We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
By Dominique Guillet
Today we find that more than 75% of the crops that feed humanity and 35% of food production still depend on pollinators, that is, mostly bees. Albert Einstein warned humanity: "If the bee disappeared from the surface of the globe, man would not have more than four years to live, no more pollination, no more grass, no more animals, no more men."
Mutiny in the hives
Bees transhuman into nothingness. Bees defect by the tens of millions. The hives are emptied in less than a week. It is a new catastrophe for the beekeeping world (and without a doubt for the whole world) since it is announced to be of planetary scope. It's called "colony collapse syndrome."
In the U.S., beekeeping experts are totally clueless. They even invoke a "mystery." In effect, bees disappear "cleanly" without leaving corpses. Hives full of honey and pollen are not poached by other bees or other insects. It is a curse that hangs over the hives.
However, beekeeping experts do not despair of finding the miracle potion, of saving, once again, their industry since they qualify it that way. The best detectives-virologists put the best detectives-virologists on the tracks of the bees reported missing. The challenge is immense: there are no bees, there is no pollination, there are no crops, there are no dollars. The biped who proclaimed himself master of the planetary sphere is very angry. The bees go on a pollination strike, the sleepers refuse to suck.
Well, what would bees have no recognition for this "beekeeping industry"? who pampered them for dozens of years, lavishing them:
- a home: with beautiful beehives all square.
- the best medicines: the most powerful antibiotics (such as theramycin) and the most effective acaricides (Apistan and the very new Hivastan)
- food to satiety: tasty white beet sugar, corn syrup processed from the best transgenic broths and, of course, nutritional supplements (made, for example in the USA, from transgenic cotton oil, soybean oil transgenic, transgenic rapeseed oil…).
- all paid trips over thousands of kilometers to discover the western agricultural deserts.
- An assured loot thanks to the monocultures so extensive that they are lost from sight when leaving the hive.
- pollen and nectar enriched with a cocktail of aperitif molecules: fungicides, insecticides, herbicides.
- assisted procreation with a selection of the best artificially inseminated queens.
A catastrophe soon planetary
In December 2006, the University of Pennsylvania conducted a survey involving several beekeepers in the eastern region of the United States. These beekeepers (owners of 200 to 3000 hives) had suffered losses of 30 to 90% of their apiary. For one of the beekeepers, only 9 colonies had survived out of 1200.
In the United States as a whole, since the end of fall 2006, losses have been in the order of 60% on the west coast to 90% in some states in the east and south of the country. According to the latest estimates, there are about 1.5 million colonies that would have died in the U.S.A. and 27 states are affected.
We recall that the number of hives was 6 million in 1947 and is only 2.4 million in 2005.
In France, the loss of colonies is estimated between 300,000 and 400,000 each year, and this since 1995. The winter 2005/2006 was particularly dramatic since 15 to 95% of the colonies disappeared, according to beekeepers (90). In April 2007, in Martinique, a beekeeper lost 200 colonies in the space of a few days.
In Québec (2), an average of 40% of the hives were reported empty last winter. However, some beekeepers have lost up to 75% and even 100% of their colonies.
In Ontario, Canada, last winter some beekeepers reported defected up to 60% of their hives and close to 40% for the apiary nationwide (50).
The advanced figures are 400,000 empty hives for Poland, 600,000 empty hives for Spain.
In Germany, according to Manfred Hederer, president of the German Association of Beekeepers, 25% of the colonies would have been decimated but some beekeepers report up to 80% losses of their hives.
In Taiwan, in April 2007, the first reports of a mysterious disappearance of bees were published. A beekeeper reported the loss of 80 of his 200 hives.
In Switzerland, some regions mourn the loss of 80% of their colonies (36). National losses would be of the order of 30% but certain beekeepers have lost all of their colonies (37). There were 45,000 beekeepers in Switzerland in 1900. Only 19,000 now remain but this number is on the decline. Between the two world wars there were 350,000 hives. Today, there are only 190,000 left.
Hive collapse syndrome rages in Portugal, Greece, Austria, and England.
Is hives collapse syndrome an ultimatum? Was it a desperate call from the bees in order to wake up humanity?
Hive collapse syndrome
In the USA, this syndrome was recently branded a "Colony Collapse Disorder" and replaced such names as "Fall Collapse", "May Sickness", "Disappearing Sickness", etc.
In England, the syndrome is described as "María Celesta Phenomenon" (from the name of the ship whose luggage was volatilized in 1872)
What are the symptoms of this syndrome?
In already collapsed hives:
- Total absence of adult insects in the hive with few or no dead bees, inside or in front of the hive.
- Considerable infection of the few bees that are still in the hive. All viruses known to be harmful to bees are present, as well as fungi. Some bees are affected by half a dozen viruses.
- Presence of a capped maggot.
- Presence of food reserve within the hive, honey and pollen that, first, are not immediately plundered by other bees and second, when they are attacked by parasites such as the False Moth (Galleria mellonella) or the Small Coleoptera of the hives (Aethina tumida,) are only late.
In hives that are collapsing:
- The too limited number of workers does not allow them to take care of the breed.
- The workers are mainly young adults.
- The queen is present.
- The swarm refuses to consume brought food, such as corn syrup or protein supplements.
Autumns without fruit
In the U.S., there are 90 food plants that are pollinated by bees. The commercial value of crops pollinated by bees is estimated at $ 14 billion. In Florida (1), the apple harvest is compromised. For apples alone (90% pollinated by bees), the value is $ 2.1 billion.
All over the planet, bees are the carriers of pollen, they are the pollinators par excellence. According to Bernard Vaissière, pollinator specialist at INRA, “Today we find that more than 75% of the crops that feed humanity and 35% of the food production still depend on pollinators, that is, mostly bees. But production practices and the resulting agricultural landscapes have evolved considerably in recent years in such a way that pollinators are now often too scarce to be able to pollinate crops reliably and efficiently.
Our results provide a vibrant reminder of the essential role that pollinators play in our daily lives, particularly at the level of our diet since their pollinating activity allows us to have numerous essential but also pleasant food products such as coffee and chocolate and fruits peel, and most of the fruits and vegetables ”(81).
In the U.S., out of the 2.4 million hives in the country, 1.5 million are routinely rented for pollination service. The situation is so catastrophic that in 3 years the cost of renting a hive almost tripled to reach $ 135.
In 2007, given the emergency, the U.S.A. they called to Australia for the massive importation of bee colonies. Competition was all the rage in April between apple orchards (4) in New York and Pennsylvania, and blueberry growers in Maine.
Pesticides and Killing Fields
Bees disappeared both in agricultural regions invaded by genetic chimeras and in agricultural regions in which they are not cultivated, or only in experimental plots. So is there a common denominator?
According to Professor Emeritus Joe Cummins (17), from the University of Ontario, the common denominator is: “The widespread use of seeds wrapped with systemic pesticides for both conventional and genetically modified crops; in particular, the very common application of a relatively novel class of systemic insecticides, the Neonicotinoids, which are highly toxic even in low concentrations, to insects including bees.
Systemic insecticide wraps protect young seedlings during the first, most vulnerable phase of their development. These envelopes are made up of systemic insecticides and fungicides, which often act in synergy.
Insecticides in the Neonicotinoid class include imidaclopride, thiamethoxam, clothianidine, and others. Imidaclopride is very common for wrapping legume seeds and open field crops, particularly corn, rapeseed and sunflower.
Imidaclopride is detected in soils, plant tissues and pollens using mass spectrometry and "high performance liquid chromatography"
The insecticide concentration rates in pollen suggest that bees could suffer brain damage (18). Since 2000, beekeepers in France and Italy have discovered that imidaclopride was fatal to bees and they suspect that this insecticide may cause colonies to decline by affecting the bee's sense of direction and its ability to return to its hive. "
Numerous studies carried out in Europe revealed the harms of imidaclopride:
- A team of scientists found that pollen produced by plants from seeds wrapped with imidaclopride contained significant concentrations of the insecticide and suggested that contaminated pollen was a major cause of colony collapse syndrome (19).
- Analysis of sunflower and corn from seeds wrapped with imidaclopride indicated that large amounts of the insecticide were carried by bees inside the hives (29).
- Bees fed with sugary solutions containing 500 or 1000 ppb (parts per billion) of the insecticide could not return to their hive and disappeared.
Those that were nourished with sugary solutions containing 100 ppb (parts per billion) of the insecticide returned only after 24 hours to the hive (21).
- Bees fed in the laboratory with solutions containing imidaclopride lost their communication abilities for several hours (22).
- A study has been carried out in Greece on the impact of imidaclopride on bees (49).
- A study was published in the bulletin of entomology in England on the impact of imidaclopride on bees (51).
- A study carried out in the laboratory in 2006, in North Carolina, USA, shows that the synergy of neonicotinoids with very common fungicides (such as Terraguard and Procure) increased the toxicity of these neonicotinoids by 1000 times.
When imidaclopride3 is used to fight termites, this substance completely disorients them (insects cannot find the termite mound again) and completely destroys their immune system.
According to Jerry Hayes, head of the apiculture section of the agricultural services of the state of Florida, imidaclopride (3) is now used not only for the wrapping of the seeds, but also in foliar sprays, in systemics and in synergy with fungicides. This pesticide is systematically found in the pollen of flowers.
According to the University of North Carolina, the imidaclopride used to wrap seeds is found in pollen from corn, sunflower, and rapeseed, and in dangerous concentrations for bees. Imidaclopride destroys the memory and brain processes of the bee, most particularly the areas of the brain related to recent memories. It may be that the ingestion of fresh or stored pollen is not synonymous with mortality but rather with disturbances of the memory processes of bees who, disoriented, no longer find their way to the hive.
In the U.S., all GM cotton, soybean, corn, and rapeseed seeds are encased in neonicotinoids. In addition, the refuge area is treated with neonicotinoids. This refuge zone is a kind of field of death for insects and has been established since 2000 by the Environmental Protection Agency, which does not have any means of verifying its application and which refers, for this, to biotechnology companies ( 25).
Thus, for example, Monsanto asks transgenic farmers to plant 20% of their cultivated area with conventional varieties in order to create “havens” to discourage the evolution of transgenic-resistant insects. They are asked to use insecticides only when the level of infestation endangers the economic viability of their crop! Thus, Monsanto's GMO variety, the “YieldGard Corn Borer” (24) (with a Bt gene) must be sown at a rate of 80% of the surface: the 20% that remain constitute a “refuge” to plant with any other variety. other than "Bt". Farmers who do not respect this clause can be punished by Monsanto (23), who can deny them further access to this cutting edge technology!
To conclude: the farmer will be deprived of “Bt” GMOs if he does not agree to make a “refuge” with conventional varieties treated to death by the most toxic insecticides.
In fact, the first weakness of the bee is to be an insect and therefore to be highly susceptible to insecticides (26). His second weakness is his little ability to resist or to mutate. At least the other "wild" insects have kept that ability to mutate very quickly. And they are not deprived of doing so.
It is the same with "weeds". In the U.S.A., the adventitia have become strictly resistant to RoundUp (Monsanto's glyphosate). Farmers have no choice but to use herbicide mixtures to clean their fields. In particular, GM soy fields are invaded by wild amaranths.
The Gaucho and the Regent released from customs by "independent" European experts
In January 2006, the French National Beekeeping Union (Unaf, 2,000 members, and 48% of French hives) expressed their fears of seeing the Gaucho and the Regent TS (28) authorized again.
The Unaf's fears were highly justified.
At the end of January 2007, the figaro.fr site reports that (40): “The results of the Afssa multifactorial survey on bee disorders found in France in the middle of the 1990s have not yet been seen. They should not be seen before a long time. Indeed, the Sofia-Antipolis laboratory is awaiting the arrival of a statistician to deal with the heap of data accumulated between 2002 and 2005. The delay is due to budgetary problems.
Budget problems at Afssa? Possibly beekeepers should be listed? Could Afssa possibly issue a raffle or ask for a grant from Bayer Crop Science?
On February 2, 2007, a proposal (39) for a resolution is presented to the National Assembly by the deputy Jacques Remillet, "aiming at the creation of a commission to investigate the causes of excess mortality in French hives"
In the explanatory memorandum:
“For ten years, beekeeping in Europe and France has been experiencing the most serious crisis in its history. In France, 1500 beekeepers stop their activity every year for 20 years.While the average age increases to reach 65 today, 5,000 beekeeping-related jobs are directly threatened. With 33,000 tons of honey produced (around 33 kilos per hive), production fell 10,000 tons in 10 years, that is, a decrease of 1,000 tons per year *.
(*: In fact, honey production went from 33,000 tons to 16,500 tons, from 1995 to 2003)
- During the 16th national congress of French beekeeping that took place in Bourg-en Bresse from October 13 to 15, 2006, the Afssa bee unit indicated that the deaths of bees during winter 2005 have been very important (around 18 In the hives surveyed, an average death rate of 74% was found - that is, 74% of the hives did not spend the winter.
- January 2007: the 2002/2005 prospective multifactorial study of the AFSSA, the conclusions of which have just been known *, shows that the causes of excess mortality in bees are of multifactorial origin. You cannot invoke a single cause. Among the major causes: parasites (varroa and Nosena Ceranae) and the lack of biodiversity (mainly due to lack of quality food for bees: pollen) AFSSA indicates that 125 bee colonies have been observed in five states with four visits per apiary per year for three years (from 2003 to 2005)
(*: In fact, the deputy specifies in a note that the results are known but not published).
“- Two conclusions deserve to be highlighted:
1. European experts clearly confirm the conclusions of the AFSSA report on the absence of risk of the insecticide Fipronil for human health: «No genotoxic or carcinogenic potential has been put in evidence. The mechanism of induction of thyroid tumors was discussed by the experts and considered to be a specific reaction for rats and not significant for humans. No toxicity at the reproductive or developmental level has been observed. The specific neurotoxic studies do not reveal any histopathological element in the nervous system »However, as Fipronil is toxic in case of inhalation, ingestion or intensive skin exposure, the report proposes the T (toxic) classification, thus adding it to the numerous list of toxic products of the current pharmacopoeia.
2. According to European experts, the use of Fipronil linked to the treatment of maize and sunflower seeds does not represent any risk for the bees that suck: «No opposite effect relative to the death of bees and their survival was observed in the set of studies carried out under tunnel. " Furthermore, the experts noted that "there was no convincing evidence allowing to attribute the incidents - of bee deaths - to the use of fipronil, except for a single case, attributed to a poor quality of sunflower casing."
Conclusion: in 2004, the ministry made a decision in the scientific field wishing to apply the precautionary principle pending scientific conclusions (AFSSA, EFFSA). And today, the conclusions release the incriminated products two years after their suspension (Gaucho and Regent).
Regarding this, the interview with Hervé Gaymard granted to VSD magazine, on November 18, 2004, reveals the media pressure of the time: «In the matter of the Regent and the Gaucho, there was a strong media interest that, without a doubt, It was related to the regional elections of 2004. But the problem is that scientific studies say today that this death of the bees was not due only to the pesticides involved and here, not a single word in any of the twenty-hour news. The funnel law was applied… Why would these new studies be less reliable than the others that led me to ban the two pesticides? And I can reveal to you that they show that the mortality of bees is also verified in states where these products were not used.
However, always according to the site figaro.fr (40), we specify that: “The AFSSA survey reveals in particular that in the five states, the different“ matrices ”(honey, wax, pollen) are contaminated with weak doses by agricultural phytosanitary products (imidaclopride, fipronil, endosulfan, deltamethrin, parathion-methyl and others). They are also contaminated by residues of substances (coumaphos, and fluvalinata) used by beekeepers to fight against diseases caused by varroa, a parasitic mite that invaded hives around the world from the 90s. A single case of mortality due to an acute toxicity was verified, the analyzes later revealed the presence of endosulfan and fluvalinata in the dead bees.
Furthermore, according to the Afssa researchers: «We have found several inappropriate beekeeping practices. Among them, the use of non-approved products for the treatment of varroase "and" anomalies related to the feeding of bees, which were suspected by the state of certain hives, could have consequences on the health of the colonies. "
From the precautionary principle… for the financial health of the agro-chemical multinationals!
The first question that arises is whether the Afssa scientists and the European experts can be trusted. According to the consecrated formula, are they "independent" experts subordinate to agro-chemistry?
Indeed, everything suggests that this report is on par with the record on the pesticide scandal in France since 1941. The beekeeping record reeks of lies, reeks of corruption, reeks of shenanigans, reeks of misinformation.
It is enough to read the chapter "The matter of the gaucho, the truth is elsewhere" of Nicolino and veillerette's work "Pesticides. Revelations about a French scandal ”(42).
When reading this Work, it is clear that the pesticide mafia, the agro-chemical mafia took agriculture and the people hostage in France (and above all the planet).
Can we trust the leadership of INRA, the leadership of Afssa, the leadership of the DGAL, in view of what has been going on in this country for 60 years? No, a thousand times no.
Can we trust the European experts who come from liberating the Gaucho and the Regent, when it is known that these gentlemen are in fact experts from the EFSA in Brussels, which has been directed since February 2006 by Mrs Geslain-lanelle?
At the risk of anger, we would be prone to say no, a thousand times no. Mrs. Geslain-Lanelle headed the DGAL from 2000 to 2003 and her handling of the Gaucho and Regent file, at the time, was not very brilliant.
To quote Nicolino and Veillerette "Under Guillou and Geslain-lanelle, the handling of the file amply demonstrated that the French administration supported industrial interests against those of public health"
We do not doubt it for a moment. And this has lasted for dozens of years. Proof of this, the death of bees, the pollution of almost all of our rivers and water tables (see IFEN studies) and France dying of cancer and other mutagenic, teratogenic diseases, etc. (see the works of Professor Belpomme).
An important point remains: According to the deputies: "If the feeders are as important for biodiversity as researchers and beekeepers say, the question of excess death of bees should be addressed by a commission of inquiry."
Deputies, the unexplained excess of bee mortality (and inexplicable when the Gaucho and the regent are released with approval) has existed since 1992. So, why have we waited 15 years before proposing the constitution of a commission of inquiry?
Because the catastrophe was not at this point catastrophic that it endangered the pollination of agricultural species? Why were there things to hide?
Another essential question: how can European experts now release the Gaucho when imidaclopride, its active principle, is now considerably incriminated from the other from the Atlantic?
Could it be that the agricultural experts in North American universities are too numerous for the multinational agrochemical companies to threaten them?
Regarding this topic, this excerpt (page 59) from the Obra de Nicolino y Veillerette is very revealing:
“The hecatomb became so monstrous that in January 1999, the minister of agriculture in turn, the socialist Jean Glavany, suspended the use of the Gaucho but only on the sunflower. Bayer screeches and sued before the Council of State. And the dance continues, led with mastery. Gerard Eyries, Marketing Director of Bayer-Agro France, declares with a very peculiar sense of humor: "The sooner we will convince the ministry of the safety of our product on bees, the sooner we will be able to put our product on the market."
A little later, Bayer publishes an extraordinary brochure entitled "About the health of bees." Two bees can be seen on the roof in Chinese shade, against the background of the setting sun. The purpose is quite thick, which tries to demonstrate, with many crocodile tears, that bees are very unhappy, victims of an infinity of diseases and viruses. Luckily we have the Gaucho, good luck! Excerpt from the last chapter: "It is evident that if the Bayer company were not convinced of the safety of the Gaucho, it would have already taken the necessary measures."
Nor doubt it. New studies will allow Bayer to demonstrate its good faith. With the first, Jean Marc Bonmatin, a CNRS chemist, demonstrates the presence of imidaclopride - the Gaucho's active matter - in the head and pollen of a treated sunflower, which Bayer nonetheless judged impossible. The blow is harsh, since the beekeepers finally have an indisputable scientific argument. If the insecticide is in the pollen and the bee sucks the pollen, then it may be the Gaucho's victim. Q.E.D. What will Bayer do? Show your teeth and in a very bad way. In a terrible letter, the billionaire Bonmatin threatens a lawsuit for damages in defamation if she continues to explain herself in public. Bonmatin, who has never seen anything like it in his life, is rightly concerned. His works will be checked seven times and his credits cut until some of his investigations are prevented (48).
The other annoying study is signed by Marc Edouard Colin. He is an excellent bee specialist at INRA, one of the best public institutes. Unfortunately, between 1998 and 2000, Colin discovers that infinitesimal doses of imidaclopride can poison a bee. Between 3 and 9 ppb (parts per billion), anomalies appear. Bayer, at the time when everything was happiness, claimed that harmful effects could not appear below ... 5000 bp. A nothing, right? Colin will pay for them. INRA, which has employed him for ten years, orders him to change the subject of study. The ecotoxicology of the bee is over for him. He will leave the INRA to go to the University of Montpellier. Let's see, who's in charge here!
Mr deputy Jacques Remillet and other deputies, would these same studies be described as "scientific fog" in your proposal (39) for a resolution in the National Assembly?
Or would they be all the other studies that have been published for 20 years regarding the impact of pesticides on the life of insects? Since studies are not lacking.
Researchers at INRA (Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique) have long studied the impacts of pesticides on bees and other pollinating insects. Since 1985, Jean-Noël Tasei has been studying the impact of pesticides on solitary bees, such as the impact of deltamethrin on the solitary bee, megachile rotundota.
According to Jean-Noël Tasei, researcher at the INRA zoology laboratory in Lusignan “Its action may be direct, but it is often indirect due to the residues deposited on plants that contaminate the food of honey insects: nectar and pollen. Several symptoms affect adults, the survival of insects sometimes hiding sub-lethal consequences of treatments, weakening their reproductive potential.
Let us note all the studies carried out in France by researchers Bonmatin, Moineau, Charvet (47).
Let us note all the studies carried out in France by researchers Colin, Belzunce, Suchail, De sousa, Rahmani, etc. (74), some of them having as theme the impact on synergy of different pesticides.
In Romania, in 2002, researchers studied the impact of the insecticide chlorpyrifos when its use decimated 80% of the region's bees.
In Romania, in 2002, researchers studied the impact of deltamethrin on bees (52).
A study was carried out in Italy on the impact of organochlorine, organophosphorus, carbammate and neonicotinoids on bees (54).
In fact, there are hundreds of studies around the world to show that pesticides kill bees. But they enrich the multinationals.
We recall that imidaclopride is distributed by Bayer under various and varied names: Gaucho, Merit, Admire, Confidor, Hachikusan, Premise, Advantage, etc.
They hide their bees: the Fipronil returns!
Fipronil is the base active substance of the Regent marketed by BASF. It was invented by Rhone-Poulenc between 1985 and 1987, later sold to Bayer who resold it to BASF, one of the leading international chemical companies. BASF markets 2 billion euros of fungicides, herbicides and insecticides every year.
The Fipronil dossier is as scandalous as the Imidaclopride dossier. We invite readers interested in the Fipronil soap opera to consult the aforementioned chapter of the work on pesticides by Nicolino and Veillerette. You can also consult a very edifying article published by the site “lepoint.fr” (58).
Fipronil was banned in France in April 2005, when all stocks were sold out. However, its permanence is considerable: several years. Its technical data sheet established by the Environmental Protection Agency of the U.S.A. (45), stipulates that its half-life can be 7 months in the soil, from the fourth after 14 months, etc. This means that the Fipronil integrated into the soil in spring 2005 remains active in the fields at least until spring 2007.
This means that those who proclaim that bees continue to die when Fipronil has not been sold since 2005 would be better off keeping quiet.
The European Commission had to renew in May 2007 the marketing permit for Fipronil within the European Union. On March 16, 2007, the Standing Committee for the Food Chain and Animal Health in Brussels, after examining the Efsa notices, gave its endorsement.
If Fipronil is authorized again this month, it will be part of the list of authorized substances to be published on October 1, 2007.
According to the site «figaro.fr» (43), “The authorization carries various restrictions and requirements. First, fipronil will be authorized only for seed treatment, a condition that beekeepers justly blame for all the bad guys. Wrapping techniques will need to be improved in order to avoid any diffusion by powders (there was an incident with a conditioning carried out by Syngenta in South-West France). Spraying will be prohibited and the burying of the wrapped seeds at the time of sowing must be perfect to prevent the birds from pecking them. The wrapped seeds should also not be found in rivers and all surface waters, since they have been shown to be toxic to some aquatic organisms. "
Well, for birds it is not a concern, since there are not many left in certain agricultural regions, and this thanks to pesticides of all kinds that do not present any harmlessness, of course.
On the other hand, it is difficult to understand how to avoid that the seed coat is not found in the surface waters or in the water tables, when the farmer irrigates or when it rains. Fipronil, even if it is true that it has a tendency to bind strongly to the ground, is it genetically programmed not to give in to the temptation of dripping water? Unless modern seeds are genetically modified to germinate without water?
Let us mention the statement from BASF, which is undoubtedly congratulated on the well-deserved bonanza of its capital. Indeed, fipronil brings in hundreds of millions of dollars each year.
“Based on a scientific examination and at the end of a rigorous process, (the authorization decision) brings a new proof of the product's safety for the environment, for the consumer and for the farmer. It confirms the conclusions of the Afssa in 2005 on the absence of risks for human health and the numerous multifactorial studies on the causes of the deterioration of bees, carried out in France and in other European countries.(…) Fipronil and regent TS cannot be considered responsible for the death of bees. BASF wants to continue its efforts for an authentic dialogue with all the actors ”.
So would fipronil be completely harmless? In fact, not totally. As the deputy Jacques Ramillet recalled: "The mechanism of induction of thyroid tumors has been discussed by experts and considered as being a specific reaction of rats and not significant for humans ... However, fipronil being toxic in case of inhalation , ingestion or intensive skin exposure, the report proposes the classification T (toxic), thus adding it to the numerous list of toxic products in the current pharmacopoeia. "
In fact, it is dangerous for rats but not for humans. Is it because rats are so different from man? But then, how can thousands of chemicals be authorized thanks to scientific studies showing that, after a few weeks, rats were not victims of disorders or injuries after ingesting these chemicals?
We are swimming in the heart of a "quantum" chemistry: the products are harmless but they are also dangerous. Understand who can.
To top it all off, the "Standing Committee for the Food Chain and Animal Health" added an annex to its authorization to put fipronil back up for sale. This annex specifies that if other studies bring new information, the authorization could be reconsidered.
In fact, Efsa specifies that the impact of fipronil on the maggot has not been sufficiently studied. So, to summarize, fipronil is a harmless and dangerous product whose impacts have not yet been evaluated.
And when will they be? Since, on March 3, 2006, when Efsa communicated the results of its investigations, this body specified the following point:
"The risk to bees can only be concluded once recently submitted data on the risk on bee brood are evaluated."
Clearly, this means that, as of March 3, 2006, Efsa did not have time to analyze the recently obtained results regarding the impact of fipronil on the maggot. Efsa has now had unpublished data on this particular point in its investigations for 15 months.
Deputies, could you ask Efsa to publish these important data? If not, will we still have to wait 10 years, until the catastrophe is irremediable and BASF has increased its dividends? It should also be noted that Efsa evokes the high levels of toxicity of fipronil for bees in laboratory studies. In fact, their decision is based on exposures at low concentration (seed coatings) and in a tunnel situation.
Which means, as usual, that the impact of fipronil in a real situation (in the fields) in synergy with other pesticides has not been evaluated. Evidently.
However, this problem of pesticide synergies is surely one of the most essential to study. We recall, for example, the studies at the University of North Carolina that show that the synergy of neonicotinoids with very common fungicides (such as Terraguard and Procure) increases the toxicity of these neonicotinoids by 1000 times.
As for the nature of the toxicity of fipronil in the USA, it is clearly established.
- The University of Oregon considers this substance to be highly toxic to amphibians and rats (lesions of the liver, kidneys and thyroid). In addition, it is considered completely toxic to bees (44).
- Both the National Institute of Health of the U.S.A. and the National Library of Medicine, specify that fipronil is highly toxic to bees. They also warn against the danger of bioaccumulation of fipronil and its metabolites (46).
- The technical sheet on the site “beyondpesticides.org” classifies fipronil as highly toxic to bees. This substance destroys the central nervous system of the insect via the channels of gamma amino butyric acid or GABA (56).
- Bayer, which still possessed fipronil in 2003, paid 45 million damages to 1,600 plaintiffs in Louisiana who sued the court for the destruction of their crayfish farms, as a result of the use of the fipronil-based icon, in rice plantations.
When Rhone-Poulenc invented this molecule, his researchers drew attention to the fact that this substance was prone to bind to fats. The fipronil then becomes increasingly toxic as it becomes concentrated in the fats. The efficiency of Fipronil (flea killer for dogs, marketed under the name Front Line) lasts one year thanks to the fact that it is fixed in the fats of the animal.
The fipronil present in plants that feed animals will fixate in the fat of cows, and in milk. Residues were found in milk, and German veterinary services also found residues in peppers that came from Spain in 2003.
According to Professor Belpomme, professor of cancerology and founder of l’ARTAC (57): “It is one of the pesticides that most pollutes water, and its molecule is not selective. It not only harms bees but also birds, fish and mammals. And, within mammals, there is man. The molecule is stored in fatty tissues, is metabolized, and released into milk when children are breastfed. But what cannot be admitted is the negligence of the Ministry of Agriculture and the lies of the industrialists concerned. This hands-free policy runs the risk of leading to a matter similar to that of contaminated blood ”
In December 2003, Professor Jean-François Narbonne, Toxicologist, gave the results of his toxicology study of fipronil. He judged this substance neurotoxic, hepatotoxic and nephrotoxic. According to Professor Narbonne, the exposed mammals "then behave as hyperthyroidians with increased metabolisms of T3 and T4 (thyroid hormones), decreased plasma levels and increased TSH (thyroid stimulin hormone)."
This is undoubtedly what explains the disturbing disorders mentioned by the “Le Point” site: “at the end of April 2002, the 'Dépêche du Midi' announces a huge death of bees in 24 hours, in 'Midi-Pyrénées': 3000 hives destroyed in one fell swoop. The populations of the countryside suffocate. People are stunned. Edema, liver disorders, eye disorders (58).
Do you always talk about the same product that the European Commission wants to authorize again? And that, with the blessing of Efsa, whose recent director, Mrs. Geslain-lanelle, declared in February 2006: “I am committed to making Efsa a European benchmark in risk assessment regarding the safety of food products and of animal feed at European and international level. " (Page 76 of the Play "Pesticides. Revelations about a French scandal")
In December 2006, PAN (Pesticide Action International) Europe and other large organizations asked Europe not to authorize fipronil while all the evaluation studies had not been done (55).
It will not be easy as dozens of pesticide industry lobbyists have their headquarters in Brussels and permanently occupy their seats in the European Commission.
Threats, Corruption and Lobbying
Agro-chemical multinationals used three major persuasion tools since the end of the last world war. They are lobbying, threats and corruption. And the system works well, very well.
For the corruption in all strata of the French administration in the pesticides file, we invite you to read the exciting and well-documented work: “Pesticides. Revelations about a French scandal ”.
The threats suffered by the authors of the work, published by Fayard, are revealing of the panic of the pesticide industry staffs, including the UIPP, Union of Industrial Poison Promoters. That union flooded a certain press with delusional advertisements. Internet sites were created to demolish the work of Nicolino and Veillerette.
We have already invoked the Bayer firm's threats against investigators. But we have not invoked the threats of the same firm in 2001 against the spokesman beekeepers of certain beekeeping unions.
They were the same strategies that were used against Rachel Carson when she published her work "The Silent Spring" in 1962 (7). It was violently attacked by Monsanto and the entire agro-chemical mafia (9). Monsanto threatened reprisals from a part of the press that echoed this work. Since then, Monsanto's methods have been much more insidious and steeped in lies, misinformation and appearances. Monsanto maintains, for example, a website created recently in the USA. to inspire consumer confidence: the Center for Food Integrity. This maneuver seeks to sow confusion since there is a Center for Food Safety (11), a true organization that fights against food-poisons and chimeras.
The work of Rachel Carson was censored by William O. Douglas (8) who served for 37 years as a Justice of the Supreme Court in the United States. William O. Douglas called for the creation of laws to hinder "all the poisoners of the human race in the 20th century!" This work also strongly attracted the attention of President Kennedy who did not live long enough to make efficient dispositions but who nonetheless had time to vote on the Pesticide Act.
The French translation of Rachel Carson's work was prefaced by the president of the National Academy of Sciences, Roger IEM, who declared in 1963: "Gangsters are arrested," hold-up "authors are shot. murderers are guillotined, despots are shot - or so-called so - but who will put in jail the public poisoners who instill every day the products that synthetic chemistry delivers to their advantage and recklessness?
Who will put public poisoners in jail?
But possibly the all new president of France who promised to bring forth more morality and more security.
More morality certainly means less corruption in the entire sphere of the state.
More security undoubtedly means more food security: an organic agriculture on 100% of the territory, the prohibition of marketing and using synthetic fertilizers and all pesticides, the prohibition of spreading sludge, the interdiction of genetic chimeras and, of course, the ban on all patented seeds. Tomorrow everything is possible, even a France that does not continue to be an agricultural garbage dump, generator of cancers!
However, you have to hurry a bit! Since, as the president of France, elected and leaving, recently said: “Today, the time of lucidity has arrived” and we must “recognize that we have reached the threshold of the irreversible, of the irreparable”.
The Agony of the Pollinators
Let's talk a little about the irreparable - not much though, so as not to totally depress the reader.
As early as 1993, André Pouvreau (INRA-CNRS de Bures-sur-Yvette) invoked the threat of disappearance of pollinating bumblebees of the genus Bombus (29). In the US, three major species of Bombus are on the way to extinction.
André Pouvreau, Jean-Noël Tasei and André Vaissière (all researchers at INRA) launched the publication of a magazine, “Osmia” (30), a liaison newsletter for all those who study wild bees.
“On the other hand, recent studies and ongoing research confirm the key role of wild bees for the balance of ecosystems, both in natural and agricultural environments. Unfortunately, a significant proportion of the apidofauna of our regions is unknown and threatened, in particular by the anthropic pressure that weighs on the integrity of their nesting sites and on the integrity of the flower plant populations on which bees depend exclusively. For their develpment. A recent study of the evolution of floristic and entomological diversity over the past 25 years in England and the Netherlands revealed a significant decline in wild bee populations, a direct consequence of the disappearance of flower plant populations. to which they are linked ”(Biesmeijer et al. 2006) According to this study by Beismeijer (6), the diversity of wild bees fell by 52% in England and 67% in Holland and that, in the space of 20 years. Europe previously had 2,500 species of wild bees (91). As for butterflies, in Belgium for example, their populations fell from 75 to 100% in 25 years. On a European scale, certain studies estimate that 45% of butterfly species are threatened with extinction (38).
In the US, the catastrophe is total: natural pollinators are decimated. In 1996, Gary Paul Nabhan and Stephen Buchmann had sounded the alarm in their magnificent work, “The Forgotten Pollinators” (“The Forgotten Pollinators”).
The problem of pollination of extensive agricultural crops will surely not be solved by calling on bumblebees, wild bees, etc. They have been massacred like the Amerindians, for Progress, for Growth, for the supremacy of the white man.
The height of hypocrisy: we now have the privilege of listening to the preaching of some double-language poisoners, who invoke the loss of plant biodiversity, the origin of the disappearance of pollinators. Instead, its toxic poisons would be totally harmless within the limit allowed by law. There is even a puppet network in France called the “Biodiversity Network for Bees” also called short on its Internet site “Biodiversity Network”, financed by “companies in the sector”. Your goal is to sow fallow fields with flowers to save our little bees.
They deceive with false appearances! The same poisoners who lament the loss of diversity are those who participated greatly in its implementation: monocultures, chemical intrans sterilizing the soil, insecticides that kill insects and consequently birds, herbicides, etc. Where are the poppies and blacks, poisoning lords?
At this time, talking about fallows is a capital hypocrisy since a large part of them have been eradicated to make room for necro-fuels. It is enough to look out over the seas of yellow rapeseed east of Paris. The truth is that we no longer speak of fallows, but of "industrial fallows"
One more pearl of the "new language" (85).
According to biologist and geneticist Mae-Wan Ho, the toxins produced by Bt transgenic crops do not appear very toxic to bees. However, they are so for butterflies, whales, and certain coleopterans (73).
This non-toxicity seems confirmed by recent studies by David Tribe in Australia (70). Similar studies carried out in New Zealand, Switzerland and by the University of Maryland seem to confirm these results (71). However, one of these studies shows a decrease in libation activities when bees are fed syrup containing Cry1Ab toxin (72).
Mae-Wan Ho emphasizes that we must also focus on the sublethal impacts of the Bt toxin on the libation and learning capacity of the bee, and on its immune system.
It already underlined in 2000 the danger of horizontal transfers of transgenes (14) to the intestines of bees. It echoed the findings of Professor Hans-Hinrich Kaatz of the University of Jena (13).
The Blauen-Institut center (15) summarizes a similar article in the newspaper Der Speigel on March 19, 2007:
“Researchers from the University of Jena studied the effect of GM pollens on bees. In healthy individuals, no toxic effects were discovered. Instead, they found that if they were suddenly attacked by a parasite, the mortality was much higher in the experimental bees fed GM pollen. The most likely hypothesis, according to the researchers, is an immune depression in the bees caused by GM pollen. Due to lack of financial means, the study was stopped in 2004.
In this article (16), Professor Hans-Hinrich Kaatz states that: “Bacterial toxin from genetically modified corn may have altered the intestinal wall of the bee, weakening the insect sufficiently to allow parasites to enter - or, pass the inverse, we do not know ”. The professor points out that he would have liked to continue with his research, but "those who have the money are not interested in this type of research and those who are interested do not have the money."
At the moment, there is not much research done on the impact of genetic chimeras on bees. We can assume that all this requires a lot of money and teams of researchers.
Genetic chimeras are a planetary catastrophe, for farmers, for the environment, for food security, for human health.
For 20 years, billions of dollars have been spent to create genetically modified organisms, to study their toxicity, to create transgene analysis laboratories, to launch hundreds of investigations on their impact on the environment, on man, etc.
Can we imagine what could have been done with those billions of dollars to develop agro-ecology techniques?
In fact, modern and toxic Western agriculture is biting its fingers: it tries to patch up all the problems it has created with technological bungling. It is a quest doomed to fail and the planet has little chance of rising, at least on the scale of our human lives.
Bee navigation and electromagnetic fields
Both in the case of hive collapse syndrome or in the case of pesticide poisoning of bees, numerous studies carried out and numerous testimonies highlight a common denominator: bees lose their ability to orient themselves and cannot return to the hive.
This orientation ability of the bee is fantastic to say the least and was the subject of some scientific research. Elizabeth A. Capaldi, from the University of Illinois, was able to verify (68) that, after five weeks, the bee integrated the topography of an area surrounding the hive within a radius of 10 km. (and sometimes more) which represents an area of at least 30,000 hectares! Elizabeth A. Capaldi installed a very small radar on the back of the bees. It was in the years 1999/2000 and since that time numerous other studies on the navigation of bees were published that lift the veil a little on this great mystery (69).
Other studies, carried out mainly in Europe, tried to perceive the influence of electromagnetic fields on bees.
Biologist and geneticist Mae-Wan Ho submits detailed reports on her website regarding the possibility of such influences (12).
He mentions the research carried out by a team from the University of Landau in Germany with hives and cordless phones. The result of these investigations was very convincing: weakening of the hives and inability for certain bees to find it again (107).
Why would modern telephony technologies have more impacts now when they have existed for about twenty years? Mae-Wan Ho advances the hypothesis of third-generation telephony whose antennas are increasingly ubiquitous in Western countries.
The extreme sensitivity of bees to electromagnetic fields and magnetic field disturbances has been well known since the last century.
In 1974, Russian researchers Eskov and Sapozhnikov showed that bees generate electromagnetic signals at a frequency that varies from 180 to 250 Hz when they perform their communication dance. Researchers from the U.S.A. they obtained very similar results in the last twenty years (102). GSM telephony is modulated at 217 Hz. Hungry bees reacted to these frequencies by straightening their antennas (32).
In 1965, J O Husing, in ‘Biene und Elektrizitat’ in ImkerfrE.U.And (Beekeeper Friend) already made this impact of low frequencies evident.
In 2006, Professor Stever took up the kind of experiments conducted by Professor Hans-Hinrich Kaatz with the same compelling results. During the first pilot study, the hives had been moved 1000 meters away but no bees were able to return to the hive (35).
The hives were removed after 800 meters. Two hives were exposed to a wireless phone and two hives were not. 25 bees were chosen from each hive and deposited 800 meters away. For the unexposed hives, 16 and 17 bees returned after 28 and 32 minutes respectively. For exposed hives, 6 bees returned to the first hive after 38 minutes. No bees returned to the second hive. Professor Ferdinand Ruzicka (himself a beekeeper and chronicler for bee magazines) observed problems in his apiary after three telephone masts were installed in his neighborhood. He conducted a survey with 20 beekeepers who also had antennas near their apiaries within a radius of 300 meters. Out of the 20 beekeepers, 8 mentioned more aggressive behavior of bees, 5 mentioned a tendency to swarm more quickly, and 14 mentioned colony collapse syndrome.
According to the observations of Professor Ferdinand Ruzicka, bees are so weakened by the presence of telephone masts that they become less resistant to disease. Also consider that 15 years earlier, they were able to resist much more severe varroa infections.
In Germany, two researchers, Professor Hermann Stever, a mathematician, and Dr Jochen Khun, a professor and lecturer, have just received two awards for their work on the relationship between electrosmog and bees (91).
In 2006, Balmori (95) studied the impact on bees of electromagnetic radiation from mobile telephony.
Bindokas VP, Gauger JR, Greenberg B. (96) have studied the impact of high voltages in 1988 in the USA.
In 1997, Kirschvink J, Padmanabha S, Boyce C, Oglesby J. (97) studied the impact of very low frequencies on bees in the USA (99).
In 1996, Sandeman, Tautz and Lindauer studied the transmission of vibrations through the hive combs and their detection by the legs of bees (100).
In the 1970s, a biophysicist at the University of Saarbrücken, Doctor Ulrich Warnke, demonstrated the stress reactions of bees under the influence of frequencies from 10 to 20 KHz31.
Doctor Ulrich Warnke (93) also reported that the communication impulses of the antennas of one bee touched by another bee can be measured by an oscillograph (33). On the other hand, Ulrich Warnke showed that low frequencies disturb metabolic processes in the bee. In 1976, he published a study (94) on the effects of electrical charges on bees.
Doctor Ulrich Warnke (98) published, in April 2007, a statement in 6 points regarding the disturbance of the bee's navigational and orientation capabilities by electrical, magnetic and electromagnetic radiation. Your first two points are as follows:
- The integuments of bees have semiconductor and piezoelectric functions. This means that they transform high-frequency microwaves into audio signals. Several segments of the integument function as dielectric receptors for electromagnetic radiation in the microwave spectrum.
- Magnetite nanoparticles are found in the abdomen of bees.
All these investigations confirm the works and the brilliant insights of the great American entomologist, Philip Callahan, who published 14 works and 200 scientific articles and gave lectures all over the planet. Philip Callahan significantly advanced the domain of research on insect navigation and infrared communication systems. He spent dozens of years studying the integuments, chitin, and antennae of insects. He also worked extensively in agroecology on the paramagnetic properties of soils in relation to fertility (103).
These studies will possibly shed new light on the works (104) of the Russian entomologist ViKtor S. Grebennikov (who died in 2001) who discovered the CSE (Cavity Structure Effect) (106). He did a lot of work on antigravitational systems in insects. His works were many times denigrated surely for being too advanced for all handicapped of the joie de vivre. He wrote a work whose foreword was written by Yuri N. Cherednichenko, Director of Research at the Biophysics Laboratory of the Institute of Pathology and Human Ecology, Russian Academy of Medicine (105).
Honey: nectar of the Gods ... or a cocktail of antibiotics, acaricides and transgenic pollen
It is not the syndrome of the collapse of the colonies that will make life easier for beekeepers in terms of the possibility of satisfying domestic markets with honey.
In France, production is 16,000 tons when 40,000 would be needed to satisfy the demand of the national market.
In the USA, in 2006 production was only 70,000 tons, that is, 11% less than the previous year.
In Québec, beekeepers complain bitterly that the price of honey dropped to 0.50 euros per pound on the wholesale market when the cost of production is 1.50 euros per pound! Nobody pays attention to them and consumers are not aware that 80% of the honey bought in Québec is imported from Argentina.
In Europe, honey is imported from Argentina. Sometimes it is imported from China but given the ecological disaster in this country, one has to fear the worst. Since the name "honey" sometimes hides many surprises.
Recently, Argentina was at the heart of a great beekeeping crisis because importers from other countries refused to import Argentine honey full of antibiotics and acaricides. After China, Argentina is the second largest honey producer in the world with around 100,000 tons in 2006, from 2.5 million hives, managed by 33,000 beekeepers. Argentina is the world's leading exporter (63): 90% of its production is exported.
The beekeeping crisis is likely to intensify as the amount of transgenic pollen in honey is discovered or, rather, analyzed.
Last year, in southwestern France, studies were carried out, under official control, to reveal the presence of transgenic pollen in hives. The hives installed between 500 and 1200 meters of transgenic corn field were contaminated up to 50% (67).
In May 2000, honey containing transgenic rapeseed pollen was discovered in England by the Friends of the Earth association. Genetically modified components from the firm Aventis were discovered in two samples analyzed by a laboratory in Austria (65). Some contaminated hives were 4 or 5 km away. from the fields of chimeric rapeseed.
In 2004, the Australian government conducted research to determine the amount of pollen coming from transgenic rapeseed, in samples of 34 honeys from Australia and Canada. Everything is going well in the best of worlds: all the honeys contained transgenic pollen but in an amount less than 1%, then without any obligation to label. Legally contaminated, but without the need to notify the buyer!
In 1999, the BBC reported the research of Dutch scientists using the nectar of genetically modified plants to produce medicines or vaccines (66). Indeed, scientists from the "Center for Plant Breeding and Reproduction Research" in Wageningen realized that fungicidal proteins from common heather were found in honey. They then fed bees with a solution containing bovine serum albumin: not only did they find this albumin intact in the honey, but it was also doubly concentrated.
They then created transgenic petunias containing a vaccine to immunize dogs against a disease called parvovirus. They also began research to see if sugars protect the proteins in honey without the need for refrigeration, in order to create vaccines for the tropics.
Honey to the transgenic vaccine, it had to be thought!
On the other hand, could it not be said that all honey contaminated by transgenic pollen becomes, by this simple fact, a pharmaceutical honey? And it is not only in the southwest of France that honey begins to be contaminated by transgenic pollen.
Soy honey guaranteed to GMO pollen coming soon?
Argentine beekeepers are terrified that importers begin to analyze the transgenic pollen content of their honeys.
Well, Argentina is covered in soy, of course, transgenic soy, 100% Monsanto trademark. But you are going to tell me, Father God, in his infinite wisdom, didn't he create autogamous soybeans, without the need for pollinators, so that Monsanto can sow its chimerical seeds without contaminating bios and old-fashioned farmers who would only use varieties not improved by the "Genetic genius"?
It's what liars tell. The reality is very different and it has been known for a long time that in some regions of the USA, for example, beekeepers harvest soy honey.
In 2004, the INRA researcher André Pouvreau published an excellent book entitled "Pollinating insects" from which we quote a very short extract on soy: "In certain soybean growing conditions, the placement of hives can contribute to increasing grain yield by reducing the number of empty pods. " (Page 20)
Between 1930 and 1970, many scientists and agronomists studied very closely the possibilities of using bees as pollination vectors for the cheap mass production of soy hybrids. Weber et al. (1970), Veatch (1930), Bradner (1969), Brim and Young (1971).
An article on the relationship between bees and agricultural production was distributed at the time of the EAS conference in 1997, in the USA, mentioning the fact that in the Delaware bee hives are brought to “favor the pollination of soybean crops”.
In 1960, Gordienko placed bees in a veiled box containing two varieties of soybeans: He fed them with scented syrups in order to stimulate flower visits: he obtained 29% hybridization in one variety and 44% in the other.
For more information and references, we invite the reader to consult pages 399 and 400 of Dominique Guillet's work "the seeds of Kokopelli" (61).
To conclude, soybeans are abundantly alogamous (60) and bees are widely used to promote their pollination. Riddle: apiaries in the middle of the fields will they produce soy honey or acacia honey?
Argentine beekeepers have not finished suffering. Indeed, 50% of the honey produced in Argentina is in regions covered with transgenic crops! And Julio César Díaz, beekeeper and president of the Argentine Association of Apitherapy, complains with good reason that it is the Argentine beekeepers who will pay for the broken dishes. Julio César Díaz violently attacks the "hypocritical pirates" who took advantage of the crisis of Argentine honeys contaminated with antibiotics and acaricides to break prices and increase their surplus value by as much. And it specifies that they are the same ones who trained the beekeepers to use the most violent chemistry to control parasites in the hive without worrying about developing gentle and durable techniques that, of course, did not generate foreign exchange for sellers of toxic products.
Let us hope that the commission of inquiry on bees, requested by French deputies, will not fail to seriously investigate the problem of contaminated transgenic honeys, be it by pollen from Argentine transgenic soybeans, or by chimeric corn pollen from south-west France. In 2006, there are 5,460 tons of Argentine honey that were imported by France (64).
As for Germany, there are 30,000 to 40,000 tons of honey that are imported from Argentina.
As Pierre Rabhi, agro-ecologist and poet rightly put it: “An agriculture that cannot produce without destroying carries with it the germs of its own destruction. At lunchtime, the time has come to wish each other good luck rather than good luck (59). "
From so much going the hive to the evils that in the end it gets tired
What stands out from this long report is a deep exhaustion of the bees.
Western modern beekeeping is the image of modern farming of the same name.
It is a militarized beekeeping not to say war beekeeping:
- Overcrowded barracks, which some would even call concentration camps, sterilized with antibiotics and acaricides.
- Punching operations (poetically described as transhumance) on selected monocultures.
- Fields of death, reminiscent of the episode of the trench warfare, bombarded with fungicides, herbicides: the heirs of mustard gas.
- Smokers (without the tobacco ration) to anesthetize recalcitrant bees.
- Food-poison: white sugar, corn syrup, soy flour, rapeseed oil, all with GM sauce.
- A restrained sexuality, by the artificial insemination of the queens.
- Considerable losses in the civilian population, collateral damage from the pesticide bombings.
- Correrías: theft of honey reserves.
- More and more armored field suits for the beekeeper, due to the constantly increasing aggressiveness of the bees.
- The slaughter of millions of queens, on the eighth day of their embryonic development, to "collect" royal jelly.
Not to mention the waves of aggressors that assail bees on all fronts, since the end of the last world war, since the technology of war became the technology of agriculture:
- The varroa "varroa destructor". This Asian mite invaded Latin America in 1971 (imported from Japan by beekeepers from Paraguay) and arrived in Europe in the early 1960s at the same time that the West invaded Asia with its pseudo-green revolution. Until then, the varroa lived peacefully in symbiosis with the small Indian bee, Apis ceranae. There is even a Russian bee of the species Apis mellifica relatively resistant to varroa due to its geographical location (extreme eastern Russia. Primorsky). (75)
- Acariasis, caused by Acarapis woodi. This mite is an internal parasite of the bee. The female lays her eggs at the entrance to or inside the windpipe. It has been strongly affecting the US since 1984 and in 2007 it seems to expand in Europe.
- A new nosemosis caused by the protozoan Nosema ceranea (78). It is already present in Spain and even in France, according to Marie Pierre Chauzat. This protozoan has been suspected of being the cause of bee colony collapse syndrome. It seems unlikely since it has been present in the US for a dozen years (79).
- The small beetle of the hives, Aethina tunida (76). A very present and fearsome newcomer from Africa in the US (since 1998 in Florida) (77), Canada and Australia. It would now be present in Portugal.
- Another acariasis caused by the mites Tropilaelaps clarae and tropilaelaps koenigerum. They are not yet present in Europe but would be in Australia or near Australian coasts, which represents a pollution hazard for the USA, where many farmers ask Australia for bees for pollination. Tropilaelaps clarae and Tropilaelaps koenigerum normally live in symbiosis with Asian bees, Apis florea, Apis dorsata and Apis ceranae.
- A new predator of bees, a drone called Vespa velutina nigrithorax, endemic to China in Bhutan, and in northern India, was introduced to France in late 2004. Vespa Velutina builds its nests high up in pine trees and its reproduction rate is high since it does not have natural predators. Attack the bees in mid-flight.
- The bees are surrendered by all these war efforts and this universe of concentration. The bees have used up their ammunition and the immune system creaks.
- A minority rebelled because of the violence: they are called “Africanized” bees (80). They come from hybridization work carried out in 1957 in Brazil by a biologist, Warwick E. Kerr, who crossed bees from Europe with bees from South Africa (26 queens from tanzania, of the species Apis mellifica scutellata). In 1958, these hybrid bees left the hive and left Latin America for the north, crossing Central America and arriving in Texas in 1990.
- They are now present throughout the southern U.S.A. They are sometimes very violent, very aggressive, hence they are called "Killer bees". The number of humans that these bees killed varies depending on the sources (from a few individuals to a thousand). They even attack large livestock.
The vast majority of bees seem rather prone to capitulate in the face of adversity. The famous biologist Henri Laborit would have possibly spoken in his case of the “praise of the flight”.
- Is this syndrome of the collapse of the colonies really something other than a collective desertion of the troops?
The bees leave the hive without returning. And modern, reassuring agriculture, which puts electronic fleas on all domestic animals, has not had time to launch a comprehensive program to put electronic fleas on bees: tens of billions of bees are therefore reported missing.
Syndrome of the collapse of human colonies.
According to entomologists, bees have been on the planet for at least a hundred million years since a team of researchers from the University of Oregon announced last year the discovery of the oldest bee fossil, of the species Melittosphex burmensis (82 ) found in Burma, in amber from the Cretaceous period.
We can think that humanity co-evolved with bees for some tens of thousands of years and that beekeeping was practiced, in one form or another, for about 10,000 years.
In the space of barely a century, modern western society has nearly eradicated the honey bee, and the fate of wild bees is no better. What a feat!
In fact, the aggressors of the bee that we have just described are not your enemies: they are only cleaning agents in charge of eliminating what is not in accordance with the laws of nature. And why is modern beekeeping not in accordance with natural laws? Because modern man lost all sense of the sacred. He's just obsessed with productivity. It has to produce, to extract, a lot and quickly, and in this case, honey, from the bee's stomach. And, of course, the force of pollination. John Lennon could have also sung: "honeybees is the nigger of the food World"
The only true enemy of the bee, its only predator on the planetary scale, is modern man.
Albert Einstein warned humanity: "If the bee disappeared from the surface of the globe, man would not have more than four years to live, no more pollination, no more grass, no more animals, no more men." (83)
In 1923, Rudolf Steiner announced the collapse of the bees.
Long before Einstein, Rudolf Steiner, the founder of biodynamic agriculture, in a series of lectures he gave to beekeepers in 1923 (84), strongly condemned the raising of queens. During these lectures, steeped in poetry and a true perception of the nature of the bee, a professional beekeeper pointed out his total misunderstanding regarding Steiner's condemnation of the rearing of queens.
Rudolf Steiner replied: if the organic forces at work in the hives continue to be replaced by mechanical forces (including the artificial rearing of queens from worker larvae) the situation will become very serious for the bees. He gave an appointment to the beekeeper a century later, warning him that by that date, if these practices persisted, there would be no more queen beds, that is, that the bees would simply have disappeared. In short, Rudolf Steiner, who already in 1924 foresaw the advent of the "mad cow" heralds the collapse of bees in 1923. He added that the survival of humanity depended on the survival of bees.
Not a century has passed yet, but the deadline seems to be approaching very quickly. And possibly it is already here: in another conference Steiner gave a term of 80 years. Is now.
An obsessive quest for elite queens
According to Mauricio Chaudière "Since man is a man, the bee parasitizes ... The most surprising thing, in this" man-bee "relationship, is that it is possible to take part of their goods from the hive without ruining it"
Indeed, contrary to their common name, bees are not domesticated (from the Latin ‘domus’, house). At least they weren't until the early 20th century, when beekeepers started raising queens. This time of 1910/1920 is, on the other hand, the time during which the first F1 maize hybrids were introduced with all their entourage of unclear concepts: hybrid vigor, elite seeds, pure lines, etc. They are the first attempts to put seeds in captivity (degeneration process) to reach the modern Terminator gene that sterilizes the plant, preventing it from bearing fertile seeds.
Can one stop thinking that the bee was actually put into captivity when the beekeeper started to breed queens and artificially inseminate them? It was the beginning of the rearing of the queens in "battery". (Does this battery term refer to the "artillery company and its equipment?")
In addition, one of the first advantages of selecting queens is avoiding natural swarming, a source of many concerns for beekeepers. In short, prevent the bees from going on an adventure, prevent them from breaking their chains since, remember, they are not domestic animals.
In nature, queens mate 10 to 40 times over the span of a few days. The number of couplings varies depending on the species of bees and the subspecies. The Mellificar Association (86) 86 cites the research of the French geneticist Frank. P whose doctoral thesis dealt with "The genetic approach to evolutionary issues associated with sociobiology and the phylogeography of the domestic bee".
In the battery, the queen's spermatheca is inseminated with the sperm of a few dozen bumblebees. The queen is anesthetized with CO2 and immobilized in a plastic tube during this surgical procedure.
Why did the bees of the genus Apis choose polyandry?
Clearly the answer to this essential question goes beyond the box in this article. However, it is possibly one of the fundamental keys to the survival of the honey bee, if for them surviving may still be possible.
Wouldn't there be a lesson to be learned from the way the "Killer Bees", the Africanized bees, are reappropriating certain territory? They are already in the US in 9 southern states and, when they arrive in a region, it seems that they are capable of Africanizing between 20 to 30% of the apiaries in a year. It would also seem that they soften as they are installed in a territory. They are also naturally more resistant to varroase.
Instead, they swarm when they please and are very uncooperative in terms of untimely use of their labor power for industrial-wide pollinations.
According to studies that have been carried out, queens inseminated with sperm from Africanized bumblebees and sperm from non-Africanized bumblebees have a tendency to request 70% of Africanized bumblebee sperm from their sperm. Why?
One last message from the bees
All civilizations have considered the bee as a sacred animal. The Mayans, who considered bees as an emanation of sunlight, even had a bee divinity, Ah Muzen Cab.
For Mauricio Chaudière, "The arrows of Eros are only bees at the discretion of Aphrodite." The Artemis of Ephesus had a swarm at her feet.
What remains of this vision of the bee in modern beekeeping? Nothing remains. The bee is a slave in the service of militarized agriculture. The queen is a sex slave inseminated in aseptic laboratories.
For Gunther Hauk, director of the Pfeiffer Center in the USA: “Regarding this strange phenomenon called colony collapse syndrome, in which bees leave the house and do not return, I would like to suggest the following line of reflection. When stress, poisons, adulterated food, and “exploitative practices”, in addition to a lack of respect and consideration, reach a certain level, the spiritual essence, this component of the being that maintains the integrity of the organism, disappears . When we look at an animal, we perceive its physical body. The Amerindians, still clairvoyant, "perceived" this spiritual entity who presides over the vital instincts of the animal with all wisdom. They called this spiritual entity the "Great Bear" or the "Great Bison." We would be prone to think that when the "Big Bee" experiences all these destructive forces, it detaches itself from the physical entity.
When the spiritual center of the hive is thus weakened, the individual bee takes its flight and returns no more. Because, in fact, it has nowhere to return to. The "Big Bee", which we might call the group-soul, cannot maintain the integrity of the colony. (87) "
It is undoubtedly the ultimate message of the bees: they separate themselves from humanity, they are going to die as a group. For tens of billions, and they even have the decency not to crowd their concentration camps with their corpses. Ultimate delicacy.
They transhuman definitely. Possibly to another planet or another cosmos? Or maybe towards another humanity, more respectful? Trashumance can be interpreted as trash, beyond the territory, or as trashumancia, beyond the human.
The solar beekeeping of Mauricio Chaudière
We would not like to end this article without adding a note of hope since there are still, all over the world, beekeepers in love with their bees who can understand that it is no longer necessary to look abroad for miracle chemicals or new hyper-selected super-queens.
The answer is within, it is within the heart of beekeepers. Mauricio Chaudière, at 80 years old, always has intact this love for bees that he gave them during 60 years of beekeeping. Mauricio is a sculptor, a poet, a pedagogue, a graft farmer, a beekeeper, a breeder, a gardener ... At a time when the Da Vinci Code invades the shelves of our bookstores (to make the people dream or to prepare them for a great revelation?) we would be prone to perceive in Mauritius a magnificent and fertile expression of that Da Vinci energy that would be focusing on the management of natural resources.
“The bees and we are in the same boat. If we dedicated ourselves to respecting their wild integrity, because they were never domesticated but only "exploited", then our very behavior would be changed. By living to the rhythm of the bees, that is to say, to the rhythm of nature, we would have some opportunity to re-establish health ”.
“Another lesson that comes from the observation of bees and that would convince me, if necessary, of the imperative need to protect the biodiversity in our environment, is the renewal period that we can cause next to a deficient hive by freeing it from the subjection to which modern Beekeeping forced it. Immediately after a beehive's creature reveals itself irregular or diseased, if the swarm of its squares armed with wax combs, its metallic threads and its more or less cubic compartment is released and we place it back in its "natural condition. ”, That is, without any of these devices, allowing it to settle in a precarious refuge where it will have all freedom to form a cluster, it will have rediscovered its best incubation condition. Now, incubation is the essential function of the hive since the colony has to incubate its hatchery to ensure the permanent renewal of its population, each bee surviving for a short time to its own task. Although it is necessary that their environment is varied and free of all the toxic products that are used so much to give our countryside that “cleanliness” that sometimes makes us proud ”(86).
Mauricio developed a form of beekeeping that he calls “solar” (108). He created clay hives that are the prefect environment for bees. Mauricio is also the inventor of an extendable hive, increasingly known in France, which allows varroase to be treated in a very simple way, and without any natural or synthetic product (89).
“The advantages of the extendable hive are numerous: we eliminate varroas, we harvest royal jelly, we provoke and control swarming, we renew half of the combs, we raise the queens naturally, we have managed a hive with two queens, we double the volume of the cresa and we increase the volume of the harvest the same. Also, no toxic products entered the hive. "
Let's free the bees
Let us free the bees before Colony Collapse Syndrome does not become Human Colony Collapse Syndrome.
Let us free the bees from their prison universes, from laboratory procreation, from fungicides, pesticides and insecticides, from electromagnetic radiation, and from genetic chimeras. When they will have come out of their captivity, well they will free themselves of their parasites - or called such, since when the soil is healthy, the parasites are not really that "those who eat next to another", in the Greek sense of the term . And man, without a doubt, must be added to the number of parasites of the bee, since, since the dawn of time, she has shared with him the treasures of the hive. Those treasures, whose names are the number on the sides of its cell, are honey, pollen, wax, royal jelly, poison, and propolis.This last substance is surely one of the most therapeutic substances on the planet: that is why it was called "propolis", "in front of the city" since it removes the evils of the bee's home, at least the evils of natural origin. Propolis proved powerless to protect the bee from the evils of human technology.
In the last century there were undoubtedly still close to a million species of insects in this great planetary hive. Within a few dozen years, very many species were eradicated by toxic agriculture, by deforestation, by desertification, by urbanization.
In this million species of insects, the bee is unique. The poet could say that the bee never flies alone: it is always accompanied by a spirit of fire who surrounds it with an aura of light whose source is cosmic. Because the bee is, par excellence, the carrier of pollen, the messenger of pollen and pollen is a small piece of sun. That is why ancient civilizations revered the bee as a solar emanation, a messenger between the Cosmos and the Earth.
Is it not strange that the bee, symbol of fire, is unleashed from a humanity whose enthusiasm, in the Greek sense of "internal fire", seems to wither, suffocated under the ashes of a technology whose Having-more serves as well-being ?
Is it not strange that the solar bee deserts the Earth at the very moment when the planet begins to suffocate under the anguish of a warming that, aided by human madness, will turn it into a burning desert in a very short time? (109)
Dominique Guillet, by Associacion Kokopelli - Translation of René Molteni
Notes and Links
18. Bonmatin JM, Moineau I, Charvet R, Fleche C, Colin ME and Bengsch ER. A LC / APCI-MS / MS method for analysis of imidacloprid in soils, in plants, and in pollens. Anal Chem. 2003 May 1; 75 (9): 2027-33.
19. Bonmatin JM, Marchand PA, Charvet R, Moineau I, Bengsch R and Colin ME. Quantification of imidacloprid uptake in maize crops. J Agric Food Chem. 2005 Jun 29; 53 (13): 5336-41.
20. Rortaisa A, Arnolda G, Halmbm M and Touffet-Briensb F. Modes of honeybees exposure to systemic insecticides: estimated amounts of contaminated pollen and nectar consumed by different categories of bees Apidologie 2005, 36, 71-83
21. 6. Bortolotti L, Monanari R, Marcelino J and Porrini P. Effects of sub-lethal imidacloprid doses on the homing rate and foraging activity of honey bees. Bulletin of Insectology 2003, 56 (1) ,: 63-67
22. Medrzycki P, Monntanari L, Bortolotti L, Sabatinin S and Maini S. Effects of imidacloprid administered in sub-lethal doses on honey bee behavior. Laboratory tests. Bulletin of Insectology 2003, 56 (1): 59-62
24. http://www.monsanto.com/monsanto/us_ag/layout/productivity_ traits / yieldgard / default.asp
31. Warnke, U .: Physikalisch-physiologische Grundlagen zur luftelektrisch bedingten „Wetterfühlig-keit“ der Honigbiene (Apis mellifica). Diss. Saarbrücken 1973.
32. Eskov, E. K., Sapozhnikov, A. M .: Mechanisms of generation and perception of electric fields by honey bees. Biophysik 21 (1976) 6, 1097-1102.
33. Popp, F.A., Warnke. U., König, H.L., Peschka, W .: Electromagnetic Bio-Information, München: Urban & Schwarzenberg 1989.
34. Stever, H., Kimmel, S., Harst, W., Kuhn, J., Otten, C., Wunder, B .: Verhaltensänderung der Ho-nigbiene apis mellilfera unter elekromagnetischer Exposition. Landau: Arbeitgruppe Bildungsin-formatik.
35. E-mail of the co-author Wolfgang Harst dated 29. März 2007 to Diagnose-Funk.
36. http://www.lqj.ch/content/index.php?option=com_content&t ask = view & id = 4477 & Itemid = 196
38. http: //cordis.Europa.E.U.A/search/indexcfm? Fuseaction = news.simpl (…)
44. Hamon, Nicholas, Richard Shaw, and Henry Yang. 1996. Worldwide development of fipronil. insecticide. Proc.- Beltwide Cotton Conf. 2: 759-765.
45. http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/ Day-26 / p30949.htm
47.  Colin M.E., Bonmatin J.M. et al., (2004), A method to quantify and analyze the foraging activity of honey bees: relevance to the sub-lethal effects induced by systemic insecticides, Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, in press.
 Suchail S., Guez D. et al., (2001), Discrepancy between acute chronic toxicity induced by imi-dacloprid and its metabolites in Apis mellifera, Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 20 (11): 2482-2486.
 Bonmatin J.M., Moineau I. et al. (2001), NE.U. Arotoxiques systémiques: bioavailability, toxicity and risk for insects pollinators - le cas de l’imidaclopride -Produits Phytosanitaires. Eds. Press Univ., Reims, France, 175-181.
 Bonmatin J.M., (2002), Insecticide et pollinisatE.U.Ars: une dérive de la chimie ?, Sciences, 2, 42-46.
 Bonmatin JM, Moineau I, et al. (2003), A LC / APCI-MS / MS method for analysis of imidacloprid in soils, in plants, and in pollens, Analytical Chemistry, 1, 75 (9), 2027-2033.
 Bonmatin J.M., Charvet R. et al., (2003), Presence of systemic pesticide imidacloprid in crops and risk to non-targeted insect species, 3rd Symposium of the Mediterranean Group of Pesticide Research, Aix en Provence, p9.
 Doucet-Personeni C., Halm M.P. et al., (2003), Final report of the Scientific Committee and Technique de l’Etude Multifactorielle des troubles des abeilles (CST), Imidaclopride used in enrobage of semences (Gaucho) et troubles des abeilles, 1-221.
 Bonmatin J.M., Charvet R., et al., (2002). CE Report N ° 15: Effets des produits phytosanitaires sur les abeilles: Recherche, mise au point et validation du dosage du fipronil et de ses métabolites dans les pollens, CNRS-CBM / SCA, 1-59.
 Bonmatin J.M., (2003). CE Report N ° 16: Effets des produits phytosanitaires sur les abeilles :, Analytic, validation, prélèvements en vue du dosage du fipronil dans les pollens, CNRS CBM / SCA: 1-23
49. http://web.auth.gr/biogengr/html/en/[email protected]_ id = 5 & cat3_id = 13.htm
51. http://www.bulletinofinsectology.org/pdfarticles/vol56 2003-007-023lewis.pdf
52. A case of acute intoxication with deltamethrin in bees Daniela Nica, Elisabeta Bianu, Gabriela Chioveanu Institute for Diagnosis and Animal Health, Str. Dr. Staicovici Nr. 63, Sector 5, 76 202 Bucharest, Romania;
53. A case of acute intoxication with chlorpyrifos in bees Elisabeta Bianu, Daniela Nica, Gabriela Chioveanu Institute for Diagnosis and Animal Health, Str. 63, Sector 5, 76 202 Bucharest, Romania;
54. Honey bees as indicator of the agricultural pollution in some areas of central Italy. Enzo Marinelli, Fabio Massimo De Pace, Paola Belligoli, Livia Persano Oddo, Alfredo Carini, Francesco Falsetti, Rita Campanelli. Ministero delle Politiche Agricole e Forestali, Istituto Sperimentale per la Zoologia Agraria, Sezione di Apicoltura, Rome, Italy; ARSIAL, Sperimentale di Viterbo Operational Center, Italy;
55. http://www.foeE.U.Arope.org/press/2006/joint_11_Dec_bees_ pesticides.htm
60. - Woodworth CM 1922. The extent of Natural Cross-Pollination in soybean. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 14: 278-283.
-Beard, B H, Knowees, P. F. 1971. Frequency of cross-pollination of soybeans after irradiation. Crop Sci. 11: 489-492.
-Caviness C. E. 1966. Estimates of natural cross-pollination in Jackson soybeans in Arkansas. 6 (2): 211.
-Caviness C. 1970. Cross-pollination in the soybean. In: The indispensable pollinators, Ark. Agr. Ext. Serv. Misc. Pub. 127, pp. 33-36.
-Abud S, Souza PIM, Moreira CT, Andarde SRM, Kiihl RAS, Farias Neto AL, Rech E, Aragão, F. 2001. Gene flow between transgenic and non-transgenic soybean plants in the field. 47th Congress of the Brazilian Society of Genetics.
-Ahrent DK, Caviness CE. 1994. Natural cross-pollination of twelve soybean cultivars in Arkansas. Crop Science 34: 376378.
-Gordineko, V. Sexual Hybrids of Soya Beans obtained by directed bee pollination .. 1960. Pp.400-407. In Mel’nichenko, A. N., [Pollination of Agricultural Plants by Bees.] SSSR.
72. Ramirez-Romero R, Chaufaux J and Pham-Delègue M. Effects of Cry1Ab protoxin, deltamethrin and imidacloprid on the foraging activity and the learning performances of the honeybee A comparative approach Apidologie 2005, 36, 601-11.
74. - Colin, M.E. & L.P. Belzunce. 1992. Evidence of synergy between Prochloraz and deltamethrin in / Apis / mellifera L .: a convenient biological approach. Pestic. Sci. 36: 115-119.
-Belzunces, L.P. & I. Colin. 1993. Synergies between insecticides and fungicides appliqués à des doses sublétales chez l’abeille. Phytoma vol. 446.
-Suchail S, Debrauwer L, Belzunces LP. 2004. Biotransformation of imidacloprid into two toxic metabolites in / Apis / mellifera. Pest Manag. 60: 291-296.
-Suchail S, De Sousa G, Rahmani R, Belzunces LP. / In / vivo distribution and metabolization of 14C-imidacloprid in different compartments of / Apis / mellifera L. 60: 1056-1062.
-Guez D, Suchail S, Maleska R, Gauthier M, Belzunces LP. Contrasting effects of imidacloprid on habituation in 7day and 8-day old honeybees. NE.U. Arolbiol. Learn. Mem. 76: 183191.
-Suchail S, Guez D, Belzunces LP. Discrepancy between acute and chronic toxicity induced by imidacloprid and its metabolites in / Apis / mellifera. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 20: 24822486.
-Suchail S, Guez D, Belzunces LP. 2000. Characteristics of imidacloprid toxicity to two / Apis / mellifera subspecies. 19: 1901-1905.
79. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/ a / 2007/04/26 / MNGK7PFOMS1.DTL
83. Dictionnaire Larousse des citations (1989)
85. http://www.jacheres-apicoles.fr/index/chap-qui_sommes_ nous /