Hacker News Reader

Comment by harryf | Hacker News Reader

Just picking one of your "sources", here's what the European Food Safety Authority is saying about bees on their website ( http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/topics/topic/beehealth.htm );

> No single cause of declining bee numbers has been identified. However, several contributing factors have been suggested, acting in combination or separately. _These include the effects of intensive agriculture and pesticide use_, starvation and poor bee nutrition, viruses, attacks by pathogens and invasive species – such as the Varroa mite (Varroa destructor), the Asian hornet (Vespa velutina), the small hive beetle Aethina tumida and the bee mite Tropilaelaps – genetically modified plants, and environmental changes (e.g. habitat fragmentation and loss).

Looks like his step dad is a better source than yours.

Just out of interest, are you paid troll? Shame to see this kind of BS on HN

View on HN

Just picking another, the researchers did in situ replication of pesticide doses known to be prevalent in working hives, along with control colonies that were untreated. Whats happening is that in the last decade beekeepers largely switched to feeding their colonies High Fructose Corn Syrup from corn treated with neonicotinoid pesticides. Their results:

"15 of 16 imidacloprid- treated hives (94%) were dead across 4 apiaries 23 weeks post imidacloprid dosing. Dead hives were remarkably empty except for stores of food and some pollen left, a resemblance of CCD."

While none of the control hives died.

Their conclusion:

"Data from this in situ study provide convincing evidence that exposure to sub-lethal levels of imidacloprid in HFCS causes honey bees to exhibit symptoms consistent to CCD 23 weeks post imidacloprid dosing. The survival of the control hives managed alongside with the pesticide-treated hives unequivocally augments this conclusion. The observed delayed mortality in honey bees caused by imidacloprid in HFCS is a novel and plausible mechanism for CCD, and should be validated in future studies."

> Just out of interest, are you paid troll? Shame to see this kind of BS on HN

This is the reason why I think that off topic articles like this should be mercilessly squelched. They turn into flame wars within an hour or two.

You just supported his point - the EFSA in the text you quoted say there's not any single obvious factor, but some have been suggested. We really don't know the exact cause.

Making shill claims is really not helpful.

Let's note that the EFSA stated a list of causes that includes pesticides, but his step-dad "knows" that it is all solely caused by pesticides.

It's a shame that your informative, strong, post finishes with a pointless flame.

Are you suggesting that supports his step-dad's conclusion that "it's obviously the pesticides"? What could be more clear?

"No single cause of declining bee numbers has been identified" "Several contributed factors have been suggested"

If that, in your opinion, amounts to "it's obviously the pesticides", then I guess you can think of me as some kind of troll. If, instead, you can understand that making simplistic and overreaching statements like "it's obviously the pesticides" does nothing to help the bees and instead just brings the conversation down to a third grade level, then no, I'm not a troll.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com