# CCD triggered not just by pesticides, but also by GMO high-fructose corn syrup



## PatBeek (Jan 13, 2012)

.

On a related note, here's another brand new article:

*Blamed for Bee Collapse, Monsanto Buys Leading Bee Research Firm*

.


----------



## jonathan (Nov 3, 2009)

The Harvard study has been discussed to death here and on Bee-L already and anyone who has taken the time to read it can see immediately that it is hopelessly flawed. Imidacloprid is used on only half of one percent of US corn and the dosage administered in the study were massively higher than field realistic level.
The Monsanto purchase of Beelogics is old news from last September. 
These are two poorly written articles riddled with inaccuracy and conspiracy theory.


----------



## HMike (Mar 11, 2012)

jonathan said:


> The Harvard study has been discussed to death here and on Bee-L already and anyone who has taken the time to read it can see immediately that it is hopelessly flawed. Imidacloprid is used on only half of one percent of US corn and the dosage administered in the study were massively higher than field realistic level.


The study seems statistically weak and very short term: "Over a 23-week period, they monitored bees in four different bee yards; each yard had four hives treated with different levels of imidacloprid and one control hive." And it would seem that in linking imidacloprid to corn, they have made a serious mistake since it is used on citrus, coffee, cotton, fruits, grapes, potatoes, rice, soybeans, sugarcane, tobacco and vegetables. According to Bayer, over the past 8 years, the annual percentage of total corn acres in the U.S. treated with imidacloprid has been less than half a percent. If they were looking for a corn link, they should have looked at clothianidin. Clothianidin and imidacloprid are related though: they are members of a class of insecticides know as neonicotinoids which affect the central nervous system of insects.


----------



## BeeTech (Mar 19, 2012)

PatBeek said:


> .
> 
> On a related note, here's another brand new article:
> 
> ...


There are at least two possible reasons for this aquisition
1) They want to use their new ownership co-opt or suppress a dissident voice.
2) They want to rapidly acquire expertise in an area they may be weak in.

the article seems to assume the first without even an argument. Since we can now assume that they are aprt of the research efforts of a private for-profit corporation it is safe to assume that any future results stand a high probability of being proprietary and not disclosed. It may be difficult to determine which reason was their motivating factor. We will need to watch to see what they do with it. I see no justification for assuming the worst.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Pat: Well at least it's on the treatment free forum but pretty sure even the most dedicated treatment free advocate realizes how laughable pretty much everything in the op is. But "75% of the honey sold is nothing more than HFCS" ????? There's your sign to tune out folks.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

I just tuned in, and now I have to tune out.


----------



## jmgi (Jan 15, 2009)

I don't think anyone can put a reliable percentage on it, but there is no doubt in my mind that when money is involved, there are some people out there that can't resist cheating. Whether is be a producer or packer, I know it has happened where honey has been cut with HFCS, but lets not let the word get out to the average consumer, and when a consumer brings it up lets just blow it off as poor and inaccurate journalism. Sorry for getting off topic a bit. John


----------



## PatBeek (Jan 13, 2012)

I can't prove it, but I'm willing to bet it's even far worse than the studies show and the articles portrayed.

I'm not here to make enemies because I respect all of your knowledge, but we have hardcore criminals in charge of government and major corporations at this point.

I'm not going to beat a dead horse and argue about it all, but the situation is dire on so many levels - not just bees and CCD.

Again, please don't take my opinion as being antagonistic toward anyone here. We're all on the same team and want the same stuff.


----------



## DLMKA (Feb 7, 2012)

I take everything I read on Natural News with a grain of salt. Too much fear-mongering and propoganda to be taken serious.


----------



## StevenG (Mar 27, 2009)

Weak studies plus weak assumptions equals false conclusions and alarmist rhetoric. "75% of all honey is hfcs?" really? who did the testing, and where is the proof? :gh:
Regards,
Steven


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

Most packers test for HFCS don't they?


----------



## JD's Bees (Nov 25, 2011)

If CCD is caused by HFCS how do these dead and dying colonies produce 75% of the honey on store shelves?


----------

