A battle is raging....apparently!

[fatshark]

This all reminds me of the zealot who claimed that the MMR vaccine caused autism and his scaremongering lead to parents deciding not to vaccinate their children.
the general public don't have a clue and they think they are doing the right thing following the advice of those who shout the loudest, especially when the press take up the case on their behalf.
Some local paper in Wales got behind the anti MMR campaign and the current problems can be traced directly back to this.
Lives will be lost over that shameful campaign.

Lives were lost ... from: http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb&HPA.../1195733835814

In 2006 there was one measles death in a 13 years old male who had an underlying lung condition and was taking immunosuppressive drugs. Another death in 2008 was also due to acute measles in unvaccinated child with congenital immunodeficiency whose condition did not require treatment with immunoglobulin. Prior to 2006, the last death from acute measles was in 1992.

All other measles deaths, since 1992, shown above are in older individuals and were caused by the late effects of measles. These infections were acquired during the 1980s or earlier, when epidemics of measles occurred.

The post-Wakefield deaths from measles in the UK are likely due to either lack of vaccination or lack of herd immunity. The fact that there had been no measles deaths in immunocompromised individuals between '92 and '06 suggests it was not their underlying medical condition but was instead the failure to vaccinate (the individual or community).

The current outbreak in Swansea is likely due to low levels of vaccination in the late 90's. Whether there are deaths or not (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/ap...idemic-mmr-jab) now there is a real chance of inevitably fatal cases of sub-acute sclerosing panencephalitis in years to come in those who catch measles now (these are the 'older individuals' referred to in the quote who acquired epidemic measles).

Globally measles kills about 18 children per hour ...

There are other similarities between the MMR publicity and the current neonic debate ...

One of the main problems with the MMR issue was that the first publication was in the Lancet - a respected peer-reviewed scientific journal. Scientific publication being what it is (i.e. a means for publishers to make money), a report supporting neonics is unlikely to be definitive enough - due to the complexity of the issue and the confounding issues of habitat destruction, mono-culture etc - to get published in a major journal. Similarly, negative results i.e. field-relevant concentrations of neonics have no detectable influence on x y z are also unlikely to achieve significant airtime.

[Jon]

Amen to all that fatshark and the same thing is happening at the moment where woefully ill informed journalists at the Guardian and the Independent are publishing articles and blogging about how neonicotinoids are wiping out bees and god knows what else. The Guardian bloke is still confusing bumble bees with honeybees and he has been writing about neonicotinoid Armageddon for at least a year.

[The Drone Ranger]

lack of vaccination or lack of herd immunity..

In Swansea wouldn't it be a flock

[worm (JTF3)]

You would need to check the tree thing with someone who is a reliable source.
I have caught Graham telling porkies so many times you would not believe it.
Don't take that stuff at face value. Ring Kew and check with someone competent to answer your questions if you are concerned about it.

It is true that neonicotinoids are now pretty ubiquitous..

If I phone Kew and find that what Graham said is true does that mean that you have to be banned from this forum for defamation?
I'll do it tomorrow.~~Don't think I'll insist on a ban though. This is just a forum.

[Jon]

I didn't say he was necessarily wrong in this case. I just asked you to check for yourself.
Basic fact checking.

Check out this post.

[The Drone Ranger]

"be banned from this forum for defamation?"


EEk!! I was only joking about the Welsh sheep thing

[Jon]

I would say you have a watertight defense DR

[worm (JTF3)]

"be banned from this forum for defamation?"


EEk!! I was only joking about the Welsh sheep thing

Nice to see you can treat stuff light, sometimes.

[The Drone Ranger]

Nice to see you can treat stuff light, sometimes.

Sometimes? ----Always

[worm (JTF3)]

I'll try again with you worm. I prefer to discuss things civilly and if that's the way it's going to be then fair enough.
To answer your question about Graham White's article - I refuse to read it. .

Well, that's obviously your choice. His best stuff, I suggest, is worth anybody interested in the natural world reading.
He has helped keep the writings of John Muir in print.
I would say he is a zealot,but I don't see that as a bad thing..
I should know,more than most, that people with strong commitment can be difficult to take,sometimes. But what if they're mostly right? We dismiss them at our peril?