Unit VII Assignment Introduction The Nature vs. Nurture debate is a long-standing controversy over whether human behavior is primarily determined by genetics (Nature) or by environmental factors (Nurture). The proponents of the nature vs. nurture argument for serial killers would contend that these individuals are born with particular tendencies or traits that cause them to commit horrible deeds. Lack of empathy, impulsivity and a propensity for violent action are a few of these predispositions. The argument put out by the opponents of the idea is that serial killers have innate traits and features that predispose them to crime. This encompasses a lack of compassion, guilt, and fear of the repercussions. This argument is particularly pertinent when considering the actions of serial killers, as some specialists argue that they are predisposed to violence from birth. Others, on the other hand, contend that environmental variables, including a traumatic upbringing, can contribute to developing aggressive impulses. The arguments in favor of nature are the genetic similarities among serial killers and the fact that some serial killers have a family history of mental illness. They would also emphasize that some serial killers have a history of mental illness, which genetic causes may bring on. Additionally, proponents of the "nature" camp would contend that even if serial killers are exposed to certain environmental variables, like a lack of parental supervision or violent media, these elements do not sufficiently explain serial killer behavior. The opposite viewpoint asserts that some serial killers have a hereditary propensity for aggression and violence, which increases their likelihood of becoming serial murderers. According to the Con side, a person's surroundings and upbringing can influence their development and conduct, but they do not necessarily turn them into serial killers. However, it might also intensify already present inclinations or trigger the emergence of certain antisocial behaviors. Genetics or environment alone cannot explain a serial killer's motivation, but a combination of the two may be able to. Serial killers are distinct individuals, moulded by their remarkable experiences, circumstances, and mindsets beyond a few basic qualities. The Literature Review The contentious argument regarding the causes of serial killers' behavior—their nature or nurture—will be examined in this literature review. The numerous hypotheses underlying the emergence of serial killers will be examined, along with the arguments for and against each hypothesis. It will also consider how these theories might affect society and law enforcement. This review will also discuss how comprehending this controversy might improve crime prevention measures. Ultimately, this analysis will summarize the numerous hypotheses and viewpoints concerning the controversy over the nature versus nurture factors in serial killers. A brief look at the histological persp.

1. Unit VII Assignment
Introduction
The Nature vs. Nurture debate is a long-standing controversy over whether human behavior is
primarily determined by genetics (Nature) or by environmental factors (Nurture). The proponents
of the nature vs. nurture argument for serial killers would contend that these individuals are born
with particular tendencies or traits that cause them to commit horrible deeds. Lack of empathy,
impulsivity and a propensity for violent action are a few of these predispositions. The argument
put out by the opponents of the idea is that serial killers have innate traits and features that
predispose them to crime. This encompasses a lack of compassion, guilt, and fear of the
repercussions. This argument is particularly pertinent when considering the actions of serial
killers, as some specialists argue that they are predisposed to violence from birth. Others, on the
other hand, contend that environmental variables, including a traumatic upbringing, can
contribute to developing aggressive impulses. The arguments in favor of nature are the genetic
similarities among serial killers and the fact that some serial killers have a family history of
mental illness. They would also emphasize that some serial killers have a history of mental
illness, which genetic causes may bring on. Additionally, proponents of the "nature" camp would
contend that even if serial killers are exposed to certain environmental variables, like a lack of
parental supervision or violent media, these elements do not sufficiently explain serial killer
behavior. The opposite viewpoint asserts that some serial killers have a hereditary propensity for
aggression and violence, which increases their likelihood of becoming serial murderers.
According to the Con side, a person's surroundings and upbringing can influence their
development and conduct, but they do not necessarily turn them into serial killers. However, it
might also intensify already present inclinations or trigger the emergence of certain antisocial
behaviors. Genetics or environment alone cannot explain a serial killer's motivation, but a
combination of the two may be able to. Serial killers are distinct individuals, moulded by their
remarkable experiences, circumstances, and mindsets beyond a few basic qualities.
The Literature Review
The contentious argument regarding the causes of serial killers' behavior—their nature or
nurture—will be examined in this literature review. The numerous hypotheses underlying the
emergence of serial killers will be examined, along with the arguments for and against each
hypothesis. It will also consider how these theories might affect society and law enforcement.
This review will also discuss how comprehending this controversy might improve crime
prevention measures. Ultimately, this analysis will summarize the numerous hypotheses and
viewpoints concerning the controversy over the nature versus nurture factors in serial killers.
A brief look at the histological perspectives of the serial killer's nature and nurture aspects
Since the 1800s, there has been controversy around the nature vs. nurture argument regarding
serial killers. Early on, scientists and criminologists thought that environmental factors like
poverty and crime-ridden areas influenced the behaviors of serial killers. They believed these
environmental influences could increase a person's propensity for crime and violence. Scientists
started to postulate that criminal behavior, particularly that of serial killers, was influenced by

2. genetics in the middle of the 20th century. This sparked the ongoing "nature vs. nurture"
controversy. Some people on the nature side of the argument think that a person's biology, such
as brain chemistry and genetic makeup, contributes to criminal behavior. According to this
theory, certain people may have a biological predisposition to violence and hostility. On the
nurture side, some contend that an individual's upbringing, environment, and experiences most
significantly influence their likelihood of engaging in criminal behavior. According to this
hypothesis, a person's surroundings can influence their conduct, including their propensity for
violent crime. The nature vs. nurture discussion of serial killers is still going strong today.
The argument between nature and nurture aspects of a serial killer
Pro Side
The argument in favor of the nature versus nurture debate about serial killers is that some people
have a genetic propensity to violence. According to Hernandez et al. (2015), some genes, such as
the MAOA gene, can increase a person's propensity for aggressive conduct. This implies that
certain serial killers may not be able to control their violent urges and instead be seen as
biological victims (Hernandez et al., 2015). Additionally, some serial killers may have
experienced trauma or abuse as children, influencing their violent tendencies. According to
O'Hara (2021), they might have been victims of their circumstances, and their surroundings may
have had a big impact on the emergence of their violent tendencies. For instance, research has
suggested that a lack of parental control and supervision and a lack of early nurturing and
warmth may be factors in the development of psychopathy among serial killers. Additionally, it
has been proposed that some elements of criminal behavior may be related to social learning, in
which people absorb information from their surroundings and others around them. In this regard,
it is possible to suggest that serial killer development is significantly influenced by nurture.
The Con Side
The argument that serial killers are born, not formed, is the con side of the nature vs. nurture
discussion regarding serial killers. This is because studies have indicated a vital hereditary
component in the emergence of serial killers. For instance, according to Entail (2021), serial
killers have specific genetic markers, such as a mix of serotonin, dopamine, and norepinephrine
receptors. Additionally, genetic variants have been connected to some behavioral characteristics,
including impulsivity and violence. Additionally, serial killers exhibit a higher frequency of
psychopathic features, which may be hereditary, according to Davies (2022). The argument's
opponents contend that socioeconomic conditions like poverty, maltreatment, or neglect are not
what leads to serial murders. While these elements may play a role in criminal behavior, they
may not always account for all serial killers (Davies, 2022). This is because many serial killers
have been discovered to have had loving and supporting families and frequently come from
stable homes. A few serial killers have also been found to have excellent occupations and
minimal criminal histories before their crimes. In general, the argument against it contends that a
combination of nature and nurture leads to serial killers.
Serial Killer: My argument in favor of the nurture aspect of a serial killer

3. Serial killers are frequently portrayed as monsters with wicked genes predisposing them to act
violently. But it's important to remember that a serial killer can also be nurtured. This is the
hypothesis that early childhood trauma and abuse can mold a person into becoming a serial
killer.
According to Reid et al. (2019), most serial killers experienced challenging childhoods, with
many suffering from physical, emotional, and sexual abuse. An individual's mental health may
be profoundly impacted by this trauma, increasing their likelihood of mental illness and violent
behaviors. A lack of attachment to parental figures can also make it difficult to build lasting
relationships, resulting in loneliness and strengthening a serial killer's violent impulses (Reid et
al., 2019).
When attempting to comprehend the conduct of serial killers, it is crucial to consider their
upbringing because it can shed light on their motivations and the reasons they have chosen a life
of murder. By comprehending this element, society can take action to assist those who could be
on the verge of becoming serial killers and perhaps stop future victims from suffering harm.
Additionally, this knowledge can aid in our understanding of the criminal justice system and how
to enhance it to decrease the prevalence of serial killers.
Serial Killer: My argument against the nature aspect of a serial killer
The media and popular society have long characterized serial killers as having a genetic
propensity for violence. This perception has been reinforced by the idea that violent traits are
innate in serial killers and that they are "born, not formed." Recent studies, however, have
refuted this notion, contending that the personality of serial killers is not the main driver of their
violent behavior. Alternatively, it is asserted that a serial killer's nurture, such as a history of
child maltreatment, impacts their behavior.
The association between the violent behavior of adult serial killers and their childhood
experiences was studied in a 2019 meta-analysis published in Clinical Psychological Science
(Frazier et al., 2019). The research includes 15 studies examining how unfavorable childhood
experiences, such as abuse, neglect, and family violence, may increase one's risk of becoming a
serial killer. The findings indicated that those who became serial killers were more likely to have
experienced childhood abuse, neglect, and other negative childhood experiences. The authors
concluded that childhood experiences are crucial in the formation of serial killers and that more
research is required to identify the precise mechanisms through which childhood experiences are
connected to adult violent behavior.
In 2020, a study in the journal Aggression and Violent Conduct looked more closely at the
influence of early life events on a serial killer's violent behavior (Drakopoulos & Farrington,
2020). According to the study, individuals who suffered childhood trauma had a higher
likelihood of developing into serial killers than those who did not. The study also discovered a
correlation between the severity of the violent behavior of the serial killer and the degree of
childhood trauma. These results imply that childhood experiences are crucial in shaping a serial
killer's aggressive tendencies.

4. A 2021 study in the journal Victims & Offenders looked into the connection between childhood
trauma and serial killers in more detail (Tol & van der Put, 2021). According to the study, those
who experienced early trauma, including physical or sexual abuse, were more likely to become
serial killers. The study also discovered a correlation between the trauma's severity and the serial
killer's violent behaviour. This shows that people who suffer from serious childhood trauma are
more prone to turn into serial killers and behave violently. The study also discovered that these
people frequently had issues with their interpersonal interactions, including a lack of trust in
others. They frequently had a diminished capacity for empathy. The study also indicated that
those who had experienced childhood trauma often felt helpless and strongly desired to control
their environment. The drive to control one's surroundings and a sense of helplessness may help
serial killers develop their conduct.
A 2022 study in the journal Psychiatric Services looked at how a violent familial background
affected the emergence of aggressive behavior in serial killers (Hastings & Karp, 2022).
According to the study, those who come from violent families are more likely to turn into serial
killers than those who do not. The study also found a link between the family's level of violence
and the serial killer's hostile behavior. The results of this study could guide the work of
professionals in criminal justice, law enforcement, and mental health. According to this research,
they might be able to identify those who, because of their family's history of violence, are more
likely to turn into serial killers. It could also be used to inform risk assessments, which are used
to determine the level of risk posed by an individual before they are released from prison or
placed in a mental health facility.
Conclusion
Overall, the evidence indicates that the fundamental cause of the violent behavior of serial killers
is not their aggressive nature. As opposed to this, it is asserted that a serial killer's nurture, such
as a history of child abuse and a violent family, is more likely to influence their behavior. The
findings of this study have significant consequences for how serial killers are perceived,
analyzed, and handled. It also implies that, rather than altering a person's genetic composition,
we should concentrate on treating the causes of violent behavior to lessen the occurrence of
serial killers.
References
Davies, N. (2022, August 24). From abused child to serial killer: Investigating nature vs nurture
in methods of murder. Psychiatry Advisor. Retrieved December 15, 2022, from
https://www.psychiatryadvisor.com/home/topics/violence-and-aggression/from-abused-child-to-
serial-killer-investigating-nature-vs-nurture-in-methods-of-murder/
Drakopoulos, A., & Farrington, D.P. (2020). Childhood Trauma and Serial Killing: A Systematic
Review and Meta-Analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior , 56, 101794.
Entail, W. D. A. S. K. (2021). Are Serial Killers Born or Made?. https://theiacs.org/are-serial-
killers-born-or-made/?print-posts=print

5. Frazier, E., Coco, A., & Rosen, J. (2019). Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Childhood
Adverse Experiences and Serial Killing. Clinical Psychological Science , 7(4), 775-786.
Hastings, R., & Karp, J. (2022). Family History of Violence and Serial Killing: A Systematic
Review and Meta-Analysis. Psychiatric Services , 73(2), 148-156.
Hernandez, J., Highsmith, J., Madrigal, S., & Mercado, M. (2015). Nature (MAOA) and Nurture
in a Criminal. UC Merced Undergraduate Research Journal, 8(1).
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5w51b7bg
Reid, S., Katan, A., Ellithy, A., Della Stua, R., & Denisov, E. V. (2019). The perfect storm:
Mapping the life course trajectories of serial killers. International Journal of Offender Therapy
and Comparative Criminology , 63 (9), 1621-1662.
Tol, J., & van der Put, C. (2021). Childhood Trauma and Serial Killing: A Systematic Review
and Meta-Analysis. Victims & Offenders , 16(2), 199-213.
O'Hara, K. (2021, October 23). Nature vs nurture: The making of a serial murderer. Medium.
Retrieved December 15, 2022, from https://medium.com/crimebeat/nature-vs-nurture-the-
making-of-a-serial-murderer-6e47c609f6df
Unit VII Assignment
Introduction
The Nature vs. Nurture debate is a long-standing controversy over whether human behavior is
primarily determined by genetics (Nature) or by environmental factors (Nurture). The proponents
of the nature vs. nurture argument for serial killers would contend that these individuals are born
with particular tendencies or traits that cause them to commit horrible deeds. Lack of empathy,
impulsivity and a propensity for violent action are a few of these predispositions. The argument
put out by the opponents of the idea is that serial killers have innate traits and features that
predispose them to crime. This encompasses a lack of compassion, guilt, and fear of the
repercussions. This argument is particularly pertinent when considering the actions of serial
killers, as some specialists argue that they are predisposed to violence from birth. Others, on the
other hand, contend that environmental variables, including a traumatic upbringing, can
contribute to developing aggressive impulses. The arguments in favor of nature are the genetic
similarities among serial killers and the fact that some serial killers have a family history of
mental illness. They would also emphasize that some serial killers have a history of mental
illness, which genetic causes may bring on. Additionally, proponents of the "nature" camp would
contend that even if serial killers are exposed to certain environmental variables, like a lack of
parental supervision or violent media, these elements do not sufficiently explain serial killer
behavior. The opposite viewpoint asserts that some serial killers have a hereditary propensity for
aggression and violence, which increases their likelihood of becoming serial murderers.
According to the Con side, a person's surroundings and upbringing can influence their
development and conduct, but they do not necessarily turn them into serial killers. However, it
might also intensify already present inclinations or trigger the emergence of certain antisocial

6. behaviors. Genetics or environment alone cannot explain a serial killer's motivation, but a
combination of the two may be able to. Serial killers are distinct individuals, moulded by their
remarkable experiences, circumstances, and mindsets beyond a few basic qualities.
The Literature Review
The contentious argument regarding the causes of serial killers' behavior—their nature or
nurture—will be examined in this literature review. The numerous hypotheses underlying the
emergence of serial killers will be examined, along with the arguments for and against each
hypothesis. It will also consider how these theories might affect society and law enforcement.
This review will also discuss how comprehending this controversy might improve crime
prevention measures. Ultimately, this analysis will summarize the numerous hypotheses and
viewpoints concerning the controversy over the nature versus nurture factors in serial killers.
A brief look at the histological perspectives of the serial killer's nature and nurture aspects
Since the 1800s, there has been controversy around the nature vs. nurture argument regarding
serial killers. Early on, scientists and criminologists thought that environmental factors like
poverty and crime-ridden areas influenced the behaviors of serial killers. They believed these
environmental influences could increase a person's propensity for crime and violence. Scientists
started to postulate that criminal behavior, particularly that of serial killers, was influenced by
genetics in the middle of the 20th century. This sparked the ongoing "nature vs. nurture"
controversy. Some people on the nature side of the argument think that a person's biology, such
as brain chemistry and genetic makeup, contributes to criminal behavior. According to this
theory, certain people may have a biological predisposition to violence and hostility. On the
nurture side, some contend that an individual's upbringing, environment, and experiences most
significantly influence their likelihood of engaging in criminal behavior. According to this
hypothesis, a person's surroundings can influence their conduct, including their propensity for
violent crime. The nature vs. nurture discussion of serial killers is still going strong today.
The argument between nature and nurture aspects of a serial killer
Pro Side
The argument in favor of the nature versus nurture debate about serial killers is that some people
have a genetic propensity to violence. According to Hernandez et al. (2015), some genes, such as
the MAOA gene, can increase a person's propensity for aggressive conduct. This implies that
certain serial killers may not be able to control their violent urges and instead be seen as
biological victims (Hernandez et al., 2015). Additionally, some serial killers may have
experienced trauma or abuse as children, influencing their violent tendencies. According to
O'Hara (2021), they might have been victims of their circumstances, and their surroundings may
have had a big impact on the emergence of their violent tendencies. For instance, research has
suggested that a lack of parental control and supervision and a lack of early nurturing and
warmth may be factors in the development of psychopathy among serial killers. Additionally, it
has been proposed that some elements of criminal behavior may be related to social learning, in

7. which people absorb information from their surroundings and others around them. In this regard,
it is possible to suggest that serial killer development is significantly influenced by nurture.
The Con Side
The argument that serial killers are born, not formed, is the con side of the nature vs. nurture
discussion regarding serial killers. This is because studies have indicated a vital hereditary
component in the emergence of serial killers. For instance, according to Entail (2021), serial
killers have specific genetic markers, such as a mix of serotonin, dopamine, and norepinephrine
receptors. Additionally, genetic variants have been connected to some behavioral characteristics,
including impulsivity and violence. Additionally, serial killers exhibit a higher frequency of
psychopathic features, which may be hereditary, according to Davies (2022). The argument's
opponents contend that socioeconomic conditions like poverty, maltreatment, or neglect are not
what leads to serial murders. While these elements may play a role in criminal behavior, they
may not always account for all serial killers (Davies, 2022). This is because many serial killers
have been discovered to have had loving and supporting families and frequently come from
stable homes. A few serial killers have also been found to have excellent occupations and
minimal criminal histories before their crimes. In general, the argument against it contends that a
combination of nature and nurture leads to serial killers.
Serial Killer: My argument in favor of the nurture aspect of a serial killer
Serial killers are frequently portrayed as monsters with wicked genes predisposing them to act
violently. But it's important to remember that a serial killer can also be nurtured. This is the
hypothesis that early childhood trauma and abuse can mold a person into becoming a serial
killer.
According to Reid et al. (2019), most serial killers experienced challenging childhoods, with
many suffering from physical, emotional, and sexual abuse. An individual's mental health may
be profoundly impacted by this trauma, increasing their likelihood of mental illness and violent
behaviors. A lack of attachment to parental figures can also make it difficult to build lasting
relationships, resulting in loneliness and strengthening a serial killer's violent impulses (Reid et
al., 2019).
When attempting to comprehend the conduct of serial killers, it is crucial to consider their
upbringing because it can shed light on their motivations and the reasons they have chosen a life
of murder. By comprehending this element, society can take action to assist those who could be
on the verge of becoming serial killers and perhaps stop future victims from suffering harm.
Additionally, this knowledge can aid in our understanding of the criminal justice system and how
to enhance it to decrease the prevalence of serial killers.
Serial Killer: My argument against the nature aspect of a serial killer
The media and popular society have long characterized serial killers as having a genetic
propensity for violence. This perception has been reinforced by the idea that violent traits are
innate in serial killers and that they are "born, not formed." Recent studies, however, have

8. refuted this notion, contending that the personality of serial killers is not the main driver of their
violent behavior. Alternatively, it is asserted that a serial killer's nurture, such as a history of
child maltreatment, impacts their behavior.
The association between the violent behavior of adult serial killers and their childhood
experiences was studied in a 2019 meta-analysis published in Clinical Psychological Science
(Frazier et al., 2019). The research includes 15 studies examining how unfavorable childhood
experiences, such as abuse, neglect, and family violence, may increase one's risk of becoming a
serial killer. The findings indicated that those who became serial killers were more likely to have
experienced childhood abuse, neglect, and other negative childhood experiences. The authors
concluded that childhood experiences are crucial in the formation of serial killers and that more
research is required to identify the precise mechanisms through which childhood experiences are
connected to adult violent behavior.
In 2020, a study in the journal Aggression and Violent Conduct looked more closely at the
influence of early life events on a serial killer's violent behavior (Drakopoulos & Farrington,
2020). According to the study, individuals who suffered childhood trauma had a higher
likelihood of developing into serial killers than those who did not. The study also discovered a
correlation between the severity of the violent behavior of the serial killer and the degree of
childhood trauma. These results imply that childhood experiences are crucial in shaping a serial
killer's aggressive tendencies.
A 2021 study in the journal Victims & Offenders looked into the connection between childhood
trauma and serial killers in more detail (Tol & van der Put, 2021). According to the study, those
who experienced early trauma, including physical or sexual abuse, were more likely to become
serial killers. The study also discovered a correlation between the trauma's severity and the serial
killer's violent behaviour. This shows that people who suffer from serious childhood trauma are
more prone to turn into serial killers and behave violently. The study also discovered that these
people frequently had issues with their interpersonal interactions, including a lack of trust in
others. They frequently had a diminished capacity for empathy. The study also indicated that
those who had experienced childhood trauma often felt helpless and strongly desired to control
their environment. The drive to control one's surroundings and a sense of helplessness may help
serial killers develop their conduct.
A 2022 study in the journal Psychiatric Services looked at how a violent familial background
affected the emergence of aggressive behavior in serial killers (Hastings & Karp, 2022).
According to the study, those who come from violent families are more likely to turn into serial
killers than those who do not. The study also found a link between the family's level of violence
and the serial killer's hostile behavior. The results of this study could guide the work of
professionals in criminal justice, law enforcement, and mental health. According to this research,
they might be able to identify those who, because of their family's history of violence, are more
likely to turn into serial killers. It could also be used to inform risk assessments, which are used
to determine the level of risk posed by an individual before they are released from prison or
placed in a mental health facility.
Conclusion

9. Overall, the evidence indicates that the fundamental cause of the violent behavior of serial killers
is not their aggressive nature. As opposed to this, it is asserted that a serial killer's nurture, such
as a history of child abuse and a violent family, is more likely to influence their behavior. The
findings of this study have significant consequences for how serial killers are perceived,
analyzed, and handled. It also implies that, rather than altering a person's genetic composition,
we should concentrate on treating the causes of violent behavior to lessen the occurrence of
serial killers.
References
Davies, N. (2022, August 24). From abused child to serial killer: Investigating nature vs nurture
in methods of murder. Psychiatry Advisor. Retrieved December 15, 2022, from
https://www.psychiatryadvisor.com/home/topics/violence-and-aggression/from-abused-child-to-
serial-killer-investigating-nature-vs-nurture-in-methods-of-murder/
Drakopoulos, A., & Farrington, D.P. (2020). Childhood Trauma and Serial Killing: A Systematic
Review and Meta-Analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior , 56, 101794.
Entail, W. D. A. S. K. (2021). Are Serial Killers Born or Made?. https://theiacs.org/are-serial-
killers-born-or-made/?print-posts=print
Frazier, E., Coco, A., & Rosen, J. (2019). Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Childhood
Adverse Experiences and Serial Killing. Clinical Psychological Science , 7(4), 775-786.
Hastings, R., & Karp, J. (2022). Family History of Violence and Serial Killing: A Systematic
Review and Meta-Analysis. Psychiatric Services , 73(2), 148-156.
Hernandez, J., Highsmith, J., Madrigal, S., & Mercado, M. (2015). Nature (MAOA) and Nurture
in a Criminal. UC Merced Undergraduate Research Journal, 8(1).
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5w51b7bg
Reid, S., Katan, A., Ellithy, A., Della Stua, R., & Denisov, E. V. (2019). The perfect storm:
Mapping the life course trajectories of serial killers. International Journal of Offender Therapy
and Comparative Criminology , 63 (9), 1621-1662.
Tol, J., & van der Put, C. (2021). Childhood Trauma and Serial Killing: A Systematic Review
and Meta-Analysis. Victims & Offenders , 16(2), 199-213.
O'Hara, K. (2021, October 23). Nature vs nurture: The making of a serial murderer. Medium.
Retrieved December 15, 2022, from https://medium.com/crimebeat/nature-vs-nurture-the-
making-of-a-serial-murderer-6e47c609f6df
1
Save the Bees: The Negative Effects of Neonicotinoids on Bee Populations

10. Tamika Diggs
Columbia Southern University
EH 1020 English Composition II
Dr. Renee Reynolds
January 5, 2021
2
Abstract
This paper examines several dangers of neonicotinoids, the most widely used pesticide in the
world. Though cost effective and efficient in controlling pests and disease, the use of neonics
should be banned due to the many sublethal effects attributed to the toxic pesticide. The
correlation between neonicotinoids and Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) is a threat to bee
populations and the process of pollination. In addition, neonics have a tendency to concentrate in
soil for years after use and to contaminate surrounding groundwater. Applying alternative
methods such as Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in place of neonicotinoids decreases the
risks of exposing the ecosystem and beneficial species to harmful chemicals. Therefore, the use
of neonics should be banned and alternative pest management systems should be implemented.
3
Save the Bees: The Negative Effects of Pesticides on Bee Populations
The argument concerning whether a ban should be placed on pesticides has been a source
of contention since the publishing of Rachel Carson’s groundbreaking book Silent Spring in
1962. In her book, Carson (1962) highlights the dangers of pesticide use by describing the effects
of dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane (DDT) on birds of prey including peregrine falcons, osprey,
and bald eagles. DDT has since been banned, but many pesticides are still being used today.

11. Proponents for banning pesticides acknowledge that while they may present a short-term solution
to issues such as insect infestations, the long-term effects of pesticide exposure cannot be
ignored. On the other hand, those in favor of pesticide use argue that the benefits often outweigh
the risks, as pesticides are responsible for maximizing crop yields while also reducing the risk of
disease in humans and livestock. Within the last 20 years, beekeepers have begun to witness
record losses in their bee populations. The phenomenon is known as colony collapse disorder
(CCD), and beekeepers affected by CCD have reported losses as high as 50–90%, sometimes
within a matter of weeks (Kluser et al., 2010). Research has pointed to pesticide usage,
specifically neonicotinoids (neonics), as a potential cause of CCD. According to research,
neonicotinoids are used in agriculture to kill pests such as aphids and grubs but are indirectly
impacting bees (Pesticide Action Network UK, 2017). Bees are responsible for pollinating most
of the world’s crops, therefore many are advocating for the ban of neonics. However, the
opposing side argues that the research naming neonics as the culprit of sudden bee deaths is
weak, and that neonics are safe for use. Also, government entities like The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) are concerned about the negative impact a pesticide ban would have on
disease control. In addition, the economic impact on farmers due to a loss in crop yields resulting
from a pesticide ban would be costly. While there would be an initial cost to explore alternative
4
methods, continuing to expose key pollinators to harmful pesticides should not continue.
Therefore, neonicotinoids should not be used due to their harmful effects on bees. Instead,
alternatives such as integrated pest management (IPM), should be utilized.
Review of Literature
In order to better understand the controversy concerning neonicotinoid use and its effects

12. on bee populations, it is necessary to review the origins of pesticide usage. In addition, this
review will closely examine pollination and the role of the bee in that process. The review will
continue by more closely examining the phenomenon known as colony collapse disorder (CDD)
and its potential impact on the environment. Finally, the literature review will explore the
opposing sides of the controversy surrounding neonicotinoid use, beginning with arguments in
favor of banning its use and favoring alternative methods such as integrated pest management
(IPM). Then, the position of those against the banning of neonicotinoids, or the con side.
The Origins of Pesticides
The concerns surrounding chemical pesticide use have been discussed for several
decades. According to the article “Pesticides― (Edwards, 2018), it was the discovery of
dichloro-
diphenyl-trichloroethane (DDT) in the 1930s that allowed modern agriculture to grow into what
it is today. At that time, DDT was cheap to manufacture and known only to be toxic to insects.
Therefore, DDT was used to eliminate insects from crops, to delouse prisoners and military
personnel, and to control mosquitos (Zoltan, 2011). Within a few decades, scientists began to
observe a decline in many species of carnivorous birds. Research lead them to the presence of
concentrated DDT in the food chain, which indirectly impacted the reproductive cycles of birds
of prey (McGrath, 1999). Due to this discovery, various government entities have stepped in and
imposed regulations to either ban them, in the case of DDT, or control their usage (National
5
Research Council, 2013). In spite of the recognized hazardous effects of these chemicals, many
pesticides are still being used today.
Pollination and Colony Collapse Disorder
Pollination is the process of sexual reproduction for all higher plant forms including

13. flowers, herbs, bushes, grass, and most trees (Blanchfield, 2011). Specifically, pollination is the
process of moving pollen (male sex cells) to the pistil (female reproductive organ) of a plant of
the same species to form a seed in which a new plant will grow. Pollination occurs by either
abiotic means, such as by air or water, or through biotic means by being transferred with the
assistance of another organism. Bees are considered to be the most effective biotic pollinator
and, therefore, are critical to the process of pollination. This is due to the species social nature,
large demand for food, and its ability to remember specific plants (Blanchfield, 2011). It has
been estimated that of the 100 crops responsible for producing the majority of the earth’s
food,
71 of them are pollinated by bees (Kluser et al., 2010). Therefore, the bee is considered a key
pollinator and is integral to the process of pollination. Within the last 20 years, beekeepers have
noticed a dramatic reduction in the population of bees in their hives. Scientists have named this
phenomenon colony collapse disorder, also known as CCD. Colony collapse disorder is when a
colony of bees abandons their hive while leaving their brood, or larvae, behind (Watanabe,
2009). The rapid decline of bee populations due to CCD places a threat on the process of
pollination and the success of many of the world’s crops.
The Argument in Favor of Pesticide Use
Those against the banning of pesticides base their reasoning on economics and public
health concerns. According to the EPA (n.d.-a), there are too many significant health problems
that are caused by pests to completely discontinue use of pesticides. Some examples of these
6
public health concerns include asthma and allergies, Avian flu, and vector-borne illnesses such
as West Nile Virus (EPA, n.d.-a). A paper published by Whitford et al. (2006) from Purdue also
presents strong examples that support the argument for pesticide usage. Pesticides are utilized in

14. many advantageous ways that often go unnoticed by the public. For example, pesticides are used
to control vegetation along highways to allow for visibility and safe passage and are also
incorporated into many household products such as paints and caulks to prevent the growth of
mold in our homes (Whitford et al., 2006). Concerning CCD, proponents of pesticide use say
that there is not enough research currently available to determine that pesticides are the sole
cause of CCD. Research concerning the sudden decline in bee populations have pointed at a
combination of factors that result in CCD, including habitat loss, global warming, and parasites
such as the varroa mite (Kaplan, 2012). Ultimately, those that support the use of pesticides argue
that the benefits outweigh the risks. There are concerns that a complete ban of pesticides would
present a threat to public health. Without pesticides to protect our crops and livestock, there
would be a reduction in crop yields which would lead to increased famine. In addition, humans
would be exposed to more diseases transmitted by insects that would have otherwise been
eradicated through the use of pesticides.
The Case Against Pesticides
When pesticides are used, many species that may not be the intended target are often
affected (National Research Council, 2013). This was the case with DDT and birds of prey, and
is also the case with neonicotinoids (neonics) and honeybees. Contrary to the studies backed by
pesticide supporters, opposing research has linked the cause of CCD to the use of neonics.
Neonics are toxic to bees and have the ability to alter their behavior, ultimately making it
difficult for them to find food (Hopwood et al., 2016). In place of pesticides, parties including
7
beekeepers and environmentalists are asking that alternative pest management systems be
utilized. Integrated pest management or IPM is the idea of providing the best level of pest

15. management without negatively impacting human health or the environment (Blanchfield, 2011).
It is believed that using environmentally friendly alternatives to pesticides such as IPM will
protect keystone species and pose less harm to the ecosystem.
While the debate on the use of pesticides is ongoing, it is clear that both sides have
concerns surrounding public health. Those for the continued use of neonicotinoids believe (a)
that they are the most effective way to kill pests that damage crops and cause disease, and (b) are
monetarily invested in the increased crop production afforded through their continued usage. For
those calling for a ban on neonics, the projected outcome of the extinction of beneficial species
such as the honeybee is of higher concern. In an effort to reach a middle ground, they propose
that alternative pest management systems be utilized. By using alternatives methods such as
IPM in place of neonicotinoids, the risks of indirectly harming beneficial species and the
ecosystem dramatically decreases. Therefore, the use of neonics should be banned and
alternative pest management systems should be implemented.
Save the Bees: My Argument Against the Use of Neonicotinoids
Continuing to allow the use of neonicotinoids will have sublethal effects on non-target
species. While some pesticides are applied to the surface of a plant, neonics work systemically
by effecting all parts of the plant, including the pollen and nectar, with most seeds treated with
the pesticide prior to planting (Goulson, 2013). With neonicotinoids being present in the pollen
and nectar of treated plants, bees and other pollinators such as moths and butterflies are
continuously exposed to the toxin each time they feed (Bonmatin et al., 2015). While an initial
exposure may not be directly threatening, small doses over an entire lifespan compounds the
8
dangers to any given species. According to research by Hopwood et al. (2016), when bees are

16. exposed to neonicotinoids it can affect their ability to forage and return home to their hives.
When a bee cannot return home, it cannot bring food back to the colony, resulting in a colony
collapse, or CCD. As a key pollinator responsible for pollinating the majority of the world’s
crops, the implications of a mass die-off of bees would have a drastic effect on the food chain
(Kluser et al., 2010). While neonics often impact unintended species, they also have equally
negative effects on the ecosystem.
Not only are neonics detrimental to beneficial species such as the bee, but they also have
negative effects on the entire ecosystem due to their tendency to accumulate in soils and
contaminate water sources. Neonicotinoid use by seed treatment first became popular because it
was thought that it would have less of an environmental impact than use by spray contact
(Hopwood et al., 2016). However, research by Dave Goulson (2013) has shown that the majority
of the active ingredient in neonics persists in the soil, with the half-life lasting for as long as
1,000 days and can even accumulate if used repeatedly. This persistence in the soil concentrates
the amount of toxin, making it more harmful to the environment. Neonicotinoids are also water
soluble, having the ability to move freely through the soil into surface water and, in some cases,
groundwater (Goulson, 2013). This water solubility and soil persistence exposes multiple
organisms to the toxin, and even allows for the uptake of the pesticide in unintended plants.
Rather than continue to expose non-target species and the environment to toxic neonics, it would
be more beneficial to utilize alternative pest management systems.
Alternative methods to pesticide use, such as integrated pest management (IPM), provide
a safer, more environmentally friendly approach to pest management. The main principle of IPM
is to provide the best possible pest control without causing damage to human health and the
9

17. environment (Blanchfield, 2011). An issue with neonicotinoids is that the seeds are often dressed
with the pesticide as a prophylactic when the targeted pest may not be present in the area where
the seed is being planted (Hopwood et al., 2016). This type of preventative usage causes needless
exposure of non-target plants and animals to the pesticide. IPM incorporates several methods in
an effort to reduce pests, starting with identifying the specific pest that is causing damage rather
than chemically treating for the incorrect pest, or a pest that may not be present. Another strategy
of IPM is prevention by eliminating the habitat, food sources, and shelter that attract the pest
(EPA, n.d.-b). Managing pests by accurate identification and prevention methods negate the need
for chemicals which reduces the exposure to the environment.
Conclusion
Neonicotinoids pose a threat to the environment and should be banned in favor of
alternative, non-toxic methods. Neonics pose the greatest threat to bees, which are essential to
the process of pollination and must be protected. Imagine a world where plants must be
pollinated by hand because there are no bees left to do the job. Without bees, grocery stores and
farmer’s markets would be bare of most produce including apples, avocados, pumpkins, and
peaches (Sarich, 2013). Integrated Pest Management is an alternative method that provides us
with significant pest control without harming a species that is integral to the food chain. The
EPA is beginning to re-evaluate the use of neonics due to these harmful effects, but
implementing government policies is a notoriously slow process. Applying the concepts of IPM
now, in larger agricultural settings as well as home gardens, eliminates the need for pesticides
like neonicotinoids and will preserve the environment for future generations.
10
References

18. Blanchfield, D. S. (Ed.) (2011). Environmental encyclopedia. Gale.
Bonmatin, J. M., Giorio, C., Girolami, V., Goulson, D., Kreutzweiser, D. P., Krupke, C., Liess,
M., Long, E., Marzaro, M., Mitchell, E. A. D., Noome, D. A., Simon-Delso, N., &
Tapparo, A. (2015). Environmental fate and exposure: Neonicotinoids and fipronil.
Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 22(1), 35–67.
http://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3332-7
Carson, R. (1962). Silent spring. Houghton Mifflin.
Edwards, C. A. (2018, May 23). Pesticides. In Encyclopedia.com. Retrieved January 5, 2021,
from https://www.encyclopedia.com/environment/educational-magazines/pesticides
Goulson, D. (2013). Review: An overview of the environmental risks posed by neonicotinoid
insecticides. Journal of Applied Ecology, 50(4), 977–987.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2664.12111/full
Hopwood, J., Code, A., Vaughn, M., Biddinger, D., Shepherd, M., Black, S. H., Lee-Mader, E.,
& Mazzacano, C. (2016). How neonicotinoids can kill bees: The science behind the role
these insecticides play in harming bees (2nd ed.). The Xerces Society for Invertebrate
Conservation.
Kaplan, J. K. (2012, July 1). Colony collapse disorder: An incomplete puzzle. Agricultural
Research, 60(6), 4.
Kluser, S., Neumann, P., Chauzat, M.-P., & Pettis, J. S. (2010). UNEP emerging issues: Global
honey bee colony disorders and other threats. United Nations Environment Programme.
McGrath, K. A. (1999). World of biology. Gale Group.
http://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3332-7
https://www.encyclopedia.com/environment/educational-magazines/pesticides
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2664.12111/full

19. 11
National Research Council. (2013). Assessing risks to endangered and threatened species from
pesticides. The National Academies Press.
Pesticide Action Network UK. (2017). What are neonicotinoids? http://www.pan-
uk.org/about_neonicotinoids/
Sarich, C. (2013, August 15). List of foods we will lose if we don’t save the bees. Honey
Love
Urban Beekeepers. https://honeylove.org/list-of-food/
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.-a). Introduction to integrated pest management.
https://www.epa.gov/managing-pests-schools/introduction-integrated-pest-management
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.-b). Why we use pesticides.
https://www.epa.gov/safepestcontrol/why-we-use-pesticides
Watanabe, M. E. (2009, December). What’s new with honeybees? BioScience, 59(11), 1010.
https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.19
Whitford, F., Pike, D., Hanger, G., Burroughs, F., Johnson, B., & Blessing, A. (2006). The
benefits of pesticides: A story worth telling. Purdue Extension, 70.
Zoltan, M. B. (2011). Pesticides and pesticide residue. In B. W. Lerner & K. L. Lerner (Eds.), In
context series. Food: In context (Vol. 2, pp. 630–633). Gale.
http://www.pan-uk.org/about_neonicotinoids/
http://www.pan-uk.org/about_neonicotinoids/
https://honeylove.org/list-of-food/
https://www.epa.gov/managing-pests-schools/introduction-integrated-pest-management
https://www.epa.gov/safepestcontrol/why-we-use-pesticides
https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.19
Unit VIII Research Paper
Instructions

20. Conclusion and Abstract
Follow the directions below for the completion of the conclusion and abstract assignment for
Unit VIII. If you have questions, please email your professor for assistance.
Purpose : The purpose of this assignment is to complete your academic argumentative research
paper.
Description : In this assignment, you will first write your conclusion; then, you will write your
abstract. The following components are requirements of the assignment:
· Conclusion:
· Revisit the controversy.
· Emphasize the seriousness of the controversy.
· Answer the “So what?― question.
· Suggest a general solution (optional).
· Call for awareness/action.
· Leave the reader with a final thought.
· Abstract: For this assignment, your conclusion and abstract must be at least one page in
length.
· Restatement of the controversy (one to two sentences)
· Your thesis (one sentence)
· Reasons (three to four sentences)
· Conclusion sentence (one sentence)
· Add the conclusion and abstract to the rest of your paper so that you are turning in a complete
research paper. The paper should include all of the following components (in order):
· Title page
· Abstract
· Introduction
· Literature review

21. · Body paragraphs
· Conclusion
· References page
· Unit VIII Journal Part 1
· Instructions Writing a research paper is a great undertaking, and now you are at the end of
the process. No doubt, you feel emboldened by your accomplishment. As we have done
throughout this course, you will be asked to reflect one last time. What did you find to be the
most challenging about the process of writing this research paper? What did you find to be the
easiest? What did you learn about writing in general throughout this course? What did you learn
about yourself as a writer? What would you like to share in the way of advice for other students
who take this course after you? Discuss how the concepts in this course can be applied to real-
world situations and increase your chances of career or life success. Your journal entry must be
at least 200 words. No references or citations are necessary.
·