different tags on different lists. below is just a little of the information from bee-l about the subject after it was published in articles, decide for your self.



    http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/w...%3BMatches&z=4


    >if you would like to see exactly what randy asked the authors after the paper had been published.



    Since the authors of the "Harvard" study have declined to answer the
    list of questions that I submitted to them, and since the Bulletin of
    Insectology does not publish letters to the editor, I've decided to
    put a slightly abbreviated, and annotized, list of my questions out
    for discussion.

    I aplologize that all formatting has been lost. I plan to post a
    formatted version to my website.

    Randy Oliver

    THE QUESTIONS
    [I have also added a few comments italicized in brackets]
    Readers will likely wish to have a copy of the study at hand. It can
    be freely downloaded at
    http://www.bulletinofinsectology.org...-099-106lu.pdf


    > these discussions were after the below presentation






    Parts/Attachments
    text/plain (13 lines)




    http://worcestercountybeekeepers.com...lapse-disorder

    ...this is a March 10 presentation by Dr. Lu, the lead author of the Harvard School of Public Health study to the WCBA.

    deknow


    >and the first entry that I can find posted by Randy oliver about the subject


    http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/w...%3BMatches&z=4

    > much more information just do a search with Harvard as the subject

    i find it unfortunate that the press, including both of our national bee
    journals, gave publicity to this paper without any sort of critical
    analysis. Such messages only confuse the public. Pesticides are a major
    issue to the beekeeping community. What we need are well designed and
    executed studies, (as well as better enforcement of pesticide law) in order
    to solve these problems. Sadly, this study just confuses the issues.
    --
    Randy Oliver
    Grass Valley, CA
    www.ScientificBeekeeping.com
    mike syracuse ny
    I went to bed mean, and woke up meaner. Marshal Dillon

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    26,230

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by WLC View Post
    ' It's much easier to say BeeWasher, than the rest of the definition.
    Which is what? I apologize for being slow. I didn't find this term in the Beekeeping Terminology List.
    Mark Berninghausen "That which works, persists."

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Herrick, SD USA
    Posts
    4,245

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by WLC View Post
    'BeeWashing' is a new term for the PR campaign denying that GM/neonics are harmful to bees.

    It's much easier to say BeeWasher, than the rest of the definition.
    New term huh. Who started it? I trust you apply this equally to the far, far more widespread pseudo-scientific campaign aimed generically at all things agri-business. "GM/Neonics"???? Do you really think it's responsible to just lump these two entirely different topics together as if they are one???? I think it's unconscionable that anyone trying to do a reasoned and responsible analysis of CCD and what it is or isn't gets branded a pro Bayer, Monsanto or Syngenta person and their research is casually passed off as being bought and paid for by agribusiness by(even more ironically) folks that have such biased agendas of their own.
    "People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe."- Andy Rooney

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Lutz, FL, USA
    Posts
    77

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Personally, being far from "bee politics" and not really knowing anybody here, I find it hard to believe that any beekeeper would be advocating use of any insecticides. There is an obvious conflict of interests there. Insecticide are by definition designed to harm/kill insects - bee keeper again by definition is supposed to care about well being of the insects in his care. But that's just me. One thing is for sure, with the European ban being implemented in two years one of the sides is going to have much less to say on the subject. If the bees in Europe make a significant comeback, the people who beat themselves in the chest in the name of the scientific progress and so eagerly display their scholarly prowess won't be so eager to stand together with big poison manufacturers. If there is no noticeable change, the other side would have to go down the road talking to itself.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Herrick, SD USA
    Posts
    4,245

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by ArtSmart View Post
    Personally, being far from "bee politics" and not really knowing anybody here, I find it hard to believe that any beekeeper would be advocating use of any insecticides. There is an obvious conflict of interests there. Insecticide are by definition designed to harm/kill insects - bee keeper again by definition is supposed to care about well being of the insects in his care.
    This is what I am referring to. It's a question not of whether pesticides kill insects, because of course they do, but rather a question of which chemical is the least damaging to bees. I kept bees back in the heyday of foliar spraying in the 70's and 80's and experienced massive kills by sprays designed to kill any insect they contact. Yet those like me are being branded as being pro-pesticide for pointing out that it's quite possible that neonics may be safer than some of the alternatives. We can all dream of a beekeeping world where no pesticides exist but the reality is that will never happen. Beekeepers are just one part of a larger and more complex agricultural picture.
    "People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe."- Andy Rooney

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Manitoba Canada
    Posts
    5,787

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by jim lyon View Post
    This is what I am referring to. It's a question not of whether pesticides kill insects, because of course they do, but rather a question of which chemical is the least damaging to bees. I kept bees back in the heyday of foliar spraying in the 70's and 80's and experienced massive kills by sprays designed to kill any insect they contact. Yet those like me are being branded as being pro-pesticide for pointing out that it's quite possible that neonics may be safer than some of the alternatives. We can all dream of a beekeeping world where no pesticides exist but the reality is that will never happen. Beekeepers are just one part of a larger and more complex agricultural picture.
    well said Jim
    Ian Steppler >> Canadian Beekeeper's Blog
    www.stepplerfarms.com

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    26,230

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by ArtSmart View Post
    I find it hard to believe that any beekeeper would be advocating use of any insecticides.
    Who is doing that? WLC? Randy Oliver? Who are you refering to?

    I used mitecides to address varroa mites. Do you?
    Last edited by sqkcrk; 07-01-2013 at 06:46 AM.
    Mark Berninghausen "That which works, persists."

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Manitoba Canada
    Posts
    5,787

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by ArtSmart View Post
    Personally, being far from "bee politics" and not really knowing anybody here, I find it hard to believe that any beekeeper would be advocating use of any insecticides. There is an obvious conflict of interests there. Insecticide are by definition designed to harm/kill insects - bee keeper again by definition is supposed to care about well being of the insects in his care.
    what about a beekeeper, who is also a grain farmer...?

    we have just finished spraying our land twice with insecticide to kill off the flea beetle, cold wet weather delayed our plant growth, our two week flea beetle coverage with the neonic treated seed was not long enough and the beetles were chewing our fields apart.

    So this beekeeper sprayed for bugs,
    Ian Steppler >> Canadian Beekeeper's Blog
    www.stepplerfarms.com

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: CCD Research

    'BeeWashing' is a term started by an author writing about Monsanto's Honey Bee Advisory Council (or was it a board?).

    It describes pretty much what the Council accomplished. "It's them Varroa!" they say, not pesticides.

    As for Randy's views on the EU neonic ban, we can pretty much surmise that he's saying that there's no proof that neonics cause bee deaths.

    What he's not saying is that there is evidence for translocation of pesticide contaminated talc dust, and that it's an environmental pollutant that can kill bees, among other organisms.

    That's BeeWashing.

    Regardless, the Harvard study was a big hit, and it's results were reported far and wide, 'Neonics cause CCD!'

    I can understand why Randy was upset by the headlines.

  13. #33
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Gladys, VA
    Posts
    91

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Interesting article.
    ----
    Joe

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

  15. #35
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    DFW area, TX, USA
    Posts
    1,016

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by gmcharlie View Post
    randy did what most researchers don't... He actually went to the fields... Where millions of us are dealing with the "issues" every day and have great bees..... Snip...... Huge respect for randy and his work...
    x2
    LeeB
    I try to learn from my mistakes, and from yours when you give me a heads up :)

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Lutz, FL, USA
    Posts
    77

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by sqkcrk View Post
    Who are you refering to?
    I'm referring to whomever is a bee keeper and advocating the use of pesticides. But if the boot fits... as I said I don't know anybody here. And no I don't use any chemicals (natural or otherwise) to treat my bees.


    Quote Originally Posted by jim lyon View Post
    Beekeepers are just one part of a larger and more complex agricultural picture.
    This is one ugly picture. I personally don't want to be a part of it.

    Jeesh, you three amigos were really happy to jump on my case and pat each other on the back for a good comeback. However I don't see anything in what you are saying to contradict anything I wrote. You said that
    : "It's a question not of whether pesticides kill insects, because of course they do, but rather a question of which chemical is the least damaging to bees." and another gentlemen was wringing his hands agonizing between his grain harvest and his bees. This is a perfect illustration for my statement of conflict of interests. If you are purely a beekeeper you won't be satisfied with the idea of anybody using anything that is "least" harmful for your bees. On the other hand, it you have vested interest in making money of the crop you would have interest in getting adequate return on your investment in which scenario bees become just one very small part of the equation. By itself it is neither bad or good. There can be numerous explanations about hardships of the modern farmer, the public dependance on the fruits of your labor, staying abreast with progress etc. However all that doesn't change the fact that you are impartial in the matter. It is a fact. And as John Adams said: "Facts are stubborn things"

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    26,230

    Default Re: CCD Research

    ArtSmart,
    Welcome to the beesource family,

    If you see my quest for clarification and understanding as "jump[ing] on [your] case" that wasn't my intention. Not my doing. Thanks for your reply.

    Do you see Randy Oliver's search for the facts as advocating the use of pesticides?
    Do you grow all of your own food?
    If you or anyone else can live eating food that has been grown never having any kind of pesticide, fungicide or whatever applied to it while growing that is only because or your wealth of circumstance. Only a select few in this World will find themselves in that category.
    Mark Berninghausen "That which works, persists."

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: CCD Research

    What some of you are ignoring is that Lu has replicated his study, and will hopefully publish his findings sooner than later.

    Some of you aren't aware of the French hypothesis concerning the cause of CCD. They hypothesized that neonic contaminated honey stores were the cause.

    Alex Lu found something similar in his first study.

    That's something the bee-washers dread: proof of the French hypothesis.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    26,230

    Default Re: CCD Research

    I gotta say that I don't respond well to name calling. For instance "you three amigos" and "Beewasher". Like the "old farts" comments from another newcomer, such name calling implies a certain disdain, or an unestablished and assumed familiarity between the parties, for those one may disagree with.
    Mark Berninghausen "That which works, persists."

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    26,230

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by WLC View Post
    What some of you are ignoring is that Lu has replicated his study, and will hopefully publish his findings sooner than later.

    Some of you aren't aware of the French hypothesis concerning the cause of CCD. They felt that neonic contaminated honey stores were the cause.

    Alex Lu found something similar in his first study.

    That's something the bee-washers dread: proof of the French hypothesis.
    "felt"? Since when is what one feels a substitute for established fact or proof? Are scientists now accepting a level of faith as good enough to maintain what a condition or effect is?
    Mark Berninghausen "That which works, persists."

Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

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