Ken said:

I have to wonder at why you are so adamant to ignore all possible culprits and especially the pesticide industry? Insider?

No, I’m not an insider, I am a trained scientist, and I have looked at this issue in detail because some in my family are commercial beekeepers. Pesticides have been examined as a possible factor from the beginning and no correlation was found. Not that anything like facts are going to persuade someone that leaps to the conclusion that anyone not agreeing with their unsupported, unreferenced theory must, perforce, be corrupt.

If you can table some peer reviewed support for your ideas, please do, otherwise this conversation is at an end.

        Ken said:

I have to wonder at why you are so adamant to ignore all possible culprits and especially the pesticide industry? Insider?

Thank you for admitting you don’t actually have an argument.

Not if the main contributor is a newer disease or that is exploiting weakness from pesticide and other factors.

I have to wonder at why you are so adamant to ignore all possible culprits and especially the pesticide industry? Insider?

        Kent said:

Try responding to the whole quote next time

Because your remarks can be seen just above the response, the quote is more of an indication who is being responded to, rather than any attempt to exploit context, as you suggest.

If you read what I wrote, I did answer you completely; I do not think pesticide use is a contributing factor, if it was this problem would have shown up before now, as in general broad-spectrum pesticide use is dropping from past levels. However apiculture with practices that create unnatural conditions in which bees are moved thousands of miles to pollinate commercial crops, frequent opening of the hive for inspection, artificial insemination of queens, routine medication and sugar water feeding may contribute to a general weakening of the constitution of the honey bee, and are more likely factors.

These types of stresses have been responsible for creating weakened strains in other forms of husbandry, and most commercial species have had to be bred specifically to avoid these problems, something that has not happened as yet with the honeybee. The contribution of pesticide use is likely minimal, if indeed it is a factor at all.

        DV82XL said:

Colony collapse disorder is a rather new event historically; if pesticide use was a factor one would think that the effect would have shown up some time ago. Pesticides, some far more aggressive that the current ones, have been in regular use for well over half a century.

I suspect that the problem is systemic, that is it is a product of stresses both genetic and acute of current beekeeping and breeding techniques that have made the insets vulnerable to a spectrum of opportunistic pathogens.

Try responding to the whole quote next time and not selectively quoting, it affects the context of what I said in a big way leaving out part of it.

Your response ignores this: “I’m not saying the sole factor, but part of a combination of factors that are weakening the bees?”

        Kent said:

Pesticide is pesticide. You honestly don’t think they can be a factor.?

Colony collapse disorder is a rather new event historically; if pesticide use was a factor one would think that the effect would have shown up some time ago. Pesticides, some far more aggressive that the current ones, have been in regular use for well over half a century.

I suspect that the problem is systemic, that is it is a product of stresses both genetic and acute of current beekeeping and breeding techniques that have made the insets vulnerable to a spectrum of opportunistic pathogens.

Pesticide is pesticide. You honestly don’t think they can be a factor. I’m not saying the sole factor, but part of a combination of factors that are weakening the bees?

I was wondering if maybe Jason was using “we” to refer to himself and the mouse in his pocket.