The Caffeinated Lives of Bees | Hacker News Reader

The Caffeinated Lives of Bees

nytimes.com

22 pointsdnetesn13 comments

Their conclusions are confusing. The simplest explanation does not involve any bee psychology assumptions, but instead:

increased waggle dance from caffeine -> more energy exerted -> more trips to nectar to keep up energy levels

this assumes that caffeine has a stimulating effect the bees, but it still seems to be the simplest explanation

EDIT: now that I look at it, it's also possible that flowers containing caffeine have higher quality nectar under typical conditions, and so on....there are a lot of possibilities

It's right here:

> But the caffeinated nectar was not nutritionally better than the plain nectar. In effect, Dr. Couvillon said, caffeine “causes the bee to overestimate the quality of the resource.”

The report had a weird take that the caffeine must be tricking the bees, to their detriment. More likely is that the bees recognize that caffeine is good and healthy. The body of research on caffeine's vitamin like health benefits is enormous. It's simply not to be consider a vice or something to avoid.

> The body of research on caffeine's vitamin like health benefits is enormous.

Vague not-really-scientific claims like this make me immediately suspicious. People who make claims like this usually fall into one of two categories:

1. They're trying to sell something.

2. They're crazy.

I looked back through your post history and found this:

> Cannabis is de facto legal throughout the USA. I repeat: marijuana is in practice legal in America, and all these people talking about drug charges ruining lives don't know what they're talking about.

Yep, you're crazy.

That's not really a crazy statement at all.

Marijuana is, in practice, legal in America.

Yes, this person is misinformed as to the number of ridiculous petty drug charges in America. Still not crazy.

And while I wouldn't say caffeine has "vitamin like" health benefits, since you know, the research on vitamins shows their health benefits are questionable, I would say the body of research on caffeine's health benefits is enormous.

> Marijuana is, in practice, legal in America.

I'm really not sure what happened to your brain that causes it to concoct this delusion, but I'm sorry to see that there are two of you with the same problem.

I don't understand the issue with that statement. You understand what "in practice" means right?

I'm not saying it's technically legal, just that the legal repercussions are so low that no one seriously considers them when choosing whether or not to smoke marijuana.

Is that not an accurate statement?

> I'm not saying it's technically legal, just that the legal repercussions are so low that no one seriously considers them when choosing whether or not to smoke marijuana.

> Is that not an accurate statement?

That is not an accurate statement. Incarceration isn't enough of a legal repercussion for you? Plenty of people are incarcerated each year for possession.

Also, you've significantly backpedaled by saying "choosing whether to smoke marijuana". "Marijuana is legal" is a statement about a lot more crimes than smoking (which in fact is actually legal--if somehow a lit joint fell out of the sky and landed on your lips, it would be legal to inhale). Possession, manufacture, sale, and paraphernalia are all illegal. A large portion of people incarcerated for marijuana-related crimes are incarcerated for crimes that aren't smoking or even possession.

And that's not even looking at drug testing and its employment implications.

Yeah I don't think I'm backpedalling. I'm actually starting to question your sanity, but I guess we'll have to disagree.

"Marijuana is de-facto legal" to "smoking marijuana is de-facto legal" is a huge backpedal.

Depends on your circumstances. Like all widely applicable but unevenly enforced laws, this gives selective enforcement power to the authorities. If you're a regular guy of no particular interest to the government or police, you can toke away pretty securely. If you need a clearance for your job, no. If the police are looking for a reason to take you in, a seed in your car - or the claim of a marijuana odor - will be the excuse.

Right. All I'm arguing is that making that statement does not amount to evidence of brain damage.

No, of course not. But "the legal repercussions are so low that no one seriously considers them" is not accurate, as I'm sure you see now. Some of us are in a position to flout various laws, others are not.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com