Interesting article. I would think that most beekeepers are aware that you can’t put chemicals, whether naturally derived or synthetic, into a colony and expect to have no potentially deleterious effect on the bees therein. I, for one, would definitely prefer to be treatment free. But, the issue that resolves many beekeepers to treat remains, regardless of articles like this: Is it better to have clean, naturally kept bees that succumb to Varroa more often than not, or to have treated bees that survive in spite of things like heat shock protein spikes and chemically induced brood breaks? I’m definitely no fan of the synthetic chemicals that have been shown to be incredibly persistent at background levels in the hive, but most everything I’ve read seems to conclude that treatments like Formic acid, oxalic acid and thymol tend to fall to normal background levels fairly rapidly after the treatment is finished. And the nature of honeybee populations is such that you have above a 99% turn over in population every 6 weeks during the height of treatment season. So long as your queen isn’t disastrously affected by any treatment, the spikes in gene expression will be a thing of the past within a few month or so (most times of the year), and you’re left with a reasonably healthy colony that isn’t overwhelmed by a colony destroying invasive parasite.
I think articles like this are important. I’m a big fan of having as much info as possible to base my decisions on, but I haven’t found one that’s going to convince me to buy increasingly more expensive stock every year or two in an effort to luck out and find a bee that will thrive in my area without treatment.
I think articles like this are important. I’m a big fan of having as much info as possible to base my decisions on, but I haven’t found one that’s going to convince me to buy increasingly more expensive stock every year or two in an effort to luck out and find a bee that will thrive in my area without treatment.