# It's never enough



## Vance G (Jan 6, 2011)

Since I do not live in an area of heavy pesticide usage I have not seen these millions of bees dying. I do not know what is right but I do know an awful lot of idiots immediately jump on any bandwagon to bring us better living thru yet more guvmint regulation.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Haraga said:


> studies show that bee-killing pesticides do nothing to increase crop yields.


That's interesting could you please provide a link or two to them?


----------



## Paulemar (Aug 28, 2013)

How in heavens name did bees ever manage to survive prior to Varroa, when it was supposed to be easy to have bees? It seems to me that those were also the times when there were so many more, now banned, deadly toxic pesticides in use.


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> That's interesting could you please provide a link or two to them?


Oldtimer I just copied and pasted an email that was sent to me.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Oh.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

Vance G said:


> Since I do not live in an area of heavy pesticide usage I have not seen these millions of bees dying. I do not know what is right but I do know an awful lot of idiots immediately jump on any bandwagon to bring us better living thru yet more guvmint regulation.


It happens. Yet again, govmint regulation is the difference between us and warlordism.

Mike (UK)


----------



## JTGaraas (Jun 7, 2014)

Words have meanings, and it is important how the words are put together when attempting to make points.

The quoted language ("studies show that bee-killing pesticides do nothing to increase crop yields") is true, but totally misleading in the context of the discussion! Pesticides kill insects, they do not "increase crop yields". Pesticides have effect upon insects, not the planted crop (wheat, corn, soybeans, etc.). Hence, the quoted language could possibly have originated in some regulatory discussion where the lawyer/scientst/lobbiest/witness was trying to be clever and truthful.

It is my belief that studies will show that Chevrolets do nothing to increase crop yields, but is that "truth" an important observation?

Pesticide usage may have an effect on crop yields, but the chemical itself will not act as some nutrient to "increase" the number of seeds produced by the plant (to the best of my knowledge, except I suspect that too much pesticide may well kill plants too).

My point - listen, but do not blindly accept, or repeat "truths" in the wrong context.


----------



## philip.devos (Aug 10, 2013)

mike bispham said:


> It happens. Yet again, govmint regulation is the difference between us and warlordism.
> 
> Mike (UK)


Wrong Mike. Government IS THE WARLORD.

Phil


----------



## philip.devos (Aug 10, 2013)

"STUDIES SHOW..." 

Whenever someone uses the phrase "studies show.." you can be pretty confident that there are either NO STUDIES or that the conclusions of the studies were formed before the studies were studied.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

If the purveyors of this email got any money, do we have any feedback about what they did with it?

Is there anything to stop someone concocting such an email, and pocketing the money?


----------



## BernhardHeuvel (Mar 13, 2013)

Oldtimer said:


> That's interesting could you please provide a link or two to them?


We already discussed this one: http://www2.epa.gov/sites/productio...d_seed_treatments_to_soybean_production_2.pdf

Sure there are more like this one.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Well that was certainly an interesting read Bernhard.

However as it relates to the email in the opening post, the email is deceptive at best.

The study you linked found there is little benefit to seed treatments in soyabeans, in most circumstances, and foliar insecticides can get better results. 

This is a whole different kettle of fish from the statement in the email "studies show that bee-killing pesticides do nothing to increase crop yields". Crops, include corn and everything else, not just soyabeans.

An honest statement in the email, would have been that a study, in soyabeans only, has shown that seed treatment alone, does not get as much benefit as foliar treatment applied later.

Course, that level of honesty would not have helped pull the dollars.


I can understand beekeepers wanting a world without poisons. Even I have lost bees to poisons, it's discouraging. But the problem with this greeny literature like the email in the OP is the dishonesty and simplification that seems to permeate it. When a statement is made implying pesticides do not increase yields, most people know that to be false and that is why there is now so much scepticism about greenies and what they say, they constantly discredit themselves, lying seems to be fine if it helps (they think) the cause.


However this is an aside to my question 2 posts ago, which was around who circulated the email and what did they do with any money people gave them?


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

Oldtimer said:


> However this is an aside to my question 2 posts ago, which was around who circulated the email and what did they do with any money people gave them?


http://sumofus.org/faq/

Based on their DC location, I am assuming they are an environmental lobbying group. Not sure how/if that money gets to Ontario for lobbying for the government proposed regulations.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel (Mar 13, 2013)

News from the EU:
http://www.easac.eu/fileadmin/Reports/Easac_15_ES_web_complete.pdf

Scientific studies rather support the neonic sceptics...


----------



## BernhardHeuvel (Mar 13, 2013)

There is quite some evidence building up, which shows that sublethal neonic exposure increases varroa populations significantly. Quite some scientists work on that.


----------



## jonathan (Nov 3, 2009)

That was an interesting review paper Bernhard.
The evidence which is emerging is that the neonicotinoid threat is perhaps not as great to honey bees as some would suggest but may well be greater to other insect pollinators such as solitary bees or bumble bees. The Whitehorn et al first drew attention to this.
The regulayory framework needs to be sorted out to take account of this.


----------

