All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
June 21, 2016 - Skeptoid
17:13
Skeptoid #524: Colony Collapse Disorder: Science and Pseudoscience

Everyone loves to point the finger at the cause of Colony Collapse Disorder; here's what we actually know. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Why Bees Are Disappearing 00:09:15
Everyone loves honeybees and the glorious golden honey they produce while handling the critically important job of pollination.
And everyone was deeply concerned when the world first learned about colony collapse disorder and the havoc it was wreaking on bee populations.
Well, they're doing much better now, and we've learned a lot about the cause.
But we still haven't been able to stop it.
Colony collapse disorder is coming right up on Skeptoid.
Hi, I'm Alex Goldman.
You may know me as the host of Reply All, but I'm done with that.
I'm doing something else now.
I've started a new podcast called Hyperfixed.
On every episode of HyperFixed, listeners write in with their problems and I try to solve them.
Some massive and life-altering, and some so minuscule it'll boggle your mind.
No matter the problem, no matter the size, I'm here for you.
That's HyperFixed, the new podcast from Radiotopia.
Find it wherever you listen to podcasts or at hyperfixedpod.com.
You're listening to Skeptoid.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
Colony Collapse Disorder, Science and Pseudoscience.
Today we're going to put on our beekeeper's suit, trudge on out to our apiary, and have a look at our beehives.
If we're lucky, all the bees will still be there.
But since 2006, an increasing number of beekeepers have been having the opposite experience.
The bees have been disappearing and disappearing fast.
It's called colony collapse disorder, or CCD.
And as hard as the scientists have been working to explain it, the pseudoscientists have been working at making up nonsense explanations, usually to further some agenda.
This week, we're going to put our hive minds to work to separate what's true from what's not and see if there's anything we can do to save the bees.
In every normal season, beekeepers see some percentage of their colonies die.
These are called overwintering losses, and they're a natural and expected part of bee colonies.
New bees are born each year to take their place.
But beginning in 2006, beekeepers in both the Americas and Europe saw overwintering losses in much larger proportions.
Bees simply never returned to the hive.
The queen and the honey and the young bees would be in there, but sometimes no workers at all.
The cause was not known and it came to be called colony collapse disorder.
Such die-offs of bees are not new.
One famous case happened in the UK in 1906.
Another happened in the US in 1918 and 1919.
But the current event is unprecedented, having lasted a decade already.
In 2015, data looked promising as we'd enjoyed two years of colony growth.
But when the 2015 data came out in 2016, we found an enormous 12% loss.
We are not out of the woods yet, and we still don't fully understand the causes or the solution.
The most attention has been focused on a class of pesticides called neonicotinoids, and one in particular called imidacloprid.
They're commonly called neonics for short.
In 2013, the European Union limited the use of three popular neonics, to the great consternation of the farmers who depend on them.
But so far, the EU has not seen any benefit from having done so.
Over the years, since 2006, neonics have been in and out as the culprit.
Predictably, the pro and con camps have condensed into the two groups who naturally favor or oppose non-organic pesticides, the pesticide producers and the organic lobby.
And as we see so often, as soon as ideology enters an equation, all kinds of wacky misinformation gets invented by those hoping to leverage a real-world misfortune and use it to promote their ideology.
The Organic Consumers Association, perhaps the world's most active anti-biotech lobbying group, was among the first and most vocal to jump on this bandwagon.
They recently summarized their claims in a 2014 article that although neonics are the main culprit, the herbicide Roundup and genetically modified crops are to blame as well.
Other activists have pointed to cell phone signals, climate change, beekeeping practices, and even the medical treatment given to the bees to protect them from parasites.
Let's take a look at some of these.
Starting with Roundup, a brand named for the much-maligned herbicide glyphosate is frequently accused of being responsible for just about anything bad, but no plausible science suggests that it might be involved in CCD.
For one thing, its mechanism operates on a plant enzyme not present in bees, and for another thing, its use does not correlate with CCD, either geographically or temporally.
Cross this one off your list.
GMOs.
Many anti-biotech sources claim that bees pollinating GMO crops become poisoned by the act and die.
There's neither evidence nor plausible foundation behind this belief.
In addition, it also lacks geographical and temporal correlation.
Cross it off your list too.
Cell phone signals.
As skeptoid listeners and others with basic science literacy know, radio signals are non-ionizing radiation, meaning they don't have enough energy to change the orbits of electrons, and thus can't trigger chemical reactions.
So radio is harmless to bees and everything else that consists of living tissue.
But citing the long-standing public concern about cell phone signals, three German scientists did a study testing the ability of bees to find their hives when either exposed or not exposed to a particular radio-based station.
Their study found no difference, but as the media is wont to do, it was completely misreported to make it sound like the study proved cell phone signals caused CCD.
The researchers have repeatedly said their study had nothing to do with either cell phones or CCD.
One of the authors told the Associated Press there was, quote, no link between our tiny little study and the CCD phenomenon.
Anything else said or written is a lie.
But the damage had already been done and it remains a fringe belief today.
And there's even hardcore woo.
You can go way out on the fringe and find increasingly bizarre proposals to explain CCD.
Richard Hoaglund, the conspiracy theorist who promoted the idea of the face on Mars, believes it is caused by a pseudoscientific theory of the universe called torsion physics, invented in the 1980s by Russian cranks.
This is a fair sampling of how weird some of the claims can get.
In a world that can feel overwhelming, spreading thoughtful, evidence-based content is one of the best ways to make a positive impact.
Ask your local public radio station to air the Skeptoid Files, a 30-minute radio-friendly version of Skeptoid that pairs two related episodes promoting real science, true history, and critical thinking.
And in these challenging times for public media, we're offering these broadcasts for free to radio stations, available on the PRX Exchange or directly from Skeptoid Media.
It's an easy ask.
Just send a quick message to your station's programming director.
By helping to bring the Skeptoid files to the airwaves, you'll help promote the essential skills we all need to tell fact from fiction.
Just go to your local station's website, find the programming director's email address, or just their general email address.
You can even use the telephone.
I know that might sound crazy.
It's an old legacy device that allows real-time voice communication.
I know that's weird, but hey, it's an option.
The world can feel chaotic, but you're not powerless.
When you promote critical thinking, you can help your community tell fact from fiction.
And that's how we shape a better future.
In uncertain times, spreading good ideas can make you feel helpful, not helpless.
Let's stand up for reason, truth, and understanding together.
Get them to air the Skeptoid files from Skeptoid Media, available on the PRX Exchange, and they'll know what that is.
So now let's look at the real causes of CCD.
The Complex Bee Crisis 00:05:25
The best way to do this is to quote from the executive summary on this year's Honey Bee Health Action Plan from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which has been regularly updated throughout the current crisis.
U.S. honeybees have been under attack by a large number of stressors, including invasive mites, varroa and tracheal, insect pests, small hive beetle, pathogens, nocema species, American fowl brood, chalk brood, Israeli acute paralysis virus, black queen virus, and numerous other viruses, lethal and sublethal pesticide exposure, Africanization of managed colonies,
nutritional deficiencies due to lack of forage and or forage diversity, genetic factors, and other problems.
Each of these problems has put additional pressure on honey bee survival and has contributed to increasing managed colony losses.
That's at least seven major causes, all seven of which are multifaceted.
For more information on these, I highly suggest downloading and reading this free PDF report.
And you can get it from the link in the online transcript of this episode.
It gives a summary of each, more detailed information on each, and most importantly, it describes the action plan for each and makes recommendations for both beekeepers and consumers on what they can do to reduce the severity of the problem.
But since such a disproportionate amount of the attention falls on pesticides and neonics in particular, let's talk about that in a little more depth.
Okay, pesticides.
Without much doubt, sufficient evidence exists that pesticides do contribute to the overall picture of CCD.
But it's not thoroughly understood.
Most of the action plan recommendations in the USDA report suggest more studies to learn what pesticides at what dosages may actually produce what effect and find best management practices to balance that with the needs of agriculture.
The relationship between bees and agriculture is deep and more complex than many lay people realize.
The question of the role of neonics in CCD has not been helped by the fact that the most public proponent of the theory has been Harvard environmental scientist Chin Shing Alex Liu, who published the first studies demonstrating the effect and continues to be at the forefront of the fight to pin CCD on neonics.
The problem is that Liu's work has been widely discredited for being based more on his personal ideology than on science, and that it's been part of a career-long crusade against all non-organic pesticides and unscientific promotion of the health benefits of organic diets.
What Liu did was to take the food given to honeybees and contaminate it with high levels of neonic insecticides, absurdly higher, than bees could ever be exposed to in the real world, which quite naturally was highly destructive to them, as we'd expect.
Harvard's powerful press release machine went into action, and neonics as the main cause of CCD became a widely held belief worldwide, by the general public, if not by the scientists.
The common theme is that Liu and other biotech opponents like the Consumer Organics Association tend to always cite Silent Spring, the famous book by Rachel Carson that first drew a link between the pesticide DDT and bird deaths.
It's a non-sequitur since the book had nothing to do with bees, but the cautionary tale sounds compelling and is repeated in virtually every anti-neonix article.
Obviously, insecticides are not helpful to bees, and nobody's arguing that they are.
But so far as we know, the amount that bees can reasonably be exposed to during the normal course of their activities should be generally safe.
However, necessarily, neonics and other agricultural chemicals will rightly continue to be a focus of researchers.
The theoretical ability of neonics to be a major contributor to CCD is, absolutely, plausible.
If it is a contributor, as some evidence suggests, it has not been proven yet.
Certainly, we're not at a point where we think removing neonics would solve CCD, as the EU's experience has shown.
So, the bottom line.
When you hear it said that we don't know the cause of CCD, that doesn't mean scientists are baffled or that we have no clue.
In fact, we know quite a lot about it.
We just haven't been able to stop or reverse it yet.
When something has multiple causes, it's usually the case that those causes are interrelated in complicated ways.
It's not necessarily as simple as shutting down one or two of them and the whole problem melts away.
A simplified example is the ongoing mass die-off of coniferous trees in the western United States due to bark beetles.
There is one cause, but it needs two legs to stand on.
Trees, Beetles, and Drought 00:02:29
Bark beetles are endemic to conifers, but it is the continuing drought that causes the trees to be susceptible.
Without the drought, the trees fight off the beetles.
Without the beetles, the trees could weather the drought.
But put them both together and they form a threat that the trees cannot defend against.
This is probably thematically similar to what the bees are going through.
We humans may or may not be able to do whatever we can about one or more causes of CCD that we are responsible for.
But whether nature does her share is a question that will probably answer itself before we figure it out.
Just keep in mind that when you hear anyone claim to know the cause of colony collapse disorder, you have very good reason to be skeptical.
Don't forget that every Skeptoid episode has complete bibliographical references on the transcript page on skeptoid.com, plus further reading suggestions if you want to know more.
Stop by to read a few, have a drink, enjoy.
You're listening to Skeptoid, a listener-supported program.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
Hello, everyone.
This is Adrian Hill from Skookum Studios in Calgary, Canada, the land of maple syrup and mousse.
And I'm here to ask you to consider becoming a premium member of Skeptoid for as little as $5 per month.
And that's only the cost of a couple of Tim Horton's double doubles.
And that's Canadian for coffee with double cream and sugar.
Why support Skeptoid?
If you are like me and don't like ads, but like extended versions of each episode, Premium is for you.
If you want to support a worthwhile nonprofit that combats pseudoscience, promotes critical thinking, and provides free access to teachers to use the podcast in the classroom via the Teacher's Toolkit, then sign up today.
Remember that skepticism is the best medicine.
Next to giggling, of course.
Until next time, this is Adrienne Hill.
From PRX
Export Selection