Slashdot Mirror
Studies Link Pesticides To Bee Colony Collapse Disorder
T Murphy writes "Neonicotinoid pesticides, designed to attack insects such as beetles and aphids, have been shown to harm bees' ability to navigate back to the hive. While initially assumed safe in low enough, non-fatal doses for bees, two papers have shown that may not be the case. Although the studies don't directly study the Colony Collapse Disorder, the scientists believe these pesticides are likely a contributing factor."
...lest they get sued by "big insecticide".
the Funny comment filter, but there's nothing funny in this.
I doubt this will change 'cause we're talking hugh chemical Compaines.
By time enough evidence is available, it'll be too late. This country should
err on the side of caution; not side with corporations.
Now if only they could come up with something like that for lawyers...
Considering the importance of bees to agriculture, I think the potential of any link between pesticides and colony collapses warrants both extreme concern and funding.
But hey, maybe you're looking forward to do the day we eat nothing but algal cultures or soylent green.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Considering the importance of bees to agriculture, I think the potential of any link between pesticides and colony collapses warrants both extreme concern and funding.
But hey, maybe you're looking forward to do the day we eat nothing but algal cultures or soylent green.
I'm looking forward to the day when we use logic and reason instead of emotion and fear to get science funding and sway public opinion.
Where the heck do you get "likely a contributing factor" == "everyone panic now! And give us more money."? This is how science works. These scientists are only publishing what their results will support and are not overstating the results. Other scientists will verify this work. Others (and possibly the same ones) will extend it if their conclusions have been shown to have validity.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Step 1: Make a moderately random statement based on tangential evidence.
Step 2: Panic inducing press release.
Step 3: Government research grants.
Step 4: Generate inconclusive results, with hints of doomsday.
Step 5: More Government research grants! (goto step 4 as needed)
And, as we all know, /. summaries are always, always 100% accurate, unbiased, and a fair and thorough representation of the issue.
God help you actually RTFA.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
I fail to see the problem with that, other than the fact you've erroneously thrown the word "panic" in there.
The food was modified by the owner (corporation) to produce the pesticide internally. Which kills the bugs, harms the bees, and gets ingested into your body where it causes intestinal bleeding (for young or old individuals).
Yummy. ;-)
Oh and family farmers that refuse to use this GMO food, and prefer to use natural seeds that are not impregnated with pesticide, are routinely accused of copyright or patent infringement by Monsanto and drug into court (where the lawyer fees bankrupt them).
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Following France and Germany, last year the Italian Agriculture Ministry suspended the use of a class of pesticides, nicotine-based neonicotinoids, as a "precautionary measure." The compelling results - restored bee populations - prompted the government to uphold the ban. Yesterday, copies of the film 'Nicotine Bees' were delivered to the US Congress explaining the pesticide's connection to Colony Collapse Disorder. Despite the evidence, why does CCD remain a 'mystery' in the US?
http://www.treehugger.com/clean-technology/nicotine-bees-population-restored-with-neonicotinoids-ban.html
If you knew anything about anything, you would have known that specific classes of pesticides, like the nicotinoids , have been linked to bee colony collapses for over a decade!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonicotinoid
But I guess these systemic insecticides are just fine. Too bad they migrate *into* the plant and you end up eating them.
It looks like there are still more studies needed if we really want to understand what is going on here.
The treated bees were about two to three times more likely to die while away from their nests, and the researchers said this was probably because the pesticide interfered with the bees' homing systems, so they couldn't find their way home.
That seems like quite the leap in logic, but I don't have the actual study in front of me. That pesticide harms bees sounds like a REALLY obvious conclusion, I kinda like bees and what they do for us.
We have a hypothesis so we want people to panic and give us funding
While I think it's unfair, I realize this has become the conventional meme for looking at all scientific results, but you should understand that colony collapse already has people panicking. If things continue to get worse, farmers that rely on bees are going to be wasting a lot of money soon.
Considering the importance of bees to agriculture, I think the potential of any link between pesticides and colony collapses warrants both extreme concern and funding.
Well, I don't think you read the article. There's a complicated situation here. It's not that the toxin is killing the bees directly but:
“So far, they mostly require manufacturers to ensure that doses encountered on the field do not kill bees, but they basically ignore the consequences of doses that do not kill them but may cause behavioral difficulties,”
So we have this situation where we believe a non-lethal dosage of this pesticide ruins the bee's ability to navigate back home which is a very serious problem. The real issue is that there's no way to quantify this and study it prior to releasing or approving a pesticide. So you have this situation where these folks are saying "we want to use technology to better our productivity in agriculture" and then you are levying unfathomable responsibility on the corporate giants who are developing said technologies. It's not as black and white as you make it out to be. I mean, how do you know that the pesticide doesn't make the bee a murderous backstabber in the colony years down the road?
I'm hesitant to comment on anything like this anymore, it got pretty ugly last time I asked follow up questions.
My work here is dung.
No problem, corn is wind pollinated so we'll still be able to live off of corn chips and high fructose corn syrup!
Several studies in the last year have indicated the same thing.
The evidence is stacking up pretty heavily at this point.
Nobody has panicked - these studies have been ongoing for the last couple years since the hypothesis was formed.
But, yes, there is some urgency in nailing it down before it starts affecting crop output.
> We have a hypothesis so we want people to panic and give us funding so we can actually see if there is a direct relationship
> between Colony Collapse Disorder
If you have been following the colony collapse story, you would already know that many entomologists suspect neonicotinoids as a possible part of the problem. Since pollination is a huge deal for agriculture, a lot of people really want to know the answer to CCD so it's not necessary to conjure up weird hypotheses to get funding. If you read any of the articles, you would also know that respected entomologists reviewing the papers thought they were well done.
Clearly you haven't been following CCD.
CCD is the effect of multiple factors in varying degress of severity. Pesticide/s, fungus, parasite/s, increasingly fluctuating local geographic weather patterns, all of these are playing a role in CCD. I'm skipping the specifics on these, since exactness varies from region to region, and in some cases per region, hive to hive.
Mmmmm soylent green.. Its whats for dinner.
This is so insane. Pesticides are designed to kill insects among other pests. Bees are insects so why the hell do we need another study!!!
Why do advertisers use sexy models? Because it works.
Why so scientists use FUD? Because it works.
You can't stop it anymore than you can stop teens from sneaking-out and from having sex. It's human nature to do what works to achieve the objective desired.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
I'm looking forward to the day when we use logic and reason instead of emotion and fear to get science funding and sway public opinion.
I am not sure if you are including this situation in your thinking. The logical move is to find alternative pesticides that do not harm the bees. Bees pollinate our crops in most areas of the world. We need them.
Both papers specifically study the effect of pesticides on bees. Colony collapse disorder is not even necessary to mention in the summary, not sure why he does.
The food was modified by the owner (corporation) to produce the pesticide internally.
False. These are water soluble pesticides that are included in the watering of plants and are easily translocated into the plant tissue as it grows. Alternatively they are applied to the soil or doused on seeds.
This is not the same as "roundup ready plants" which are GM plants that are resistant to roundup. You sound confused and appear to be bent on spreading fear about harm to humans who consume these plants.
My work here is dung.
Unfortunately, the politicians who control funding and public opinion don't understand logic and reasoning.
I am not sure if you are including this situation in your thinking. The logical move is to find alternative pesticides that do not harm the bees. Bees pollinate our crops in most areas of the world. We need them.
The logical move is to actually do a study before announcing that the pesticide is destroying bee colonies. Once we decide to start looking for an alternative to something that isn't proven to be doing harm we take away resources that could be used to find the real problem if it turns out our initial assumption was wrong. While we are all busy looking for a bee friendly pesticide we could be ignoring a fungus or a mite, giving them time to do even more damage.
Before anything gets done about it, and I'm guessing it's nearly impossible to get that rubber stamp because someone will always cry "We Need more Proof!".
-- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
Because he's a wanna corporate hack, that's why. Don't you know these days that if you suggest any evidence that a commercial product is harmful, you are in a funding conspiracy, possibly a vile leftist one?
They haven't announced that pesticides are destroying bee colonies, so your point is moot.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
WAIT! I thought colony collapse disorder was caused by cell phone radiation...the science was settled. Everyone agreed. How can this be? (bee?)
Scott
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
I'm looking forward to the day when we use logic and reason instead of emotion and fear to get science funding and sway public opinion.
There are several Utopian cults who promise what you seek, it is delivered right after the Kool-Aid is served.
This should be moderated as "+5 Troll" but that wasn't an option so I didn't know what to pick.
...that insecticide would have bad side effects on bees? What does one thing have to do with the other?
"Although the studies don't directly study the Colony Collapse Disorder, the scientists believe these pesticides are likely a contributing factor."
We have a hypothesis so we want people to panic and give us funding so we can actually see if there is a direct relationship between Colony Collapse Disorder.
And panic you should however this would conflict with the interests and lobbing investment of the CORN industry and their allies, the pesticides and petroleum industries. Wait aren't these the same companies funding the majority of the collage laboratories?? How much funding is needed to study France where the beekeeper striked and got the neonicotinoid pesticides banned. CCD is not nearly present as before. Let just sit and wait to let the politician weigh in on it -NOT. As a not for profit beekeeper I say again "Panic you should".
The logical move would be to read and understand the research before making things up. The scientists have said these classes of pesticides might be the cause and more study is warranted. If they are right the next move is what to do which may include limiting the usage of these pesticides or their methods of dispersal.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Since the papers are behind a Science paywall, I can't tell: Do the papers actually mention a connection to Colony Collapse Disorder? All I see is the mainstream press articles making that extrapolation.
Sadly, while soylent green is predominantly people, another key ingredient is honey.
Of course if you follow your logic. We would ban everything until we can prove it is safe. Pesticides are used to keep bad bugs off the crops, It was formulated with due diligence to not kill the bees. However there is some preliminary research that may mean there is an unknown side effect, and it should be studied. However this public statement that this Hypothesis may be a major factor, will only cause the wrong people to action. People who have bought the pesticides will still use it until they are told to stop, the same with producers. And they will fight tooth and nail until they got real evidence. In the meantime the Stupid Idiots will be protesting and creating a ruckus and taking the Hypothesis as fact, and if evidence proves that the Hypothesis is wrong then it is part of some conspiracy, in the mean times companies will need to retool just to silent the Idiots.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Logic and reason say that bees are critical to agriculture and doing nothing about colony collapse, not investigating possible causes, could have dire consequences.
Is spelling out those possible consequences an appeal to emotion and fear? Maybe. If it wasn't needed then the plain and obvious logic would have already had the effect you desire.
The enemies of Democracy are
And why is that wrong? It's the only way to get any science funded these days. I suppose they could go the whole evangelical "God wants you to give me your social security check" route, but that has a few ethical issues.
That's one of those +5 Informatrollightfull comments.
So aka, don't publish findings to try to secure grants for further research until said research is already done. Makes sense.
I didn't see anything calling for a ban. Just a possible link. I haven't even seen anyone saying they should ban it. I personally think it should be used more sparingly than it was before since there is a potential link since bees are so important to agriculture and the Colony Collapse disorder is a real major concern. If research shows that there is no real connection I don't see anything wrong with continuing to use it and if research shows there is a link, we need to stop using it. If a drug has shown a possible link to cancer in the majority of patients it is prescribed to, how would you feel about your doctor prescribing it to you if he knew that ongoing research was being done on the potential safety of the drug? It wouldn't be banned but I would prefer my doctor prescribe an alternative medication.
No, the logical move is to develop sustainable agriculture practices that don't need to rely on pesticides. By definition, any pesticide is poison, and will certainly affect something else down the line. Even if we find an alternative pesticide that does not harm the bees, it will harm something else.
The sudden and drastic drop in the bee population has been ongoing for a few years now, and to date, no one has had a solid explanation for it. That an important part of our own food chain is rapidly and inexplicably disappearing in large numbers should be cause for panic. These studies point the researchers in a new direction. That's actually good news, as it may be bringing us closer to the real cause.
I should mention that I am old enough to remember when idiots like you were dismissing the systemic impact of DDT with similar language, whe all the birds began disappearing.
How much funding is necessary to stop buying pesticides? Seems like anti-funding.
But in my heart place I want to see everyone of those fuckers die in agony
Why so scientists use FUD? Because it works.
And it destroys scientific literacy in the process.
The logical move is to actually do a study before announcing that the pesticide is destroying bee colonies.
Agreed. And the logical move is to get funding in order to perform the study. Research like this usually means getting funding from the government (i.e. politicians). So, the logical move by the scientists was to point out and say, "hey someone found a possible relationship here, we should investigate this further." And that's exactly what happened.
It's typical conservative projecting. They think everything is a scheme to make money because with them pretty much everything is a scheme to make money. They think science is about power because everything is about power.
Also, the tendency to embrace simple answers to complex problems completely precludes understanding statements that essentially mean "I don't totally understand this situation, but I have knowledge/experience/research that makes me believe it might have something to do with X. It should be studied further to find out if that's true or not."
To a conservative that's weak because conservatives KNOW what's right and wrong and any evidence to the contrary is just ivory tower liberal thinking. That's especially true when the possible or probable conclusion would result in having to change behaviors, particularly profitable behaviors.
I'm looking forward to the day when we use logic and reason instead of emotion and fear to get science funding and sway public opinion.
Well, here's hoping the public starts responding to logic and science more than fear and PR. Bees pollinate 90% of the worlds crops, and they're dying out quickly. We need to identify why they're failing and then protect them or else we're going to face big food shortages. I don't care how it gets sold to the public or even IF it gets sold to the public. It's fine with me if tax dollars are spent on this research without the public even realizing it, so long as that doesn't jeopardize it.
If that sounds elitist, sorry, but I really stopped valuing public opinion when public opinion said we should invade Iraq because Saddam had a bunch of WMD and was behind the 9/11 attacks.
Of course if you follow your logic. We would ban everything until we can prove it is safe.
I love it when "by that logic..." statements don't even try to follow the logic that was presented, but this one is even better because there was no logic regarding banning products provided at all!
The enemies of Democracy are
Your overreaction is the exact root of the problem which you describe in others. The article makes it clear that scientists might have a cause to the bee problem and further study is required. You have taken it to cause panic (which has not happened) and bans (which were never suggested).
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
If all they want is money to study to see if there is a relationship between these pesticides and Colony Collapse Disorder, I do not have a problem with that. If, on the other hand, they want to ban the use of these pesticides on the basis of the study they have already done, I have a problem with that.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
I have it on pretty good authority that a leaf blower works just as well for this task, if not better.
Why so scientists use FUD? Because it works.
And it destroys scientific literacy in the process.
Not as much as vaccines. They destroy scientific literacy more than anything.
My, that is a very nice man made of straw you have there!
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
If we lose bees, we do not lose all our crops overnight.
What happens instead is that the number of humans we have to devote to food production increases dramatically. Without bees or a decent substitute for bees, we would have to pollinate crops by hand, which is a very labor-intensive process. While this will not result in human extinction overnight, we are talking about a very drastic change in the kinds of civilizations we are capable of having. The less of your population you have to devote to food production, the more advanced your civilization can be.
If we had to suddenly devote a lot more human labor to food production, there would be profound effects for all of us for generations to come. We're talking about pretty scary stuff, but nowhere near as extreme as the complete loss of agriculture overnight.
This is very serious stuff, and I think we should err on the side of caution and ban these pesticides, but suggesting the instant loss of regular plant-based agriculture is a bit Henny Penny.
Hey, fun fact, there are currently ~7 billion people alive today, largely due to industrial agriculture practices such as pesticides. Without them we could not produce nearly as much food as we do as cheaply as we do. So, keeping that in mind, what do you suggest we do in the interim while waiting for pesticide-free agriculture practices to develop?
I'm looking forward to the day when we use logic and reason instead of emotion and fear
This applies to everything, but it isn't likely to happen anytime soon.
I'd be glad if we used logic and reason for a lot of things, not just science:
* Education
* Health care
* Public policy
* Foreign policy
* The military
I could list so much that I would run out of space.
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Hey, there, snarkopotamous. Did I say to stop all current agricultural practices RIGHT THE FUCK NOW so we can all step as one into the bright utopian future?
No, I did not.
It's this type of blatant refusal to address issues coherently and the related knee-jerk argumentativeness that keeps progress from being made.
Fun fact: a hell of a lot of those 7billion people who are alive today are very slowly and painfully starving because the system that IS in place doesn't adequately meet their needs anyway.
Also, cheap food is typically less nutritious, as well. What do I propose we do? Anything at all. But people like you try to reframe the discussion, so I suppose we'll just sit on our hands and do nothing, year after year. Which is what we are doing anyway.
Ho hum.
We'll also still have vanilla, onions, potatoes and paw paw which is pollinated by other insects.
The real funding is all going to go towards developing a super bee that is resistant to pesticides kind of like when they made africanized honey bees. Our kind of science prefers the costly solution with unknown results over the obvious one.
Not sure what that guy drank, but I think it warrants further investigation as some of the users on this site may also be drinking it... :-)
It should be banned now so industry can get right to work testing something even more harmful on their crops.
I mentioned colony collapse both due to various mainstream news articles mentioning it, and because when looking to find links to the papers the first thing I came across was another article from the same issue, mentioning colony collapse and talking about these papers. I do not have access to Science so I cannot see the full text, but I assumed the newspapers were drawing from this guy's report. The summary provided does not explicitly connect these studies to CCD, so it would be helpful if someone with access could let us know if the newspapers were overdoing the CCD angle.
That said, if these pesticides are widely used, and they do cause navigation problems for bees, it would make sense that they would be at least aggrevating the CCD problem, if not a root cause.
My webcomic
That's a high enough bar to still call it a "study"? That may not be the case.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
. . . which means that even if you stop using the pesticides, the trees are going to get you. And if you are going to go after the trees out of self-defense, that also puts the bees in a tight spot which, then, could spiral out of control and lead to a . . . script for an M Night Shyamlan sequel. Either way we're screwed.
Monsanto bees!
More likely we'll get a panic and a grossly inappropriate reaction. Tar and feather some chemists!
You are going to leave blow all the plants in the world?
This may be true, but the extent to which we are responsible and can do something about it is pretty much the extent to which we kill bees with pesticides, along with the overworking and transport of colonies.
Korma: Good