BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tz'unun" data-source="post: 1572053" data-attributes="member: 14142">It's honey (mel das abelhas) that is linked to hummingbird deaths. White sugar is sucrose, which is the most abundant sugar found in the nectar of hummingbird flowers. Natural coloring is better than artificial, but the product is still a waste of your money. Please do post photos from your pátio(?)!The first thing you need to do is read <a href="http://www.trochilids.com/dye.html" target="_blank">Stacy Jon Peterson's in-depth review of the medical literature.</a> Then ask yourself these questions:How often do you see a sick, dying, or dead hummingbird? They get sick and die of other things all the time, but how often do you see one drop off a feeder or find a carcass? For me the answer is only a handful of times in the last twenty years, even though I spend a lot of time at feeding stations that host thousands of hummingbirds (no, I'm not exaggerating). The odds are stacked heavily against seeing a hummingbird sick, dying, or dead of any cause because:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Most North American hummingbirds are long-distance migrants that are more likely to die in the months they spend away from feeders than the days to weeks they spend using them. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Even relatively sedentary species such as Anna's spend more time away from feeders than on/near them. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Wild animals tend to hide illness to avoid showing vulnerability to predators and rivals, so a casual observer would be unlikely to detect a mild illness or even a terminal one in its early stages. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><a href="http://fieldguidetohummingbirds.wordpress.com/2007/08/29/7/" target="_blank">A sick hummingbird drawn to the easy energy offered by feeders may be driven away (or, in rare instances, killed) by healthy, aggressive rivals</a>.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A moribund or dead hummingbird is a tiny object easily obscured by vegetation and easily carried away by scavengers.</li> </ul>If you did see a sick, dying, or dead hummingbird, how would you know what its problem is/was?In addition to easily-refuted urban myths that the San Diego Zoo/Audubon Society/some university did a study and found that red dye(s) did/did not cause cancer/bill deformities/liver tumors/etc. in hummingbirds, there have been claims of first-hand observations of dye-related problems by wildlife rehabilitators, self-styled hummingbird experts, etc. Unfortunately, none of these incidents seems to have been followed up with a necropsy and histopathology report, so direct evidence of harm to hummingbirds from these additives remains elusive (but is not necessary anymore than human mortality and morbidity is necessary to get or keep potentially hazardous chemicals out of our own food supply.)Though a representative of Perky Pet once tried to frame it as hummingbirds taking a swig of red stuff and dropping dead, the issue is not acute toxicity. It's <a href="http://www.trochilids.com/faq.html#red" target="_blank">long-term/chronic exposure to unacceptably high intake rates of chemicals shown in laboratory and clinical studies to have deleterious effects at smaller intake rates over shorter time frames</a>. These effects include genotoxicity, neurotoxicity, reproductive and behavioral toxicity, etc., which can lead to reduced reproductive success, lower offspring survivorship, and diminished longevity. All of these potential effects should be of concern to dispassionate conservationists, but none would be expected to manifest as noticeable mortality around feeders. If we were to determine that artificial colorants in hummingbird feeder solutions did cause disease and premature mortality in hummingbirds but were not correlated with population declines, would we abandon the campaign against these additives or continue it on purely emotional/ethical grounds? As for emotional language, if people are going to insist on "proof" or "conclusive evidence" of harm to hummingbirds, they need to do so with a full understanding of what that would entail as well as why it is as unnecessary (and unethical) as human studies in this context. The propaganda war is being waged by, not against, the companies that produce these products [<a href="http://home.mindspring.com/~tzunun/reddye.htm" target="_blank">link</a> <a href="http://www.hummingbirds.net/dye.html" target="_blank">link</a>], which is why we are out there fighting back with science.The issue that's got me feeling a bit exasperated here (besides having my opinions misrepresented) is setting the evidence standard so much higher for hummingbirds than for humans, pets, or livestock. I have trouble understanding why evidence compelling enough to spur regulatory action on behalf of human health would not be equally compelling in light of the vastly greater intake rates of hummingbirds, at least to anyone without a financial interest in "instant nectar" products. (I know, I know - it happens all the time - I just have trouble understanding it.)</blockquote>

Verification