Does FGMO work?

[waxworker]

I have never used FGMO for the control of varroa. I am very interested in finding a way to treat my bees during a flow. I have read with interest many of the articles and experiences of this forum. Being a cautious man I did some further reading and came across some contrary evidence. I would like a response to this form the exponents of FGMO use in the control of varroa. Is the research quoted here faulty and if so how?

The abstract reads:-

Elzen, P.J., Cox, R.L., Jones, W.A. (2004).
Evaluation of Food Grade Mineral Oil for Varroa mite control.
American Bee Journal December 2004.
921-923.
"Food Grade Mineral Oil (FGMO) applied with an insect fogger was
evaluated for Varroa mite control in honey bee colonies by comparison to
an industry standard, coumaphos strips, and an untreated control group
(eight colonies per treatment group). During the six-week test period,
the Varroa populations increased in untreated colonies and those treated
with FGMO, while those treated with coumaphos strips decreased greatly,
and, consequently, averaged 96.1 to 99.4% fewer Varroa than the
untreated colonies at the end of the test period, by the alcohol wash
and sticky board methods, respectively. In addition to providing no
control for Varroa, FGMO applied in an insect fogger may pose a fire
and/or other health hazard to beekeepers and bees".

[honeyman46408]

IT WORKS FOR ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[Michael Bush]

FGMO is not a deadly poison like coumaphos. It's like comparing Howitzer to a .22.

FGMO requires fogging on a regular basis. I does not, nor has anyone purported that it does, kill all the mites in the hive. It disolodges and kills some of the mites every treatment. That's why it requires regular treatments. But those are regular treatments with an inert oil as opposed to an organophosphate pesticide.

I've only used the fog without the cords etc. and without the thymol. So I have no experience with all of them.

My guess is that if you are in a location with thousands of hives crashing around you, FGMO fog may not be sufficient to control the Varroa. But under normal conditions, I had good results.

If you are not careful, you can cause a flash fire. I've done it once. Don't let the fog back up into the flames on the burner. Like anything else, you need to pay attention and be careful.

[Jim Fischer]

I'm not sure of the details, but this National
Honey Board press release:
http://www.nhb.org/buzz/release022505-VarroaResearch.html
says:


"A third project funded and completed in 2004
evaluated a fogging method with food grade
mineral oil to control Varroa destructor.

The treatment method was determined to be unsafe
for beekeepers and of no benefit in controlling
Varroa populations or improving the overall health
of the colony during the test period during the
Spring conditions in South Texas."
On the other hand, the NHB appears to be funding
additional research in this area (see same
document):



"Effects of mineral oil and essential oils on
honey bee worker brood and colony Varroa mite
populations

Jeff Pettis, USDA-ARS Bee Research Laboratory,
Beltsville, MD

Summary: study designed to determine the efficacy
of mineral oils and mineral oil plus essential
oils in controlling Varroa destructor, and to
examine the potential side effects of mineral oil
and mineral oil plus essential oils on colony
brood and honey production."

Funding period: February 2005 – Summer 2005

[clintonbemrose]

I'm beekeeper that has used this treatment that is said to not work for 5 years. Last year I added Thymol as per Dr. R's instructions. I have been using it weekly on 500 + hives with no problems. I have had no explosions or fires with it. I think that it is safer and less toxic than the regular chemicals that were told to use but for me did nothing but cost me money and time.
retired this winter but still have 10 hives going.
FGMO WORKS FOR ME!!!
Clint
Thanks Dr. R

[JJ]

WORKS FOR ME. JJ

[Sundance]

FGMO is only to be part of IPM strategy.

SBB, small cell, FGMO, and drone cell frame freezing is the route I am going to try.

I doubt if FGMO on it's own is overly effective.

It would be interesting to get the details of the study that came to the conclusion it is ineffective. How often it was applied, duration of the study, severity of initial population, etc.

All that said........

I have fogger in hand, 2 gallons of FGMO and 1 kilo of thymol on the way.

My hives have, and will get, only small cell foundation (other than initial brood frames).

I am ordering the drone frames (the green ones).

Fingers are crossed!!!

[Bryn]

OK, based on what has been said:

Then you would have to use SBB for sure otherwise the FGMO is just going to cause mites to fall off and w/o SBB they will crawl back up into the hive.

Is that correct?

[Dr. Pedro Rodriguez]

smile.gif Hello Folks.
I have sworn to never paticipate in this forum again for lots of reasons (previously stated), primarly because it is obvious that some of the contributors' only purpose is to disrupt the forum.
However, I could not let this one go without making an appropriate comment.
I started working with FGMO 12 years ago. Ever since, I have not used any other "substance" but FGMO (and thymol lately) in my test hives (and those of my associates which number hundreds.
I have been extremely generous to beekeeping and will continue to do so, because of my love for nature and honey bees (contrary to some who are in it because of the fat check they receive from their employers).
I have zero mites in my colonies both in Virginia and in Spain. I have challenged disvelievers to come and visit my hives. As it is said, "seing is believing!).
The literature to which the contributor references, is ABJ, no secret about that either.
However, the test to which the contributor refers was poorly conducted. It would seem that the purpose was to discredit FGMO use, the fogger and the principle in general.
As I have said, I developed this procedure. I have been working with it for 12 years. I can recite the procedure by memory blindfolded. I have offered to cooperate with any one who is interested in replicating my work time and again but my phone calls and e-mails have been ignored grossly.
I receive hundreds of phone calls and e-mails from beekeepers from around the world and have participated in presentations both locally and internationally. I continue to provide information about my findings continually for free and will continue to do so as long as The Good Lord gives me strength to continue doing so.
Humdreds of anecdotical reports are being circulated around the world favoring FGMO.
Laboratory tests in the USA and abroad have demonstrated FGMO/thymol residue free honey and wax while obtaining moderate to large honey production by beekeepers who use the system.
While it is true that FGMO fog does ignite if used improperly, no one has reported having an accident with the fogger, and much less having had toxic effects from using FGMO.
Slowly, almost painfully, FGMO has survived the critics and continues to offer protection to those who use this type of mite control system.
Unfortunately, for beekeeping, these type of unfair critiques have and are keeping the beekeeping industry from using FGMO on a wider generalized form.
What is more significant yet, is that humdreds of beekeepers are using FGMO but do not dare admit that they are for fear of being ridiculed.
Fear not, friends and colleagues, FGMO, is coming of age on its own merits regardless of the antagonism demonstrated by those who may have doubts as to its efficacy.
Very best regards and may The Good Lord bless us all.
Dr. Rodriguez

[clintonbemrose]

Well said!!!
Clint
FGMO/Thymol works for me

[Dr. Pedro Rodriguez]

Hello Clint.
Please take care of yourself and stay healthy.
Very best regards and God bless.
Pedro

[Action]

So far so good. I am happy.
Jack

[jalal]

amazingly said, i agree. smile.gif

[searcher]

[JJ]

Hello Dr. and everyone. Well said and like I said before WORKS FOR ME. Take care JJ

[Kurt Bower]

Sorry for the late post.
I am only using FGMO/thymol with great success!
Too bad for the others that cant seem to figure it out. I have no intentions on switching to anything else! 4 years going strong!

Kurt

[Dr. Pedro Rodriguez]

Hello folks.
Thank you all so very much for your trust and support.
Please do not hesitate to share with me your findings.
Very best regarda and God bless.

[waxworker]

The effectiveness of FGMO is of interest to me as a hobbyist beekeeper I expect that I will try it and see for myself. As a scientifically trained person used to reading scientific papers I asked the question to get, as it were, a detailed peer review of the article quoted. The main point of my question still hasn’t been answered, Is the research quoted here faulty and if so how? Most responses simply say, “It works for me”. That’s great but it’s not full response based on scientifically validated testing. Personal experience is very important for the individual but a full answer needs an independent properly controlled scientific experiment repeated in several locations. The design of such an experiment would need to be agreed by both sides of the argument, as would the interpretation of the results. At present FGMO is in the realms of homeopathy. With respect to those of you who believe in homeopathy, and I don’t want to start a side debate, the jury on its effectiveness is still out. I did not have access to the full research article on
Evaluation of Food Grade Mineral Oil for Varroa mite control.
American Bee Journal December 2004.
921-923.
I had hoped that someone who had would be able to tell me where and why the research is faulty, if in fact it is. Dr. Rodriguez is a dedicated man who has put a lot of hard work in designing and perfecting the use of FGMO with no personal financial benefit. I do not know why no one has agreed to take him up on his offer to work with him in investigating the effectiveness of FGMO and speculation is pointless and counterproductive.
Dr Rodriguez’s remark “Fear not, friends and colleagues, FGMO, is coming of age on its own merits regardless of the antagonism demonstrated by those who may have doubts as to its efficacy.” is a circling of the wagons and a call to the converted. It would be better to attack the article by pointing out factual and experimental errors.
Pat

[Dr. Pedro Rodriguez]

Dear Pat
Thanks for your so very well expressed thoughts about FGMO.
I agree wholeheartedly with your remarks and would like to add that I believe that lack of support for FGMO research lies in the fact that there has not been any one who is willing to provide research funds. Coming from a scientific background, I think that you will agree that research work requires money. I have spent a good portion of my retirement check during the past twelve years with very litlle to scant support from outsiders. By contrast, chemical laboratories provide large grants to institutions to "test their products." The writing is on the wall, so far chemical products have had a tendency to fail within a shortly period of time, yet there are thousands of beekeepers around the world who are using FGMo successfully for many consecutive years.
Unfortunately FGMO research was developed with animonsity because I was not associated with a "research institute." I have explained my reasons many times and these have been recorded in several media. There is no need to repeat them, it is well known that I am doing this work for strict humanitarian reasons and that I do not wish to derive a profit from it. Were I associated with an organization or institution definitely I would demand payment for my work, however, definitely, I remain firm in my original decision of doing my work for the benefit of honey bees, nature and humanity in general. I will continue to do so, God wiling.
Best regards and Goid bless.

[hrogers]

Howdy All --

I am into my 5th year of using nothing but the
fog with good results. Mite drop in established hives averages about 6. BUT all my colonies are ferile. They have had no help until I collected them. Some are known to have lived in walls for 8 years of so. They are certain to have developed some trait which helps them survive and thrive in spite of Varroa.

In '04 I fogged only 6 times except for newly collected colonies. I fog those several times in the first 3 months after collecting.

Doc

[waxworker]

Dr. Rodriguez. I can understand your point that you as an individual do not have the funds to finance a full investigation of FGMO. I see no reason why you should have to do so. It could be of no financial benefit to you but is something that you believe is of great benefit to beekeepers in general. Indeed I think that you are to be praised for your efforts to develop a method of treating Varroa in an ecologically sound manner. Would I be correct in saying that you are the leading expert in the use of FGMO in the control of Varroa? As such your opinion and advice should have been sought. I assume that you don’t have a full copy of the study

Elzen, P.J., Cox, R.L., Jones, W.A. (2004).
Evaluation of Food Grade Mineral Oil for Varroa mite control.
American Bee Journal December 2004.

and are unable to make a full reply other than the obvious one on the dangers of the careless use of any inflammable liquid.
Did the authors of the report seek advice from you on the design of their experiment or asked for comment on their findings? Has the NHB who are also doing research on FGMO contacted you?

"Effects of mineral oil and essential oils on
honey bee worker brood and colony Varroa mite
populations
Jeff Pettis, USDA-ARS Bee Research Laboratory,
Beltsville, MD

The design of any study of animals or insects is very difficult, the number of variables are enormous, hrodgers “Doc” comment on his bees being only one such variable. I am sure that experienced beekeepers could list off many more. It seems that the definitive answer will not come until a long term detailed study is carried out, hopefully this will be soon.
One final question. Your analysis of the wax and honey revealed no contamination, yet you have been using FGMO for several years. This must amount to many grams of oil, especially in relation to the cords. Where is the oil going? Are the bees able to digest it? Is it in the wood of the hive or is it removed by the bees in some manner or is it evaporated? Again I realize that you don’t have the finance to do a full investigation but it is an interesting question.
Pat

[Dr. Pedro Rodriguez]

Dear Pat.
Thank you ever so much for your thoughtful and well organized posture on FGMO use for the control of Varroa mites. There is no doubt that you have a scientific background and are very capable of organizing research efforts. Kudos to you, Sir.
Please allow me to provide replies to some, if not all of your questions/remarks in order of presentation in this mail.
(Firstly, I apologize, for not having offered my personal e-mail in my first reply to your post yesterday, but I assume that you may be cognizant of the fact aht I have offered it in this forum and have stated continously that I welcome contributors to this forum to write to me personally. Please feel assured that you are quite welcome to write to my personal e-mail address if you so desire).
Secondly, replies to your thoughts.
1. Leading expert on FGMNO use:
a. It is quite difficult to define the word expert because it may have diferent meanings according to viewers, especially in a forum as this. I can provide data and let readers decide the weight that they may wish to give to this area.
1). I started performing my initial studies with FGMO 12 years ago based on my knowledge of it use in veterinary medicine, government regulatory practices in meat and poultry packing houses and for general use in packing industries and butcher uses. I did not know at the time that FGMO had been utilized for agriculture insect control. After several years into my work with FGMO for mite control in honey bees, data has been provided to that effect. I have not delved into that area of expertise because I am fully convinced that FGMO serves its purpose to apiculture and because I am fully convinced as to FGMO's mechanissm of action. I have not ignored the fact. I find that it does not add any knowledge to my area of investigation.
b. I have made continuous efforts via e-mail and telephone, at contacting leading research groups to offer my findings with FGMO. All my inquires have been in vain, beginning by no replies to my quests and continuing into attacks at my "scientific qualifications" and lack of "scientific procedures" in the conduct of my research.
c. There was one student who sought my advice regarding the use of FGMO, however for unknown reasons he did not try to replicate my findings. His conclusion regarded FGMO as unsuitable for the purpose. This was an unfortunate accident in the development of FGMO technology for honey bee mites control because he had adequate funding and was located at a teaching institution which could have given FGMO a fair standing in the scientific community.
d. FGMO has developed in a background of controversy, primarily for the reasons stated above and because official recognition (as has happened in New Zealand) of FGMO as an effective control for honey bee mites), chemicals used for the control of honey bees would take an obvious dive in sales, fact which is well recognized and efficiently fought.
e. I subscribe to ABJ, hence I do have a copy of the referenced report on FGMO in southern Texas. FGMO is sourrounded by controversy. I have chosen to follow a path of no resistance hoping that FGMO will be eventually accepted for its merits, disregarding personal attitudes.
f. In June 2004, Dr. Pettis and I coincided as guest speakers in a National Honey Bee Congress in New Zealand. I walked up to Dr. Pettis and introduced myself. That was the extent of our "contact" during a week of mutual presentations, (Dr. Pettis 3, I four). Dr. Pettis argued that my focus on FGMO was contrary to current ideas on IPM. He also stated that he was impressed by the excitement with which New Zealand beekeepers were accepting FGMO. These presentations were recorded graphically and are available in the minutes of the congress.
I have not been approached by anyone in the scientific community, including governmet agencies, regarding FGMO even though I have made loud and clear efforts to make myself available to cooperate with FGMO reasearch efforts.
FGMO honey and wax laboratory analysis.
Negative contamination! Independent honey and wax laboratory analysis have been conducted: I in Europe at one of the most sophisticated bee laboratories in Europe, and Clinton Benrose, a commerical beekeeper in Michigan (fact published in this forum).
I have been a beekeeper for 66 years and an FGMO user for for as amny years. I suspected from day one that FGMO would not become a contaminating factor for either the colony environment or nature for two primary reasons.
1) FGMO in my formulation is minimal.
2. I hoped, and have demonstrated that my original thoughts were correct, that the greatest part of FGMO introduced in the bee hive would become attached to honey bees and that since honey bees have a short life span, they would take FGMO with them to their final destination on their last death flight. My knowledge of beekeeping has proven me right.
Another bonus discovered during the past 12 years doing FGMO research has proven correct another aspect which I hoped would occur. FGMO stimulates the inherent hygienic behaviour in honey bees and contributes to development of resistance to mites. Beekeepers around the world are discovering "excitement" of their colonies when FGMO is applied, leading to increased hygienic behaviour, removal of mites through combing and actual chewing of the mites. This is a fact that has been scientifically gathered and recorded by beekeepers in Germany and New Zealand. Interested readers about this fact should contact Bob Russell, a contributor to this forum.
I apologize for the length of this posting. There is a lot of data regarding FGMO requiring much more diversification for the benefit of beekeepers and humamnity in general. I hope that this trend will continue.
Very best regards to all readers and may God bless all of us.

[waxworker]

Thank you Dr Rodriguez for your very complete response. I, and I suspect the other contributors to this forum, would consider you an expert if not the expert on the use of FGMO. I wish you success in the further development and recognition of FGMO.
Pat.

[Dr. Pedro Rodriguez]

Thank you Pat for your kind words.
May God bless and guide you always.
Dr. Rodriguez

[louis1st]

Hi
I have used FGMO for the 1st time a few days ago, after a few long icing sugar spreading tries following all the praises on this website.

I have checked the beehives yesterday (the day after the try with the fogger), but couldn't actually see any dead varroas in the front of the beehives at all, but it may be a bit too soon as I think you suggest to check during the first 3 days.

However, I did notice the gathering of a lot of bees in the front of the hives, and the groomings mentioned in Dr Rodriguez's earlier post.

This may surprise some of you, but I actualy think that icing sugar has been more efficient for me than FGMO (I particularly followed a hive with just one brood chamber and did notice a lot of varroas by the entrance (in the grass below) almost immediately after the spreading.

i will however give FGMO a go next week as I get more used to the fogger, i may get a different result!
Thierry

[John Russell]

I think you might consider that FGMO is not as much as a treatment, but a lifestyle. It does not tend to work like apistan or a toxic treatment. By fogging on regular intervals you contain and control by altering the varroa's enviroment.
( grooming bees, suffocation, dropping and not being able to return to the hive....)

By all means, use it for the season, or at least more than a few times, to get a good long term effect. I was very happy with the results last season.

John Russell