Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Rosemary Mason claims leading journal 'nature' is in the pocket of Syngenta!

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Exiled Scot, North of Stoke on Trent,
    Posts
    483

    Default

    As varroa are a man introduced bee mite, then non treatment can be considered "not natural".


    But then I threat (with thymol)

  2. #12
    Senior Member Jon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Belfast, N. Ireland
    Posts
    5,122
    Blog Entries
    94

    Default

    The Primorsky bees (Russians) could be considered as one giant bond experiment.
    They have been exposed to varroa mites for approximately 150 years and have developed some resistance but not total resistance like Apis Cerana, the natural host of the mite.

    There are a few people keeping bees alive without treatment, Michael Bush is probably the best known, but he is in an area (Arizona) with Africanized bees and doubtless has some of that genetics in his stock. He is at altitude as well and the winters are long and very cold. Others crow for a while about not treating and then go very quiet after a couple of years and then start to justify 'soft' treatments.

    There is no point in refusing to kill the mites unless you have a good idea why your particular circumstances might be conducive to bee survival with non treatment. Other than that, the odds are stacked well against you.
    Last edited by Jon; 30-01-2013 at 05:06 PM.

  3. #13
    Administrator gavin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Tayside
    Posts
    4,464
    Blog Entries
    41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by madasafish View Post
    As varroa are a man introduced bee mite, then non treatment can be considered "not natural".
    Are you saying that two non-naturals make a right?!

  4. #14
    Administrator gavin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Tayside
    Posts
    4,464
    Blog Entries
    41

    Default

    LOL! There is some real comedy gold in that letter. One of my favourites is just 3 lines in:

    As a result of the lack of media coverage, you are
    to be forgiven for having little knowledge of the issues.

    For students of the development of conspiracy theories there are exceedingly rich pickings. I ran out of fingers trying to count them.

    This bit is weird:

     Based on the evidence of the close relationship between Nature and Syngenta I sent
    to you on 07/01/2013, and your subsequent silence on the matter, we are forced to
    assume that some editors in Nature did know about this fake journal: The Journal of
    2

    Environmental Immunology and Toxicology, set up by two employees of the US EPA
    to capture our paper. It is in press, but we cannot submit it to another journal.
    Our suggestion that Nature recover it from JEIT, publish it and make a public
    withdrawal of Dr Juliet Osborne’s paper must have been unwelcome to Syngenta.

    They are referring to their paper claiming that global declines in biodiversity are due to neonics. The paper they got 'published' in a journal that doesn't seem to exist.

    http://www.boerenlandvogels.nl/sites...12-00001_0.pdf

    G.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •