Can someone please explain the Foundationless hype to me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WLC

...synergistic effects with other contaminants (or even pathogens)... I have seen LD50s reported in the 1 ng/bee range and below, although the listed LD50 is orders of magnitude higher.

---

Show actual effects or sit down and be quiet please. Demonstrate how much of any given contaminant or combination of contaminants and pathogens will kill my bees or sit down and be quiet please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WLC

That's the issue, the LD50s form a range at different orders of magnitude depending on who is doing the testing.

---

For the uninitiated, 'order of magnitude' means 'multiple of ten.' For instance, 100 is two orders of magnitude higher than 1. I'm coming to the conclusion based on this math that WLC is anywhere from 10 to 100% wrong at any given time, and the number may be closer to 1000% or even 10,000%.

Hokum meter still in the red.

For a possible correlation between levels in wax and levels in bees and honey etc. this might shed some light.
http://entomology.unl.edu/faculty/el...Pesticides.pdf

"I'm coming to the conclusion based on this math that WLC is anywhere from 10 to 100% wrong at any given time, and the number may be closer to 1000% or even 10,000%."

:lpf:

Am I 'Rocking-the-Boat' again Sol?

If you had read through the scientific literature, you would have already had the information in hand.

In short, it's already in the scientific literature, and it's been there for years.

Both the Wu and Mullin paper are good places to start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by deknow

I'm happy to assume that sergey's math is correct...but he is still basing everything on an assumption of a complete.layer of wax of a given thickness.....for a.product that I don't believe.he has ever seen.

---

I just take medium size frame with foundation and measure the dimensions of the foundation. Than I assume VERY thin thickness, 0.1 mm. It takes 11 g of wax to cover the whole surface assuming that foundation is flat. In reality, foundation is not flat - it has indention (hexagon pattern), which increases the surface area - it means even more wax per foundation. As for "scraping" or melting wax to measure how much was on the foundation - when you scrape it - you could not remove all wax from hexagon pattern; when you melt it - it stick to the plastic because of surface tension. Probably the best way to measure actual amount is to weight two identical plastic foundation plates, one with and another without wax coating. Alternatively, one could weight the plastic foundation with wax than remove wax by dissolving in hexane (a few changes of hexane) and weight it again. I could do it if somebody sent to me a plate. This assumed that hexane do not dissolve the plastic. Sergey

Sergey:

It's definitely sputterred wax on the plastic foundation. So I would drop it down an order of magnitude.

According to the Johnson paper, the level of cuomophos (Checkmite) in the bees is about 40 times lower than that of the wax.

DDT, more than ten times higher in honey than wax.

Fluvalinate (Apistan), 35 times higher in wax than in bees.

Permethrin (Gardstar), 52 times higher in the bee than wax.

Dichlorobenzene (Paramoth) 535 times higher in wax than honey.

I think we could develop some crude partitioning coefficients from these kinds of numbers.

First off, I apologize for my comment "when do you guys find time to have fun with beekeeping." or remarks similar. Un called for and un warranted. I go off my meds sometimes:)
At the risk of just stirring the pot, at what point are the larvae not exposed to the wax during pupation? They spin a silken barrier. How, or does that even enter into this over all equation?

"I think we could develop some crude partitioning coefficients from these kinds of numbers. "

Thanks for the link to that article, by the way.

I haven't gotten totally through it, but I think that the bees were exposed directly to the miticides, etc, so they wouldn't have specifically gotten their concentrations directly from the wax, so I don't think we could actually derive partitioning coefficients from that, at least not the ones I was referring to, which would allow us to determine how much of the chemical a bee would have access to only from wax foundation or wax coated foundation.

Someone probablyalready studied pesticides in royal jelly. I don't know if anyone has ever looked at the contamination level of silk cocoons.

Makes me wish I was back in grad school studying bees!!

Not so much the silk, if I read the post right, but more to the insulation of the silk from the wax, and there by the larvae. (if that makes sense?) (speculation)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SantaFeBeek

I haven't gotten totally through it, but I think that the bees were exposed directly to the miticides, etc, so they wouldn't have specifically gotten their concentrations directly from the wax, so I don't think we could actually derive partitioning coefficients from that, at least not the ones I was referring to, which would allow us to determine how much of the chemical a bee would have access to only from wax foundation or wax coated foundation.

---

Good point, that would assume something more like a treated hive which for the most part, foundationless hives would not be, mine either. A worst case scenario if you will.

I wish I could be in grad school studying bees, but no, gotta study something that will make money. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SantaFeBeek

Makes me wish I was back in grad school studying bees!!

---

I would bet,,,,,,,,,you would not get the education/experience/ and real time info you are getting here:) aaahhhh But it would be nice to be back in college. If I had hair, it would be long, I can play the guitar better now. (those guys got the chicks) Huummm would I have to do drugs,,,,Naaahh just have a 4g phone:)

4g phone way better than drugs. Not that I have any first hand knowledge.

Bees bring contaminants into the hive all the time.

It could easily go from nectar or pollen into the wax, etc. .

Fellas, it's not a one way street.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WLC

Bees bring contaminants into the hive all the time.

It could easily go from nectar or pollen into the wax, etc. .

Fellas, it's not a one way street.

---

No one denied that, but what we are discussing is how much contamination bees are exposed to from wax, not how much contamination wax is exposed to from bees.

So, where's the estimates?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WLC

So, where's the estimates?

---

That's usually your specialty.

I assumed you would have already determined that "from the literature".