tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post4979353400642581439..comments2024-03-06T06:34:42.881-05:00Comments on EconoSpeak: Follow the HoneyUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-26091345983077265642012-04-03T08:16:33.447-04:002012-04-03T08:16:33.447-04:00Carl, thanks for taking the time to reply. My mai...Carl, thanks for taking the time to reply. My main response would be this: the criticism is not that you should have "settled" the debate, but that (1) the reader would be in a better position to make sense of the dispute if the root disagreements were identified, and (2) journalists should transmit information about the extent to which experts have interests in the issue at hand.<br /><br />An example of (1) would be possible disagreement over whether the pesticide dose administered to the experimental group in one of the studies was "too large", in the sense of being above a potential threshold that is seldom breached in the field. Another expert might say that there is unlikely to be such a threshold, so that a linear extrapolation from the dose is justified. This is hypothetical -- I don't know if these positions were actually taken, but they exemplify what I mean by getting to the basis of disagreement. If the reader knows why the experts disagree, he or she can do more than just shrug shoulders, flip a coin, etc. I realize this places a very large burden on the journalist, which is why I suggested the expedient of an outside panel if the job seems to be too much.<br /><br />The second issue, material interests that experts have in one side or the other, is possibly something you can do little about, since there is no source you can go to in order to find out who has been paid by whom. So please don't be defensive about this! We the licensed professionals (economists, entomologists, etc.) are the ones who need to clean up our act -- by creating central repositories for this kind of information.<br /><br />And Blissex, your point about speaking fees is well taken. Why do you think I am malicious?Peter Dormanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00093399591393648071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-87458644409716888582012-04-02T16:07:08.204-04:002012-04-02T16:07:08.204-04:00I am the author of this article. In my story, I so...I am the author of this article. In my story, I sought to portray the current scientific debate over neonicotinoids and bees as accurately as possible. I spoke to the main authors of the two studies, and eight experts. There was little consensus, with some favoring one study over the other, and others arguing that little could be said with certainty from either, and others saying that there was a clear message. I also read a number of recent papers and scientific reviews, which also conclude that the evidence has been ambiguous. It's certainly true that I quoted someone from Bayer CropScience, but it would have been remiss of me not to. I did not, however, just reprint the Bayer scientist's critique of the experiment; I got confirmation from another scientist that the critique was valid. In such a situation, do you really expect a journalist to say, "Well, it's all settled"?Carlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03829168960578664919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-80472498165035352042012-04-01T18:44:13.982-04:002012-04-01T18:44:13.982-04:00Oh my god. Is it really possible that science pro...Oh my god. Is it really possible that science professionals sell their souls and their ideas to the highest bidders? Is that possible in modern day America? Academia is a quagmire of scum taking corporate largesse to supplement their "meager" $100,000 plus salaries for six hours in the classroom.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12971442888151627894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-31795370428030684042012-04-01T10:28:52.770-04:002012-04-01T10:28:52.770-04:00«First, there should be a public registry, for bee...«<i>First, there should be a public registry, for bee researchers and economists alike, that records any substantial funding they may have received from private individuals or organizations.</i>»<br /><br />This is a great example of malicious misdirection...<br /><br />Because while there may be some corporate funding behind some research, the really big story is that one that you don't mention: that a professor may be making 10 times his salary as a part time consultant to private industry, with speaking fees, writing policy advice papers, expert witness at lawsuits, retainer fees.<br /><br />Very few professors (and their heads of department) would want to kill the goose that lays the fat heavy golden eggs by speaking uncouthly about the interests of current and potential customers.<br /><br />This is very clearly explained in an an appendix to the book "High stakes, no prisoners" by a policy wonk who became a businessman and then discovered how aggressively and venally economics professors market themselves to companies.<br /><br />Remember also that Ken Lay endowed 35 professorial chairs. That category of donor is one that department heads and university presidents love and don't want to scare by letting some silly undisciplined academic annoy with their discordant views.<br /><br />It may be uncharitable, but a lot if not most of USA Economics is hopelessly corrupted by prospects of wealth for those who appreciate which side their bread can be very richly be buttered on.Blissexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11787118635948156824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-22637547259409584692012-03-31T05:30:39.190-04:002012-03-31T05:30:39.190-04:00my comment on the same story at the WaPo, copied h...my comment on the same story at the WaPo, copied here:<br /><br />though i'd just as soon see them ban neonicotinids and the rest of the pesticides, i aint willing to put colony collapse into the solved column on top of them yet...i did a lot of reading on CCD when it first broke (subscribed to 2 bee journals back then) and i havent seen anything that fits all the cases reported in those early years..i still think that Israeli acute paralysis virus, first discovered in 2004, is one of several underlying factors, probably weakening the bees to succumb to other issues, such as varroa mites or pesticides... <br /><br />the only colony i ever lost to CCD symptoms was last april, & it was so wet at the time there wasnt a piece of farm equipment out in the fields anywhere in this county - so no one was using pesticides at that time (im in a wildlife area where there is little activity anyhow) <br /><br />some reported CCD is likely normal winter kill, and i know there's also been a lot of CCD in non agricultural areas, too...i'm interested to see how the bees make it this year; im willing to bet that with this warm spring in the east, CCD will almost disappear..rjshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15681812432224138582noreply@blogger.com