Reply With Quote
Lol ..still can't address the Forbes article.
Monsanto to
Lol ..still can't address the Forbes article.
....and its Bayer....you know, the German company.
thanks for the link, tb
I know the neonicotinoids are from Bayer,mostly, but GE seeds from Monsanto coated with them are the largest source of neonicotinoids pollution.
EU Announces Potential Ban on Neonicotinoid Pesticides Linked to Bee Deaths, Environmental Collapse
In a major victory for environmental preservation, the European Union has announced a potential history-making ban on neonicotinoid pesticides that have been linked to the death of bees worldwide.
Despite 15 nations voting against the ban, EU rules allow for a designated ruling body to enact limitations on the use of neonicotinoids. The EU commission may now put into effect a 2 year restriction on neonicotinoids found in pesticides – the chemicals responsible for harming bees. Furthermore, the UK won’t have the option to opt of of these restrictions (even though they voted against a ban due to ‘inconclusive scientific evidence’).
“The European Commission will decide on the adoption of a proposal of restriction on use of 3 pesticides (nenicotinoids (NNI) – clothianidin, imidacloprid and thiametoxam) following vote in the Appeal Committee on April 29 2013 – where the proposal was supported by 15 Member States but did not reach a qualified majority,” a post reads on the European Commission website.Greenpeace EU agriculture policy director Marco Contiero said Monday’s vote “makes it crystal clear that there is overwhelming scientific, political and public support for a ban. Those countries opposing a ban have failed.”
“The Commission will go ahead with its text in the coming weeks,” said EU Health Commissioner, Tonio Borg ffter Monday’s vote. ”I pledge to do my utmost to ensure that our bees, which are so vital to our ecosystem and contribute over 22bn euros (£18.5bn; $29bn) annually to European agriculture, are protected.”
http://naturalsociety.com/eu-announc...#ixzz2S3AScHp1
TBif you post, be ready to be slapped
You think about me too much.
Wait till they figure out they just banned the stuff that keeps their dogs and cats from getting fleas.
*scratch*scratch*scratch*
do you prefer no fleas to no bees?
CC: he never met a Corporate-American he wouldn't fellate.
Just laughing that they probably didn't realize they just banned Fido's monthly flea treatment.
keeping nico's off crops and seeds isn't the same as keeping fleas off dogs. So there's no other anti-flea poison for your flea bag dog?
Honey Bee Die-Off Caused by Multiple Factors Including Pesticides
A federal study released today attributes the massive die-off in American honey bee colonies to a combination of factors, including pesticides, poor diet, parasites and a lack of genetic diversity. Nearly a third of honey bee colonies in the United States have been wiped out since 2006. The estimated value of crops lost if bees were no longer able to pollinate fruits and vegetables is around $15 billion.
Experts at the USDA, EPA and others involved in the federal bee study concluded that there was not enough evidence to support a ban in the United States, and that the cost of imposing one could outweigh the benefits. They recommended further research be done.
http://truth-out.org/news/item/16156...ing-pesticides
Yes! BigAg/BigChem corrupt puppets in govt say: "we need lots more CCD wipeouts until the cost exceeds the profits of the BigChem poisoners, then we might do something, (but probably not)"
Last edited by boutons_deux; 05-03-2013 at 02:40 PM.
Top Insecticide Is Devastating Aquatic Insects, Threatening Environmental Stability
the new study authors actually allows for around 20,000 tons of bug repellent chemical to be used for livestock bug repellent, Dr Jeroen van der Sluijs of the Utrecht University says that allowing aquatic insects like snails and dragonflies to die at record numbers will ultimately challenge environmental stability at large through an assault on the food chain.
The research, published in the journal PLOS One and performed by Dutch researchers from Utrecht University, details the methods in which the dangerous insecticide can ravage the wildlife population by tracking its journey from farmland to stomach.
It all starts with the application of the insecticide onto crops, or in some cases use as a bug repellent for livestock and pets (which is a truly horrible idea). Even the ditch water found in fields treated with the insecticide was found to be an effective pesticide. In other words, the concerning insecticide is still powerful in eliminating insects even after a significant amount of dilution.
http://naturalsociety.com/study-inse...#ixzz2SR8PRlvK
The Anthropocene is really ing up the planet, for fun and corporate profits.
Widespread Use of Neonicotinoids Poses Risks to More Than Bees
A report released this week by the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation moves the spotlight from the risks neonicotinoids pose to bees to the impacts of neonicotinoids to invertebrates such as earthworms or lady beetles.
Beyond the Birds and the Bees provides a comprehensive review of published articles and pulls together the growing body of research that demonstrates risks from neonicotinoids to these beneficial insects. These risks occur particularly in agricultural systems, but are also found in urban and suburban ornamental landscapes.
Findings from the Review:
- Although neonicotinoids have been promoted as safer for beneficial insects than older insecticides, the balance of evidence suggests that neonicotinoids are generally harmful to a variety of beneficial insects.
- Widespread preemptive application of neonicotinoids (or any pesticide) represents a fundamental shift away from Integrated Pest Management, since chemicals are frequently applied before pest damage has occurred, and often in the absence of any current pest abundance data.
- Use of neonicotinoid seed treatments on annual field crops has increased dramatically in the last decade yet these treatments may not consistently result in yield benefits and can be less cost effective than other control measures.
- Though neonicotinoid seed treatments may be unnecessary or more expensive than other treatments in some cir stances, it is very challenging for farmers to obtain non-organic field crop seed that is not treated with neonicotinoids.
- Neonicotinoid resistance has been do ented in a number of pests, including green peach aphid, whitefly, and Colorado potato beetle. The environmental persistence of neonicotinoids such as imidacloprid and clothianidin, coupled with their widespread use, can facilitate pest resistance.
- Although there has been less research on the impact of neonicotinoids to soil organisms, most studies to date have found that neonicotinoids may have negative effects on earthworms and other soil invertebrates.
http://ecowatch.com/2013/neonicotino...ore-than-bees/
Research into bee-killing pesticides is tainted by corporate interests
Here’s one way to keep us from finding out once and for all whether pesticides are contributing to the mysterious and catastrophic collapse of the world’s bee colonies: let the people manufacturing the pesticides fund the studies. That’s the charge being leveled against Britain’s government by the Parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee in a report published Monday, which contends that corporate funding is compromising the integrity of its scientific research.
The good news, amidst a sea of bad news, is that hardly anyone’s arguing that the we have a serious bee problem on our hands. In the U.S., about 23.2 percent of honey bee colonies were lost over winter 2013-2014 — an improvement from the even more disastrous winter that came before it, but a rate that the U.S. government nonetheless calls “economically unsustainable.” The White House, in pledging $50 million to address the problem, calls the losses a “genuine threat to domestic agriculture.”
A number of factors are likely contributing to bee declines here and abroad; among them are invasive parasites, along with the rise of monocultures — acres and acres of fields dedicated to one crop and one crop only — and the resulting loss of bee-supporting flowers. But a growing number of independent studies are pointing to a class of pesticides known as neonicotinoids, concluding that they, if not the sole driver of declines, are nonetheless heavily implicated. (To take just one example, they’ve been shown to compromise bees’ immune systems, making them that much more susceptible to the viruses being carried by said parasites.) The voices most loudly insisting that there’s no link between pesticides and bee die-offs belong, unsurprisingly, to industry representatives, who continue to insist that the science is inconclusive.
http://www.salon.com/2014/07/28/repo...ate_interests/
Beekeepers file suit against pesticide makers Syngenta and Bayer
Beekeepers in Ontario have launched a lawsuit against two big chemical companies, alleging their pesticides have caused widespread bee deaths that have driven up costs and reduced honey production.
The honey makers allege Syngenta AG and Bayer CropScience were “negligent” in the “design, sale manufacture and distribution” of neonicotinoid pesticides, which are used to grow corn, soybeans and many other crops.
The lawsuit, which seeks $450-million in damages, alleges beekeepers experienced damaged or lost bee colonies, lost profits and unrecoverable costs as a result of neonic use on plants and crops. None of the allegations have been proven.
The case marks an escalation in the battle between Ontario beekeepers and chemical companies, two groups farmers rely on for pollination and crop protection.
The lead plaintiffs in the suit are Sun Parlor Honey Ltd. and Munro Honey, both of which are family-owned business in southwestern Ontario, the heart of the province’s agriculture sector.
In the statement of claim filed Wednesday, both companies allege they respectively lost more than $2-million in bees and honey production because of neonics between 2013 and 2006, when the pesticides became widely used in Canada.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle20319629/
the EPA says neonicotinoid treated seeds provide no benefits to soybeans farmershttp://www.motherjones.com/tom-philp...less-otherwiseSo, there's this widely used class of pesticides known as neonicotinoids, marketed by chemical giants Bayer and Syngenta, that have emerged as a prime suspect in honeybee collapse, and may also be harming birds and water-borne critters. But at least they provide benefits to farmers, right?
Well, not soybean farmers, according to a blunt economic assessment released Thursday by the Environmental Protection Agency (PDF). Conclusion: "There are no clear or consistent economic benefits of neonicotinoid seed treatments in soybeans."
Wait, what?
The report goes on: "This analysis provides evidence that US soybean growers derive limited to no benefit from neonicotinoid seed treatments in most instances."
Hmmm. But at least they're better for farmers than no pesticide at all?
Nope: "Published data indicate that most usage of neonicotinoid seed treatments does not protect soybean yield any better than doing no pest control."
"no benefits to soybeans farmers"
of course not, that's BigChem LIE. the only benefits are to BigChem profits and effective annual enslavement of farming to their toxic .
btw, the BigAg/BigChem's very own agency, FDA, is actually considering approving Agent Orange component 2,4,-D because Roundup has failed.
http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/food/genetically-engineered-foods/24-d-corn/
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philp...s-actual-pestsAnd not only are neonics useless against soybeans' major field pest, aphids; they may actually boost the fortunes of another important one, the slug, which is "emerging as a key pest" in the soybean belt, according to the report. Pointing to a 2015 study from Penn State researchers, the report notes that slugs aren't affected by neonics, so they can gobble neonic-treated soy sprouts at will, ac ulating the chemical. But when insects called the ground beetle—which has a taste for slugs but not soybean plants—eat the neonic-containing slugs, they tend to die. So slugs transfer the poison from the crops to their natural predator, the ground beetle, and throw the predator balance out of whack, allowing slugs to proliferate. As a result, the Penn State researchers found, neonic seed treatments actually reduce yields in slug-infested fields.
Really world data says treating soybeans help delay aphid infestations. Not worth it to me as I spray for aphids anyway, which instantly kills all insects.
Delay being the key word.
The meta study discussed here finds there's little to no benefit for most soybean growers:
https://www.motherjones.com/food/201...ybean-farmers/
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/365/6458/1177
May Berenbaum, University of Illinois entomology professor and department head, said via email that "the CCD bees also carry a greater number of picorna-like viruses; these are viruses that "hijack" the ribosome, inserting themselves and reprogramming ribosomes to manufacture viral proteins instead of bee proteins. So, what we think is happening is that infection by multiple viruses basically overloads the ribosome, which falls apart, thus leaving bees vulnerable to other stresses." This, according to the authors of the study, is "the root cause of colony collapse disorder."
https://www.popsci.com/environment/article/2009-08/ccd/
Humans still bad though tbh fwiw imho
yep, humans are ing up the planet, ting piles into their own bed, there's no stopping it
insecticides weakening the bees so all kinds of other stresses can kill them
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
