1. Allison 1
MaryAnn Allison
English 102
Professor Christie
21 October 2014
If the Bees Are Dying, Why Are People Eating the Honey Left Behind?
In any given week, there are news reports somewhere about the demise of bee colonies
worldwide and the pending doom of the global food supply if these important pollinators are lost.
Elke Genersch, Jay Evans and Ingemar Fries define Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) as “a rapid
loss of adult worker bees in colonies and the lack of apparent symptoms” leaving empty bee
colonies containing untouched honey and pollen in the combs (Genersch S2). That means that no
predators have bothered to enter either. Until recently, scientists did not have adequate means to
identify all the parasites, viruses, pathogens, predators, and pesticides that would harm bees, but
that has changed significantly in recent years. Moreover, the world has never seen beekeeping at
such large scales as the past thirty years (Genersch, Evans and Fries S2). For that reason, most of
the research has been on varieties of bees that are in managed hives working on factory farms
around the world. Of concern is that relatively little research has looked into the effects of toxic
bee honey on people who consume the honey. Because CCD remains pervasive, agrochemicals,
genetics, and global agriculture are the primary threats to managed pollinator bee populations
and human beings around the world.
The economic impact of CCD can be significant. In 2010 Dennis vanEngelsdorp and
Marina Meixner reported on a number of historical factors and describe 2007 honey production
worldwide was approximately $1.25 billion; the value of pollination for the same year was $212

2. Allison 2
billion worldwide. The implications to the global economy are not small. Fifty-two of the 115
leading global food commodities depend on honeybee pollination. Just five out of those fifty
commodities would experience ≥ 90% yield reduction without the bees. This would negatively
affect 35% of all agricultural production in the developing world for the human diet
(vanEngelsdorp and Meixner S80).
First reports of CCD began in 2004-2005 in the United States, about ten years after the
introduction of a new systemic pesticide, known as a neonicotinoid, and others. In 2014, Ken
Tan, et al., published a study describing how one neonicotinoid called Imidacloprid, interferes
with bee behaviors involved in pollination and colony fitness. Their 2014 study reports that bees
exposed to Imidacloprid experienced a number of biomechanical functions necessary for survival
by 6-20%. These impaired functions included their ability to learn, navigate, general locomotion
abilities, find their way back to the hive as well as eating habits (Tan 1). Francisco Sanchez-Bayo
and Koichi Goka described in their 2014 report on “Pesticide Residues and Bees – A Risk
Assessment” that regulators must not limit evaluations of toxins within the bee’s environment.
Regulators must also consider the potential for those toxins to enter the food chain through a
buildup of toxins in the plants themselves that are subsequently consumed as feed by food
animals or humans directly (Sanchez-Bayo and Goka 12).
The evolution of commercial beekeeping, including the chemical treatment for bee
pathogens, has created an environment where weak and susceptible colonies are allowed to
propagate. Genetic similarity among colonies increases the chances of disease transmission due
to compromised immune systems and hypersensitivity traits of the colony members passed down
from one generation to the next. Whereas genetic variability is of great importance to evolve
natural defenses with the bees themselves to improve their ability to resist disease and to

3. Allison 3
promote the overall health of the colony. This survival of the weakest within commercial bee
colonies is not a sustainable practice and one that is changing in Europe. Highly desirable traits
of genetic variability within a colony have proven crucial for a managed colony to thrive over
time. The European programs have coordinated national breeding schemes whereby thousands of
healthy genetically diverse, disease resistant queens are exported across Europe and the world
(vanEngelsdorp and Meixner S89).
Global agriculture demands on commercial beekeepers requires that bees receive
additional pesticides within the hive as a preventative measure to maintain health. Beginning in
the 1980’s nonnative parasites were introduced through globalization that resulted in the demise
of several beekeeping operations. Pesticides were then developed specifically for bee parasites
and delivered directly into the hives (Suranarayanan and Kleinman 221). By most reports, the
global demand for pollinators of industrial agriculture is not sustainable. Transportation of bee
products and contaminated equipment involved in global migratory patterns for agriculture have
facilitated exposures of pathogens to nonnatives as well as introduced new pathogens to the
migratory bees, continuing the disease-pesticide treatment cycle. The global agriculture lobby
insists that pesticides reduce cost of crop loss increasing yields, therefore minimizing any study
reporting adverse effects of pesticide use on bees and crops. Profits over health have become the
mantra in this global agricultural model. Land-use intensification is another common theme
among all the reports that have taken away the habitat for the bees so that modern agricultural
products can be cultivated on the land. Interestingly, crops dependent on pollinators are
increasing due to their higher market value while crops not dependent on pollinators are
contracting (vanEngelsdorp and Meixner S81).

4. Allison 4
With increasing human populations worldwide, global industrial agriculture and the
economic contributions of managed migratory bee pollinators will increase. A review of the data
consistently identifies the major contributors of CCD or sudden bee death in any form are man-
made. Negligence in bee animal husbandry takes a form of over-medicating the bees to prevent
disease. Alternatively, poor management of commercial stock leading to weakened species of
bees from a shrinking gene pool of overworked, malnourished and highly mobile migratory
colonies increases disease susceptibility. These weakened bees easily contract and spread
diseases both from new pathogens contracted in unfamiliar environments as well as introduce
new pathogens into those unfamiliar environments. As a result, CCD will remain pervasive
through continued overuse of agrochemicals, compromised genetics and profitable global
agriculture that has a long history of ignoring anything that might reduce profits regardless of
human and animal costs. What is unfortunate is that very little attention is focusing on the
humans who unknowingly consume the honey from these toxic diseased bees. The future may
present humans with a new kind of disease outbreak borne from the consumption of honey that
contains some ingredients not listed on any nutrition labels. Without urgent action now, future
jars of honey may come with a skull and cross bones warning.

5. Allison 5

6. Allison 6
Works Cited
Genersch, Elke, Evans, Jay and Fries, Ingemar. “Honey bee disease overview.” Journal of
Invertebrate Pathology. 103 (2010):S2. Web of Science. Web. 18 Oct. 2014.
Sanchez-Bayo, Francisco and Goka, Koichi. “Pesticide Residues and Bees – A Risk
Assessment.” PLoSONE 9.4 (2014):1-16. Web of Science. Web. 18 Oct. 2014.
Suryanarayanan, Sainath and Kleinman, Daniel. “Be(e)coming experts: The controversy over
insecticides in the honey bee colony collapse disorder.” Social Studies of Science. 43
(2012):215-240. Web of Science. Web. 18 Oct. 2014.
Tan, Ken, et al. “Imidacloprid Alters Foraging and Decreases Bee Avoidance of Predators.”
PLoS ONE. 9.7 (2014):1-8. Web of Science. Web. 18 Oct. 2014.
vanEngelsdorp, Dennis, and Marina Meixner. “A historical review of managed honey bee
populations in Europe and the United States and the factors that may affect them.”
Journal of Invertebrate Pathology. 103 (2010):S80-S95. Web of Science. Web. 18 Oct.
2014.