View Full Version : Formal Research on FGMO
07-09-2003, 02:07 PM
Have there been any formal scientific studies published on FGMO by universities, Beltsville, etc., independent of Dr. Rodriguez, which demonstrate the effectiveness of FGMO? If there are none, why? If there are some, does anyone have the links?
Wish the Cuttlefish
Dr. Pedro Rodriguez
07-09-2003, 03:01 PM
What is meant by formal? Are we looking for crdibility here"
Must research be performed at universities?
There have been many contributions to humankind by independent researchers.
Unfortunately, research costs money and most monies for research are granted to universities, but that should not mean that only university-based research is credilbe.
07-09-2003, 03:33 PM
What I guess I am looking for is any research paper, submitted for peer review and published in a well regarded scientific journal (Science, Nature, American Bee Journal even!) which successfully replicates and validates your findings in regards to the efficacy of FGMO. The epistemological ideas of Karl Popper, etc, not withstanding, this is still the modus operandi in the scientific community for examining and verifying scientific claims.
I myself do not have hives, and I have not tried it. I am looking to start and I am interested in reading any and all research regarding Varroa mite control. Your techniques, which may have much anecdotal evidence and your own research to support them, are nonetheless controversial. Credible, independent research would go a long way towards persuading people, including myself, that your techniques are the way to go.
As for my mentioning of universities and the federal research station in Beltsville, MD, I only mention these as examples. You are certainly correct, there are independent researchers, and I would welcome those as well. However, as you suggest, the organizations I mentioned generally are able to apply more funds and resources to a given scientific issue. It seems to me that claims regarding the efficacy of FGMO would warrant extensive research by these groups, especially considering the severity of the Varroa mite problem and the impact it has had and continues to have on beekeepers and US agriculture in general.
Wish the Cuttlefish
Dr. Pedro Rodriguez
07-09-2003, 04:01 PM
Your point is well taken. Maybe your queries will start a trend from which you may get answers to some of your questions.
I for one, am far too busy to engage in philosophical dialogues.
If you are interested in useful contributions to beekeeping, please write to my private e-mail address with a real name and a real e-mail address and I will be very glad to assist you.
07-09-2003, 06:45 PM
I have noticed in the case of alternative treatments such as FGMO and small cell that most of the research I find done by others does not bother to try to duplicate the methods or concepts of the original and because of this fail. I don't understand why the researchers don't bother to follow the methods that they are supposedly testing. I get the feeling that down deep, they are actually trying to disprove it and that's why they didn't bother to try to follow the same methods. In reality they should be trying to simply follow the method and see if the results are the same or not without any expectations.
The things that are passed off as scientific research are shocking.
On rare occasions these researchers actually do follow the original protocol and it does work.
As pointed out by Dr. Rodriguez in other posts, many other alternative treatments probably work because they have FGMO or some other oil as the base for the treatment.
07-10-2003, 06:56 AM
My name is Kai A. Richardson, I live in Pomfret MD, and my email address is email@example.com.
Michael Bush has said that on the rare occasions when researchers have followed protocols they have had success. Have their results been published? If so, where? If not, why?
I would be surprised if others on this forum would not also be interested in reading such research, which is why I submitted my original post. Such information would be extremely helpful to those of us who are new to beekeeping and are facing the daunting task of examining all of the various Varroa mite control methods. The efforts in this area made by independent researchers such as Dr. Rodriguez are certainly appreciated since they save time and money for those of us without the resources or expertise to engage in such research. I have read Dr. Rodriguez's article in American Bee Journal but I have been having no success in finding research which replicates his results.
07-10-2003, 11:11 AM
My last treatment with Apistan was last fall. I have since then tried to follow the FGMO as prescribed by the Dr. and I have seen very little sign of varroa in my hives and only then earlier in the year when I first started. I even have uncapped whole frames of drone cells to see if I could find varroa and I have seen very little. I love using the fogger instead of my smoker (may not work with other hive nor is this included as part of the Dr. recomendations) I just found that it works like the smoker for me. It is neat to watch the bees go after new cords - right away they will start tugging and pulling to get it out of they hive.
07-10-2003, 12:27 PM
Question for Dr. Rodriquez,
In Pa, the state inspection program recently published the results of a mite test. Of 123 hives tested (from different apiaries),15 had mites. All with levels below 5 mites per sample. Samples taken via sugar roll test. These hives were not using FGMO or any other medications at this time. Spring/summer levels seem to be manageable.
My question has to do with the use of FGMO on a continual basis. Is it needed on a weekly/monthly basis if no test indicates a problem?
Has it been tested using it only for fall time application?
Would timely application in the fall be effective?
I ask since spring buildup and winter weather would not be conducive to application for possibly 3-5 months period. And yet at other times of the year it seems a regimented schedule must be followed for success.
Thank-you for your input.
Dr. Pedro Rodriguez
07-10-2003, 03:24 PM
I am plased to see reports of low mite incidence. Perhaps we are reaching the point where honey bees are becoming more resistant to mites. I would be skeptical of low mite counts. I would advise to keep your guard up. Mite infestations do flare up when one least expect them.
Regarding your question:
Tests have demonstrated that the FGMO emulsion-soaked cords do protect colonies during Winter and early Spring.
Thank you Kai for posting your Name and e-mail address. I sincerelly wish that institutions with research capabilities would perform genuine duplication trials. I honestly think this will never happen because there is no money in FGMO. No one is going to fund it. At least that has been my experience so far.
07-10-2003, 05:36 PM
I try to keep a close watch on mite levels too. This time of year I generally dont see a huge level but there are a few colonies that break that exception. I saw one in the last couple of days that is a doomed with tattered wings and little varroa hitch hiking on the bees. Screened bottom boards dont seem to be showing much either. However, I typically see the mites really increase in late August or so.
I think you and I have the same questions about treatment with FGMO......when to start, time interval to space treatments and how many overall times are needed/how long to continue treatments.
The following was my experience when the colonies were fogged in the fall (September) with only two applications....60% loss of colonies. Don't take this to mean that I think FGMO is worthless.......I havent given up on FGMO and am going to try the exact same method again this fall and see what happens......I suspect that the loss will be substantially less just due to the bees I have now versus when I tried last time and that a quick fogging could allow me to maintain an acceptable winter loss. I keep hoping for a method to use FGMO that will work for me....it simply isnt possible to fog on a constant basis.
07-11-2003, 07:21 AM
When I hear about losses of 60% and sometimes more, I go crazy thinking there has got to be more to the story. I am not a wizard, but have never experienced anything close to this level and I did not treat with anything last year.
I wish there would be a checklist for beekeepers to fill out when a hive was lost. Something like -When was the queen last replaced? - Date of last check on brood in the fall - Mite count on last check - Starvation signs vs. desease signs - etc.
My question is from a pure labor/time angle. If your bees are showing low numbers through spring and summer, and knowing the mites increase rapidly in late fall, then would timely application be the best way to go?
I hear about beekeepers using FGMO on newly installed packages with full sheets of foundation. Is this needed? Other than the fact that they are new and possibly making mistakes, losing new hives with no/little drone cells is hard to do. Does fogging all year long make sense other than the fact you should go into fall with lower levels as compared to not using FGMO at all?
I have always believed that the grease patties helped, which I do use. And FGMO makes sense to me. I just can't see carrying the fogger all year long and how hives can be completly lost on a small deviation or temporary lapse in application.
I think I will follow the FGMO procedure as outlined and use on half my bees/apiaries. The other half with something else perhaps strips and see what the outcomes are.
And I agree that fogging would be hard to do on a constant basis. This is also why most big university/Ag Dept. concentrate on other areas of research. I think they are trying to find a one time application on a yearly basis. They are more in line with commercial application. Of course politics, money, egos, and other things I'm sure come into play. My opinion of course.
07-11-2003, 11:23 AM
I had very similar losses to Wineman last season-over 50%, fogging every 2 weeks starting in spring through early August and using emulsion mop cords,though the cords werent replaced regularly(try lifting hundreds of supers to do that)By August it was apparent that there were huge varroa loads and other measures were taken to save the hives.Although some losses were due to queen failure the vast majority died from virus killed brood(PMS-my wife loves that one)
So make of it what you will,I am NOT using mineral oil this year.
Dr. Pedro Rodriguez
07-11-2003, 03:39 PM
Sorry folks if I sound repetitive.
Sounds to me like the old complaints, yet we all end up at the same conclusion.
I have varroa-free hives, and my colleagues very low mite counts. However, all of us follow a strict protocol. I have truthfully published my findings and procedure for use of FGMO. Please read the published material and you will notice among other details that the best results have been obtained when fogging and the cords are used together. Also that in the absence of emulsion-soaked cords (due to excess labor) fogging is required once a week for optimum results.
I also notice that there might be other reasons for hive losses beyond FGMO. I have stated many times that FGMO is an alternative treament and not a "silver bullet." I receive thousand of anecdotes from people who use FGMO. Some fail, but the majority of users claim to be successful with it. Remarkably, according to their testimonies,those who succed are those who follow strict protocol instructions.
This year I have been working with a variation to the FGMO formula to include the SHB. As I posted on this forum, results are very encouraging and will soon be published.
Please "do not kill the messenger." Please bear with me.
07-11-2003, 07:41 PM
Think I probably raised more questions than anything with my last post. Sure I will forget something but I will try to answer some of your questions. If not let me know.
I believe taking care of bees has three parts these days.
(1) Following good practices and trying to keep the best conditions for the bees.
(3) Mite control with the method or combination that works best for you whether its chemicals, FGMO, screened boards, small cells.
Number one can include alot but I think young queens is a good start. Number two is full of twists and turns but I would suggest most folks try to simply find something that works in their operation given their environment/location.
I try to rasie a few queens and add some SMR, Russian etc into the bees. I dont treat any colonies that are used for breeders, for drones or those being tested for future use as either but I do treat general production colonies. Which takes us to number 3.
Generally, production colonies have queens that are from 3 months old upto 2 years old heading into winter. Regarding diseases, generally dont see much chalk brood and occassionally see AFB in a percentage of colonies. Vast majority of the colonies are more than capable of handling it on their own but I typically destroy frames with it so that I don't accidentally use it to make a nuc or something. Tracheal mites are my big issue. I have stopped grease patties due to concerns with SHB. The core basis of my bees has been american buckfast and new world carniolan so I have a fair amount of resistance but you can lose it very quickly if you dont watch out. Starvation typically is not an issue. Comes into play in three scenarios.....late season swarming, late season nucs that barely make it into a single and bees that simply have too much italian in them.
I have my own protocol of testing for mites and treating that works for me but I am always looking for something new.
My first test was actually before fogging. It was when essential oils were being talked about. We would spray vegetable oil mixed with essential oils across the top bars and leave the soaked shop towels in the top. In these experiments I usually only jeapordize about 25 colonies max but I can compare them to my treated colonies and my untreated colonies. I believe the shop towels in vegetable/essential oil did a nice job on tracheal mites when the temps were warm enough for the oils to evaporate. I cant say that it did anything for me in the way of helping battle varroa. I hadnt thought about it since I saw the work by Dr. Rodriquez on here recently. It seems to be similar to the cords but I can see how the emulsion would make it much better than just towels soaked in oil. Plus, we only put the towels in for the short time window starting in late August/early September. Back then, didnt do much to monitor for varroa either.
When the fogging was done, only colonies that were thought to have realistic mite numbers for autumn.....around 25-40 natural fall and at the point that I personally think treatment maybe needed.....were used. No cords were used. I think the mite load was close to the threshold.....too little treatment, too late and 60% loss was the end product.
I didnt mean to sound as though I was killing the messenger Dr. Rodriquez. I understand that the results could be completely different if I followed the full protocol. I am glad that it works for those who do follow the protocol. However, that just doesnt seem realistic for me given present time constraints. So I am still searching for a way that FGMO might integrate into my operation. This posting has prompted me to consider a test with one group of 10-12 2 year old colonies with cords and 2 foggings both applied in August/September and one group of 10-12 2 year old colonies with either 2 or 3 foggings and no cords applied at the same time. I wouldnt suggest that anyone else try it unless they dont mind what the downside could be.
07-11-2003, 08:55 PM
Loggermik there was some similar notes on this forum and it is bad to here beekeepers have so many losses.
From time to time I connect to the UK -FGMO group and I think lots of beekeepers must have the same problem. Last year they had so many postings, in May /209 and June /182 and this year May /7 and June only 1. Thats absolutely nothing from over hundred members. When I have good or bad results I talk about it, because thats why we have this forum. Nobody is perfect and we have lots to learn from each other.
I hoped the new thymol product would help us but Im really skeptic. Thymol evaporates like formic acid and is fine during the warm weather, but what can we do when we have a late honey flow and must wait with the treatment? As soon as we getting colder weather in fall the evaporation slows down or stopped and thymol is useless. Has anybody an answer?
With oxalic vapor I can treat the colonies as long as the temperature is a few degree above the freezing point.
I had a very high mite infection last summer and vaporized oxalic acid several times 7 days apart because of the sealed brood. In late fall and early winter during the brood free time, I treated my colonies again and lost not even one colony.
At this time of the year I have Oxamite strips in my colonies (1 strip per 4 full brood frames) and mites falling in high numbers. I find out because of the strips there is no early acid vapor necessary like last year and I can wait with the main evaporation treatment till the colony is almost free of brood. Important is always the control with a sticky board.
07-11-2003, 09:21 PM
Well I dont want to shoot the messenger either as I always find Dr.R. posts interesting and worth reading.I gave the mineral oil a good try based on the time available for a small commercial operation and under those specific conditions had no luck.I cannot do more than I did,so will have to leave it at that.But I wish the best for those still trying it and hope it works for you.
I too tried the wintergreen in syrup and grease patties when they were first discussed several years ago,and still believe it has a positive effect on lessening viral damage,but by itself couldnt control varroa in a bad year.
This season I cant find a varroa mite anywhere!At this point I am just random sampling drone brood forking out around a hundred per hive as I look in brood nests.
I agree that good management requires good young queens ,good locations(nutrition),disease and pest management and of course swarm prevention and control.All of these have a cost and sometimes just dont work out in spite of our best efforts.As for mites, we are still writing the book on them.They are the worst plague to ever hit bees and our strategies for dealing with them will be constantly changing.
Dr. Pedro Rodriguez
07-12-2003, 08:39 AM
Thanks Loggermike and Wineman for your kind words.
Axman. Before I proceed, please allow me to ascertain that I do not have a ax to grind. Anyone can make a statistical presentation on any subject and make it look good depending on his ability to handle mathematics, probability laws and the such upon which so many people make a living. Do you have statistical data on oxalic acid performance and could you please give us the links. I am quite capable of obtaining them on my own but I am in how partial/impartial your sources can be. And by the way, did somoone mention in this forum that you work for or are related to an oxalic acid producer? Just curious.
Wineman: Ever since I started using FGMO, I have not been able to find one single tracheal mite in the thousands of colonies that I have inspected. FGMO fog does a terrific job with tracheal mites.
I think that many of your questions regarding the use of thymol will be put to rest soon. More to come.
07-12-2003, 03:11 PM
This post started with a rather well written request for verification on any level as to FGMO. I have also asked very pointed and direct questions. None of which have really been answered.
It is amazing to me that after 8 years of research, that not one independent source in the bee world could verify any claims made to date. Is it lack of personal salesmanship, arrogance, ego, or other reason. I am only guessing. Not one ag dept. not one university, not one anything anywhere.
And now, after Axtmann does not disrespect FGMO, but spoke highly on something he believes. He's ask to provide data to back up his claims. Are not his own experiences enough for him to speak openly about his successes. Seems to me thats what FGMO is without independent varification. If he has an agenda, I suppose its no more than others. Don't we all on some level.
I wish one day that one lab, university, ag department, one anything, would do this process and report the findings. Of course I'm sure there will be someone to say "the process was flawed, I wasn't involved, they had an agenda, money was involved,............".
07-12-2003, 03:27 PM
I have heard that experiments were done with fgmo in various places but other than Dr. R.'s I have had no luck in finding any of it.As for oxalic it has had lots of research done and is pretty easy to track down on the internet.I tend to disregard the insinuations about profit making as there is no money to be made with either mineral oil or oxalic.At the levels they are used in beekeeping,both are dirt cheap.
Dr. Pedro Rodriguez
07-12-2003, 05:57 PM
I am stil interested in knowing if indeed Axman works for or is related to someone who owns an oxalic acid enterprice. No offense was nor is now intended.
07-12-2003, 06:34 PM
BjornBee,I see your point.Others have done research on fgmo,I hear references from time to time,so why is it so hard to find?You would think they would make the results available if they went to the trouble to test it in the first place.
07-12-2003, 08:30 PM
Hello Dr. Rodriguez and other beekeepers
Thanks for your answers and I wish the Oxalic Acid producer would send me some money. I think those companies dont even know that beekeepers using the acid to treat honeybees.
How much money can you make on a crystal that cost 10. Euro / 9. - US per kg and is good for almost 500 treatments? I think this is one of the reasons why nobody is interested to go for a registration with all the difficulties and costs.
For an example, would you go and register vinegar as a window cleaner if the government would demand this? After the registration you must raise the price to get your money back with an result, no housewife would by it from you. Same with oxalic acid, it is a good wood cleaner and you can also bleach the wax. The crystals are available here in hardware stores and all beekeeping suppliers sell it. Why should we pay double or even more to someone who registers the acid???
The first tests are made from several beekeeping institutes since the Varroa arrived in Germany.
Dr. if youre interested I will give you the addresses from some of at least 6 institutes here in Germany.
Search the Internet and you will find lots of countries where the acid is in use against the Varroa. Some governments even recommend the treatments with OA (Scotland, New Zealand, Denmark, Finland and many more) because of the low costs for the beekeepers and the very good results.
I would say, beekeepers in almost all countries from the eastern part of Europe and Russia treating their bees with OA.
The breakthrough was when beekeepers find out, the vaporized oxalic acid is the saves for the honeybees and the most effective treatment against the Varroa. Official test are made in this direction.
I give you one of the sites so you can see how they made the tests and what the result is http://www.mellifera.de/engl2.htm
Im not using the electric oxalic acid vaporizer like in the tests because of the heat in the colonies. It might work during the wintertime but not in late summer or fall when colonies are strong and not in a cluster. The heat kills lots of bees before they can escape. I heat my vaporizer outside the colonies and blow the vapor in the hive with same good results but no casualties.
Dr. I wonder why I cant find such test from your recommended treatment on the Internet after all the years you work with FGMO?
Dr. I dont like to devaluate your work in the fight against the Varroa but it would be nice to here some different independent statements.
By the way, if you know someone who owns an oxalic acid enterprise you can give me the name and address. Maybe I have luck and make some money I can share with you.
Dr. Pedro Rodriguez
07-13-2003, 05:19 AM
I see that this topic is getting out of context.
I do not see the reason why Axman is so intent in debating against FGMO if he has no other reason than comparing/contrasting the merits of oxalic acid vs FGMO. If he believes in oxalic acid as I do in FGMO, fine. What does anyone have to gain by demeaning the merits of either product unless there is a biased reason?
On to the basics of FGMO research.
I have performed FGMO research (and I believe my credentials will compare favorably with those of many performing honey bee research) for 9 years at my own expense for the benefit of beekeeping large and small. I am convinced that FGMO has merits as an alternative method of treatment for honey bee parasites as demonstrated in field trials and anecdotic reports from all around the wolrd.
I do not know why research institutions do not engage in performing FGMO research and if there is anyone who does why they do not publish their results, positive or negative. I see no point in debating the merits of FGMO on this forum or any other forum. My time is much to valuable to engage in arguments that will not foster the wellfare of our common object: honey bees.
I will continue in search of ways and means that will benefit honey bees, beekeeping and humanity in general. That has been my goal from day one and will continue to be.
In closing, I would like to remind those that have followed the progress of FGMO, that I have always insisted that I continue to look for ways to make FGMO cost-effective and less labor intensive for the benefit of commercial beekeepers. During the past years, I have noticed that most complaints about the efficacy of FGMO comes from commercial beekeepers because present day FGMO procedures "takes too much of their time and it is too much labor intensive." Yet, I have not heard of one single commercial beekeeping enterprise, even though there are very large commercial enterprizes in beekeeping, that would certeinly benefit from it, that have offered to fund FGMO research.
Here is my plea once more. Don't kill the messengers, be they for whatever procedure that works. Let's concentrate in finding ways that will protect our honey bees!
07-13-2003, 08:11 PM
First off, I want to thank everyone for reading and responding to my initial post. I am amazed at the interest my simple request has generated. Unfortunately, I have to come to the conclusion that my questions regarding independant verification of FGMO can't be answered here. That does not mean I am saying I believe FGMO does not work. Quite frankly, I don't know one way or the other. As I have said, I am a complete newbie.
I have decided that I will inquire directly with the Beltsville Bee Lab and ask the same questions I asked in my initial post, plus one more:
1. Has research on FGMO been done?
2. If so, what are the results?
3. If not, why?
4. What course of treatment does Beltsville currently recommend for a hobbyist?
I appreciate the responses of Dr. Rodriguez and the dedication he clearly has to his work. His caring for the condition of honeybees is commendable.
Clearly I have stirred up some ill will, and this was not my intention. However, I do disagree with him on one point: a forum, in my opinion, can be an excellent place to discuss the merits of a given subject as long as the postings remain cordial, are intelligently presented with well-informed assertions, and remain relevant to the topic.
I will not be posting the responses to my inquiries with the Beltsville lab to this forum. Dr. Rodriguez is the moderator of this forum and therefore I believe his desire not to engage in this debate here should be respected. Instead, I will post any additional information I receive on this matter to the "Diseases and Pests" forum.
Kai A. Richardson
aka Wish the Cuttlefish
07-14-2003, 07:08 AM
You bring up a good point about this forum,and one that I had reached myself.The debate about the effectiveness or lack thereof and comparisons to other treatments must be carried on, but NOT here.So out of respect to Dr.R. ,I too will not post any negative comments here anymore,as this forum is Dr. R's.See you on the disease and pests forum!
Dr. Pedro Rodriguez
07-14-2003, 03:51 PM
I appreciate your kind words and concerns.
I wish to clarify that I do not own this forum. Like you, I post here.
I agree on another aspect. This forum is for FGMO. As I have stated before, unfortunately, I am far too busy to engazge in debates.
I would like to suggest to those of you who may wish to debate beekeeping issues to visit Bee-L.
Your wishes may certainily be granted there.
My very best regards to all.
07-14-2003, 10:44 PM
Greetings to all of you !
I have been "reading ' almost all of page 2 of the subject here . The concerns are valid and the contributions vary in importance to the subject . Since the Varroa incident is a hot subject and no silverbullet has hereto come forth , it is understandable for different opinions to surface .
I have neither seen anything anywhere pointing to so called research related to FGMO other than what Dr R has published . It has also puzzled me since my involvement with FGMO that no other source has come forth with anything but meaningless comments such as : "it does not work ". This kind of statement is absolutely worthless to me and I give to this kind of comment no attention .
Another aspect is also of interest as it relates to the ENGLISH language and its use in a rather limited arena . Maybe one should respect other folks also around the globe which MAY have done this reseasrch you are looking for and are not inclined to debate such matters in English !!. So much for that .
Since we have no other means to communicate and lack the so called "Scientific " verification from other sources we are stuck with our own observations of an anecdotal "value". But who is to say that our observations are of a lesser value than anyone elses . As far as research goes there is the "Primadonna " sydrome present which presents itself as a handicap also . Politics have the tendency to creep into a picture much to anyones regret .
Such is life
I have posted repeatedly my observation of anedotal value in this forum but have no time nor interest to play the same tune like worn out 76 record .
I have stated that Varroa is and will be present until it resolves itself or the bees can take care of it as they do in Asia from where they came .
In the meantime we have to make do with what we have and ONE of the tools is FGMO . It is to me the most benign application I have used and are aware of . There may be others NOW , but I shall stick with FGMO because it has not killed the bees , nor did it contaminate the product but kept the Varroa as well as the tracheal mite in check .
Yes ,I lost colonies . Not to mites ,but not managing correctly ( Handicapped time wise ) that is : starving , Mice , yellow Jackets. Shrews , Queen loss and laying workers .
I have never seen phoretic varroa on my bees and the drone brood at the late check revealed ONE varroa where I found the mite. But Not in all drone cells . That is strange in itself since most mites bear more young in one cell. I am not even sure that the mites were NOT the old mother and had not propagated offspring . Particularly in one colony this phenomenon occurs with a daily drop of 10 to 50 in 24 hours . The colony however does not show any ill effect . I do not know what to make out of this .
Furthermore I have no problems with brood ailments other than in one colony the incident of chalkbrood and it is most likely the location as a culprit .I requeened that one and have to check on the subject shortly.
The usage of FGMO in my apiary began in late dec 1999 and on a prophylactic basis since Jan 2000 with a minimum of 2 weeks interval of fogging and cords when depleted .
May I be permitted to explain a notion here . The emulsion has the tendency to separate the honey from the other ingrediences . since the distribution within the cords are rather uniform the "separation " is also widely distributed with the cords . The bees therefore like this honey component and surely "Go" for it , hereby having to "Dig " for it and thus get the other ingredients onto their bodies to do what it suppose to do .
I have made tests with the effect of the emulsion as well as the oil on the mite and the mite perished almost instantaniously specifically when exposed to the oil . Trouble is , I have not enough or no mites to play with other than the live drop in this one colony out of 20. So, I have not reason NOT to continue with the application of FGMO and take my hat off to DR Pedro Rodriguez to maintain his cool inspite of years of adverse comments and attempts to sabotage his work .
The jury on most Varroa treatments is still out because nothing has been forthcoming to make a dent in the bucket .
Best wishes to all and happy beeing !
07-15-2003, 01:04 PM
correction to one statement in the foregoing post : The Fog application has a maximum timespan of two weeks . More often it is applied in one week intervals , dpending on my personal doings of daily living.
07-18-2003, 05:32 AM
I have been absent from the forum for some time and the reason was the same as it is going to be this time.A simple inquiry evolves into a mud slinging affair with no knowlege being gained. The gentleman using the acid sounds very much like the last clown who was jumping all over FGMO.See you all in a couple of months when this path of destruction might be over. I am not siding with Dr. R. or anyone else. I simply think we should all be working for a common goal and not searching for a power base to shout from.
Because of my limited knowlege I need to know what SHB is Dr. R.
See you later
07-18-2003, 07:54 AM
SHB=Small Hive Beetle=Major Pest
07-30-2003, 10:06 PM
However i am not qualified to speak because I lack the credentials of whatever facilities and time to construct statistics which requires a course at a learned institution . Of course , then again anyone can concoct statistics without the above . Sometimes I made extra income with that . ( Please keep quiet about this )
Anyway, my pure ingnorance of testing with the alcohol / water method revealed at the last random check a maximum of 5 % and the other 5 samples zero % . Naturally my unscientific method as proposed by Dr so and so in respect to the above treatment is questionable since I are/is unable to count properly . Not to talk using division manipulation and grammar.I would love to experiment with the mites but sorry I cannot find any and the few dead ones are hard to fiddle with . It is too bad .I use only FGMO since Dec 1999 and it is very disappointinmg that I still find only a few . I also try to spot any in drone cells and was diappointed not to find any there . In conclusion I find myslf in the position to stop the FGMO treatment to increase the mite population , giving me the opportunity to excercise in further anecdotal events .
yours very sad
Meantime the other odd hive with the mite drop I mentioned before is now in production somewhere and I am not able to monitor daily . It is producing pollen somewhere else aside honey.
Scot Mc Pherson
07-31-2003, 08:13 PM
Hi, I am curious as to how you decided to research the effectiveness of FGMO in the use of mite control. What was the original source of this idea.
Just curious really, I have been away from "modern beekeeping" for a while and there are LOTS of new ideas.
Scot Mc Pherson
"Linux is a Journey, not a Guided Tour" ~ Me
07-31-2003, 08:40 PM
According to what Dr. Rodriguez, who is a veterinarian, has said elsewhere, its a treatment he has used for mites in large mammals and he tried it on the mites on the bees figuring that if it worked on ear mites and other mites on mammals, then it might work on the mites on the bees. I think the question really wasnt would the FGMO kill the mites, but would it harm the bees and what was the best way to administer it.
The Dr. can feel free to elaborate on this if he wishes.
Dr. Pedro Rodriguez
08-01-2003, 08:10 AM
Mac. Thank you for your question. My idea was the result of professional veterinary knowledge and Divine guidance.
Thank you Mike for your reply to Mac.
Your reply is okay but it is a bit more extensive than what you have explained.
Here again, I urge all visitors to beesource.com to read the archives in order to obtain "the whole story" as Paul Harvey would say. It is too time consuming for me to reapeat time and again to new commers.
My most recent research results will soon be published. Guaranteed to be pleasing.
Have a wonderful pleasant summer in the company of your loved ones and Godly guidance.
Scot Mc Pherson
08-01-2003, 03:47 PM
Dr and mike. Thanx for the replies.
I understnad what you are saying about just applying a science already used elsewhere in animal care. My question really stems from the beginning of the beginning of using mineral oil to treat mites.
And if it works for mites, I wonder if it would be good for flees ?!? Bath a dog in fgmo, let him stand for 10 minutes or so to let the oil enter the trachea of the mites, and then wash the oil off of the dog. Or would FGMO not be viscous enough?
I know its not strictly beekeeping, but the question is valid in the sense that I am wondering where did FGMO treatment historically start from the beginning of time.
Scot Mc Pherson
"Linux is a Journey, not a Guided Tour" ~ Me
[This message has been edited by Scot Mc Pherson (edited August 01, 2003).]
08-01-2003, 06:45 PM
I don't know about fleas but it works on lice. It doesn't wash off as easily as vegatable oil though, and I'd recommend olive oil for lice.
Dr. Pedro Rodriguez
08-02-2003, 07:14 AM
To Scot Mac and other interested parties.
Yes, I have reported time and again that mineral oil has and is being used for the treatment of lice, ticks, fleas and other body parasites of humans and animals.
Dr. Pedro Rodriguez
08-02-2003, 07:28 AM
I am not disagreeing with my good colleague Mike Bush.
1). olive oil is far more expensive than FGMO.
2). olive oil is a a valuable food and it seems to me like a shame to waste valuable foods when there are other proven alternativs.
3). Olive oil has an odor that permeates
the environment. It is fine for the salad but doubtful for the work environment.
I know of several colleagues who have/are using the fogger to fog their livestock using FGMO and the Burgess fogger.
Just a thought.
08-02-2003, 10:18 AM
I am NOT recomending Olive oil for bees. I'm recomending it for head lice. I'm saying FGMO would work for head lice except that it is difficult to wash out. Olive oil would probably work in the emoulsion for the bee mites, but you have to worry about it going racid and all the other issues that the Dr. brings up.
The principle is the same.
I find it interesting how many things that are being tried on the mites and look promising that are in some way an oil or distributed in an oil and often it is FGMO.
I read one recently about a man who was using fish oil on shop towels and the article was actualy making fun of the concept, but my guess is that it works. I wouldn't want to eat his honey, however. http://www.beesource.com/ubb/smile.gif