Bees in danger - it's not just one chemical

[Mikko-kun]

And bmk, from your own link, the second one..

The disappearance of bee colonies began accelerating in the United States shortly after the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allowed these new insecticides on the market in the mid-2000s. Last month, beekeepers and environmental groups filed a lawsuit against the agency over its failure to protect bees from these toxic pesticides.

Meanwhile, France has banned Imidacloprid for use on corn and sunflowers after reporting large losses of bees after exposure to it. They also rejected Bayer´s application for Clothianidin, and other countries, such as Italy, have banned certain neonicotinoids as well.

The EPA³ acknowledges that “pesticide poisoning” may be one factor leading to colony collapse disorder, yet they have been slow to act to protect bees from this threat. The current lawsuit may help spur them toward more urgent action, which is desperately needed as the food supply hangs in the balance.

No point for you, because you dont see one if it doesn't fit your agenda. Or prove me wrong in that?

[bmk1245]

I would not be surprised that he is, as nobody tells us why urban beekeeping is quite successful and the critters are mostly dying in rural areas... and the more GMO in the area the bigger the number of colonies affected.

Those are the facts that nobody addresses in all this "yaddah yaddah yaddah we are saving the world".

Then how does it fit to the picture that bees in rural areas die more than in cities? Unless they use more cell phones in rural areas or can block the signals to beehives in city farms.

[...]

Where did you got that? Its deception propaganda spread by mobile communication companies.

See? Thats easy... As I did said already.

[bmk1245]

And bmk, from your own link, the second one..

No point for you, because you dont see one if it doesn't fit your agenda. Or prove me wrong in that?

What neonicotinoids have to do with GMOs? But lets see what situation will be after 2 year ban in EU on particular neonicotinoid insecticides. And if CCD will continue, or even worsens, what then? Of course, GMOs will be to blame... Edited August 28, 2013 by bmk1245

[questionmark]

Where did you got that? Its deception propaganda spread by mobile communication companies.

See? Thats easy... As I did said already.

We knew you would as you have shown more than once that as soon as Mon(un)santo is mentioned your interest in facts decreases radically.

[bmk1245]

We knew you would as you have shown more than once that as soon as Mon(un)santo is mentioned your interest in facts decreases radically.

What facts? "Facts" manufactured by mobile communication companies and their shills^[*] to cover their a****?

Edit to add [*]

Edited August 28, 2013 by bmk1245

[questionmark]

What facts? "Facts" manufactured by mobile communication companies and their shills^[*] to cover their a****?

Edit to add [*]

Next time I go out into the Northern hills of the island I'll bring you a picture of hives right below a mast. And no CCD. Besides that, in urban areas there are many more mobile communication devices and transceivers.

Try again.

[bmk1245]

Next time I go out into the Northern hills of the island I'll bring you a picture of hives right below a mast. And no CCD. Besides that, in urban areas there are many more mobile communication devices and transceivers.

[...]

Right, you will bring hives to the mast, will take pictures, and then will transport hives far away from the mast again... Money from mobile companies can do a lot.

[Guest]

Right, you will bring hives to the mast, will take pictures, and then will transport hives far away from the mast again... Money from mobile companies can do a lot.

Desperate stuff from a desperate shill.

Br Cornelius

[questionmark]

Right, you will bring hives to the mast, will take pictures, and then will transport hives far away from the mast again... Money from mobile companies can do a lot.

Right, I am just like you.

[Mikko-kun]

Bloody hell bmk, you think this is all a joke? Do you have a reading comprehension disorder or something? Here's a link you gave us, http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/06/08/bees-dying-off.aspx , there it says:

What’s Causing Bees to Die?

Proposed culprits of bee colony collapse disorder include:

This result was duplicated in 2009 by

Sainuddeen Pattazhy

, a researcher and dean in the department of zoology at SN College, Punalur, Kerala. His experiments showed that microwaves from mobile phones appear to interfere with worker bees' navigation skills. When cell phones were placed near beehives, the hives collapsed completely in five to 10 days. The worker bees simply failed to return home.

More recently, a study

²

published in 2011 found that the presence of microwaves from cell phones have a dramatic effect on bees, causing them to become quite disturbed.

• Pesticides and insecticides
  —Nicotinoids such as Imidacloprid and Clothianidin kills insects by attacking their nervous systems. These are known to get into pollen and nectar, and can damage beneficial insects such as bees.
  
  
• Malnutrition/Nutritional deficiencies
  —Many beekeepers place the hives near fields of identical crops, which may result in malnutrition as the bees are only getting one type of nectar. Essentially, this theory is identical to that of human nutrition; we need a wide variety of nutrients from different foods. If you keep eating the same limited range of foods, you can easily end up suffering from nutritional deficiencies. Poor nutrition suppresses immune function, making the bees far more susceptible to toxins from pesticides, viruses, fungi, or a combination of factors that ultimately kill them.
  
  
• Viruses and fungi—
  There's even the possibility that some new form of "AIDS-like" viral infection is affecting the bees.
  
  
• Electromagnetic fields (EMFs)
  —Researchers have discovered that when a cellular phone is placed near a hive, the radiation generated by it (900-1,800 MHz) is enough to prevent bees from returning to them, according to a study conducted at Landau University several years ago.
  ¹
  
  
• Lack of natural foraging areas—
  Mass
  conversions of grasslands
  to corn and soy in the Midwest has dramatically reduced bees’ natural foraging areas
  
  

As well as

The disappearance of bee colonies began accelerating in the United States shortly after the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allowed these new insecticides on the market in the mid-2000s. Last month, beekeepers and environmental groups filed a lawsuit against the agency over its failure to protect bees from these toxic pesticides.

Meanwhile, France has banned Imidacloprid for use on corn and sunflowers after reporting large losses of bees after exposure to it. They also rejected Bayer´s application for Clothianidin, and other countries, such as Italy, have banned certain neonicotinoids as well.

The EPA³ acknowledges that “pesticide poisoning” may be one factor leading to colony collapse disorder, yet they have been slow to act to protect bees from this threat. The current lawsuit may help spur them toward more urgent action, which is desperately needed as the food supply hangs in the balance.

The part I already quoted for you from the same link, the link you gave us in post #98. I dont see how else we should interpret it as your proof of that cellular phones are to blame. Yet if you bother to read your own bloody link, it blatantly clearly says it's too early to consider them the only cause, that they quite likely are far from the only cause. Maybe you can interpret it as "it's all because of cellular phones" but really?

[questionmark]

Bloody hell bmk, you think this is all a joke? Do you have a reading comprehension disorder or something? Here's a link you gave us, http://articles.merc...-dying-off.aspx , there it says:

As well as

The part I already quoted for you from the same link, the link you gave us in post #98. I dont see how else we should interpret it as your proof of that cellular phones are to blame. Yet if you bother to read your own bloody link, it blatantly clearly says it's too early to consider them the only cause, that they quite likely are far from the only cause. Maybe you can interpret it as "it's all because of cellular phones" but really?

Putting a several Watt strong cellphone in a beehive is certainly not the same as having a cellphone somewhere in the vicinity, electromagnetic radiation strength decreases geometrically with distance. After a few meters you need pretty sensitive equipment (such as a radio receiver that works with micro watts as input) to detect it. If you take a microwave oven transmitter and put it over a hive you will even cook the bees.

So blaming it on cellphones is about as ludicrous as blaming falling trees in the Amazon forest. Yes, there is an effect but hardly a noticeable one. Radar stations (that work in similar frequency ranges but with kilowatt power) could be a more likely suspect. Besides if it were cellphones, as I have pointed out a few times, bee colonies would more likely collapse there where there are the most of them: In urban areas. Well, given that in the US urban areas seem to be the last places where bees are safe kind of proves the contrary, does it not?

And besides that neighbor of mine that has his hives within 20 yards of one of our local cellphone transmitters (without complaints) unless I can sneak out of the house Mrs. questionmark always makes me carry my cell when I go out in the fields, so far I have noticed no difference between having it on me or not having it.

It is pesticides and insecticides in at least 90% of the cases,and I wager that it is the excessive use of pesticides and insecticides that is more likely to blame than the simple use of them. Where my critique towards a certain GM pushing company stems from: Insecticide and pesticide is not a necessary evil for them but the centerpiece of their production philosophy.

[bmk1245]

Wow... Heh, its like take a cookie from 3-year old...

Bloody hell bmk, you think this is all a joke? Do you have a reading comprehension disorder or something? Here's a link you gave us, http://articles.merc...-dying-off.aspx , there it says:

As well as

The part I already quoted for you from the same link, the link you gave us in post #98. I dont see how else we should interpret it as your proof of that cellular phones are to blame. Yet if you bother to read your own bloody link, it blatantly clearly says it's too early to consider them the only cause, that they quite likely are far from the only cause. Maybe you can interpret it as "it's all because of cellular phones" but really?

Loosing temper, aren't we? What happened to your "You can replace being poor debater with persistence and offensiveness, as long as you know where you walk, it seems", huh? You did not brought proof that long term exposure to certain EM frequencies (and lower levels) does not affect bees, so far... (Heck, look below)

Putting a several Watt strong cellphone in a beehive is certainly not the same as having a cellphone somewhere in the vicinity, electromagnetic radiation strength decreases geometrically with distance. After a few meters you need pretty sensitive equipment (such as a radio receiver that works with micro watts as input) to detect it. If you take a microwave oven transmitter and put it over a hive you will even cook the bees.

So blaming it on cellphones is about as ludicrous as blaming falling trees in the Amazon forest. Yes, there is an effect but hardly a noticeable one. Radar stations (that work in similar frequency ranges but with kilowatt power) could be a more likely suspect. Besides if it were cellphones, as I have pointed out a few times, bee colonies would more likely collapse there where there are the most of them: In urban areas. Well, given that in the US urban areas seem to be the last places where bees are safe kind of proves the contrary, does it not?

And besides that neighbor of mine that has his hives within 20 yards of one of our local cellphone transmitters (without complaints) unless I can sneak out of the house Mrs. questionmark always makes me carry my cell when I go out in the fields, so far I have noticed no difference between having it on me or not having it.

It is pesticides and insecticides in at least 90% of the cases,and I wager that it is the excessive use of pesticides and insecticides that is more likely to blame than the simple use of them. Where my critique towards a certain GM pushing company stems from: Insecticide and pesticide is not a necessary evil for them but the centerpiece of their production philosophy.

Holy... Ok, since you can't conceive message I've been trying to bring since my reply to Mikko in my post #98 (with replies to QM), I'll go further: Seriously?! Where are the long term studies on EM effects on bees with lower levels of exposure (personal anecdotes do not count)? And yeah, having radars working on the same frequencies as cellular networks would be nice...

PS, with "It is pesticides and insecticides in at least 90%" I'll try to deal later.

BTW, me, bringing (here is the hint) "supporting material" from J.Mercola (well known cranky quack), should had set all alarm bells ringing wildly... Yet...

[Mikko-kun]

Answer my post before properly instead of insulting me and saying things like "jedi stuff, bs" if you want to talk with me, and stop being condescending and trying to make me the scapegoat here. Else we have nothing else to talk about, you and me.

Edited August 30, 2013 by Mikko-kun

[bmk1245]

Answer my post before properly instead of insulting me and saying things like "jedi stuff, bs" if you want to talk with me, and stop being condescending and trying to make me the scapegoat here. Else we have nothing else to talk about, you and me.

Condescending? Slightly... Insults? Where do you see insults?! Honestly, I'm frightened to use "Its easy" from now on (unless you are J.Mercola)...

On the topic, I just gave you your own medicine, i.e. blaming everything on single (or two) thing(s) (be it pesticides or GMOs); I could've been going on with CCD-EM connection endlessly with "Where are the long term studies" and similar crap. Do I see EM as contributor to CCD? No. Do I see some pesticides as contributors (at some extent) to CCD? Yes. Do I see some natural pesticides (allowed in organic farming) contributing to CCD (at some extent)? Yes. Do some pesticides (certain neonicotinoids particularly) affect bees? No doubt about that - they do. Question is - at what extent they do contribute to CCD? 90% percents as QM claims? Where is the proof? What caused similar disappearances In 1891 and 1896 in Colorado? Pesticides? GMO? Certainly no. CCD is a complex problem, and blatantly blaming just on one cause is shortsighted and stupid.

BTW, (and I'm trying not to bring some insulting word combination) what if nature just started to clean up not natural deeds of human kind? Honey bees are invasive species in US after all...

[questionmark]

Wow... Heh, its like take a cookie from 3-year old...

Loosing temper, aren't we? What happened to your "You can replace being poor debater with persistence and offensiveness, as long as you know where you walk, it seems", huh? You did not brought proof that long term exposure to certain EM frequencies (and lower levels) does not affect bees, so far... (Heck, look below)

Holy... Ok, since you can't conceive message I've been trying to bring since my reply to Mikko in my post #98 (with replies to QM), I'll go further: Seriously?! Where are the long term studies on EM effects on bees with lower levels of exposure (personal anecdotes do not count)? And yeah, having radars working on the same frequencies as cellular networks would be nice...

PS, with "It is pesticides and insecticides in at least 90%" I'll try to deal later.

BTW, me, bringing (here is the hint) "supporting material" from J.Mercola (well known cranky quack), should had set all alarm bells ringing wildly... Yet...

Could you please quote some long time studies that actually were published peer reviewed regarding bees and cellphones? If you want to talk about quackery you should put up or shut up. Or are you making use of the usual quack-a-day New Age crap?

[bmk1245]

Could you please quote some long time studies that actually were published peer reviewed regarding bees and cellphones? If you want to talk about quackery you should put up or shut up. Or are you making use of the usual quack-a-day New Age crap?

Oh... I already expressed my opinion to Mikko... But if you want to play along - bring long term studies that show EM is no harm for bees. Do it.

Honestly, WTF? You can't see message I'm trying to convey? Read my (efking) responses starting from #98 . Do I have to highlight what I have meant?!

Seriously, QM, I thought you are more reasonable.

[questionmark]

Oh... I already expressed my opinion to Mikko... But if you want to play along - bring long term studies that show EM is no harm for bees. Do it.

Honestly, WTF? You can't see message I'm trying to convey? Read my (efking) responses starting from #98 . Do I have to highlight what I have meant?!

Seriously, QM, I thought you are more reasonable.

This is not a question of reason, this is a question of demonstrability, and may I ask you again to put up or admit that you were talking out of an orifice other than your mouth?

We all know that microwaves are harmful, in large amounts. It has been demonstrated again and again, including in peer reviewed publications, that the radiation coming from either a cellphone or a cellphone transceiver is not strong enough to cause any harm to anything unless put into the bee hive. The only paper that we could consider peer reviewed with acceptable methodology did not relate to CCD, regardless of what the Independent published, it related to the productivity decrease of bee queens. Original quote of one of the researchers "Our study was way before CCD and is not intended to claim the answer for that problem," wrote Stefan Kimmeltant, Kuhn's research assistant, in an e-mail to the newspaper. "I cannot say anything about a link between radiation and CCD." (Source)

The whole thing was misrepresented, and evidently is being kept misrepresented by interested party incapable or unwilling to quote a single paper showing a relationship between CCD and cellphones.

On the other hand, many show a relationship between CCD and pesticides published among others in Science (04/2012), Science Express (same time) and by Purdue (01/2012) and those are just the ones I remember offhand without having to look it up.

[bmk1245]

This is not a question of reason, this is a question of demonstrability, and may I ask you again to put up or admit that you were talking out of an orifice other than your mouth?

We all know that microwaves are harmful, in large amounts. It has been demonstrated again and again, including in peer reviewed publications, that the radiation coming from either a cellphone or a cellphone transceiver is not strong enough to cause any harm to anything unless put into the bee hive. The only paper that we could consider peer reviewed with acceptable methodology did not relate to CCD, regardless of what the Independent published, it related to the productivity decrease of bee queens. Original quote of one of the researchers "Our study was way before CCD and is not intended to claim the answer for that problem," wrote Stefan Kimmeltant, Kuhn's research assistant, in an e-mail to the newspaper. "I cannot say anything about a link between radiation and CCD." (Source)

The whole thing was misrepresented, and evidently is being kept misrepresented by interested party incapable or unwilling to quote a single paper showing a relationship between CCD and cellphones.

On the other hand, many show a relationship between CCD and pesticides published among others in Science (04/2012), Science Express (same time) and by Purdue (01/2012) and those are just the ones I remember offhand without having to look it up.

For the love of Perkunas/whatever Gods you believe in...

What in my "Do I see EM as contributor to CCD? No" makes you drag cellphones in again?!

Do I have to say explicitly: I don't see EM as major (and minor) contributor to CCD?

Again: should I highlight essential points in my post #98???

Edit to add: can you bring long term EM effects on bees?

In case you will not understand my point again - its just question similar to one of the questions anti-GM are asking for.

Edited August 30, 2013 by bmk1245

[questionmark]

For the love of Perkunas/whatever Gods you believe in...

What in my "Do I see EM as contributor to CCD? No" makes you drag cellphones in again?!

Do I have to say explicitly: I don't see EM as major (and minor) contributor to CCD?

Again: should I highlight essential points in my post #98???

Again: put up or admits.

I am tired of boolkrappy.

[bmk1245]

Again: put up or admits.

[...]

What exactly?

[...]

I am tired of boolkrappy.

Same here.

[Rafterman]

Next time I go out into the Northern hills of the island I'll bring you a picture of hives right below a mast. And no CCD. Besides that, in urban areas there are many more mobile communication devices and transceivers.

Try again.

Damn, how did I miss the mobile phone shill money?

I'll have to check that out since I'm already getting the Monsanto, Big Pharma, Fracking, and Illuminati paydays.

[Rafterman]

On a serious note, I'd be interested in folks' take on this article from the Ottawa Citizen:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/There+crisis/8860471/story.html

There is no bee crisis

Contrary to what you may have heard, there is no “bee-pocalypse.” There is lots of alarmist talk about colony collapse disorder, people are blaming pesticides and talking about hundreds of billions of dollars at risk. But a closer look tells a very different story.

Yes, honeybees are dying in above-average numbers, but the most likely cause is the varroa mite and associated viruses.

Moreover, if you look at the actual numbers, they undermine much of the catastrophic rhetoric. In the United States, where we have good data, beekeepers have adapted to CCD. Colony numbers were higher in 2010 than any year since 1999. The beekeepers are not passive victims.

Instead, they have actively rebuilt their colonies in response to increased mortality from CCD. Although average winter mortality rates have increased from around 15 per cent before 2006 to more than 30 per cent, beekeepers have been able to adapt to these changes at fairly low cost and to maintain colony numbers.

[Guest]

Damn, how did I miss the mobile phone shill money?

I'll have to check that out since I'm already getting the Monsanto, Big Pharma, Fracking, and Illuminati paydays.

Honesty for once

Br Cornelius

[Guest]

On a serious note, I'd be interested in folks' take on this article from the Ottawa Citizen:

http://www.ottawacit...0471/story.html

There is no bee crisis

Contrary to what you may have heard, there is no “bee-pocalypse.” There is lots of alarmist talk about colony collapse disorder, people are blaming pesticides and talking about hundreds of billions of dollars at risk. But a closer look tells a very different story.

Yes, honeybees are dying in above-average numbers, but the most likely cause is the varroa mite and associated viruses.

Moreover, if you look at the actual numbers, they undermine much of the catastrophic rhetoric. In the United States, where we have good data, beekeepers have adapted to CCD. Colony numbers were higher in 2010 than any year since 1999. The beekeepers are not passive victims.

Instead, they have actively rebuilt their colonies in response to increased mortality from CCD. Although average winter mortality rates have increased from around 15 per cent before 2006 to more than 30 per cent, beekeepers have been able to adapt to these changes at fairly low cost and to maintain colony numbers.

Bjorn Lomborg, need I say more.

Br Cornelius

[questionmark]

The way to do that is Bjorn Lomborg