So we can believe a very experienced beekeeper that says the sample size is inadequate or 
assume that some of the best bee researchers in the world know a thing or two about sampling 
theory. 

I worked in an R&D lab for a large Fortune 500 company and we routinely consulted with our 
statistics staff who did nothing but help scientists design experiments. 

the whole idea of sampling is understanding the population, in this case not the whole hive 
population in the USA but rather get a cross sampling of combs from CCD operations was my 
recollection of Maryanns data. 

Since we do not have the final scientific paper in front of us we really cannot comment on what 
hypothesis Maryann was working from when she designed her sample size. 

In the end a very explicit set of conclusions can be made from a sample. I very very much doubt 
that Maryann was trying to make a statement about how contaminated the roughly 2.4 million 
hives are in the USA, so I feel Bob's comment completely misses the mark. 

A recent rough sampling of beekeepers was done in Bee Culture back in the April issue, I think. I 
posted info on that a while back. Basically 65% of respondents said they use products like Apistan 
and Checkmite.  How accurate was that sample? Probably not too representive as it only polled a 
limited number of people who they contact for the honey reports. But its a piece of data that one 
can draw conclusions about miticide use in the USA.

In the upper midwest the enforcement actions documented in Nodak and Mn speak for the reality 
that shop rags and heavy use of miticides that contaminate comb is rampant. Talk to beekeepers 
and researchers at regional meetings etc and you'd have to be out of touch to think that comb 
contamination is not reality folks. 

The denial is kind of like this: today I went strawberry picking across the road here. The berry 
farmer said this it the last year as his knees are bad. He's 75 pounds overweight and 60 years old. 
He is planning to get his knees replaced but no mention of taking some poundage off. 

So are his bad knees a result of the berry farming or hauling around 75 pounds of extra baggage? 

Likewise regardless of what virus or version of nosema is causing CCD, is CCD caused by the virus 
or are the bees more susceptible to the virus and nosema etc (CCD) because they are  shuttled 
around to feed on monocrops, over medicated and living in a contaminated hive? 

now we will have someone say oh but we have organic keepers with CCD. Whatever. it does not 
take a Phd to figure out that the vast number of CCD affected hives are coming from a rather 
small number of beekeepers - NOT the other way around - with most of the CCD hives coming 
from many many beekeepers. 

the widespread use of fluvalinate and coumaphos that we now know damages the reproductive 
health of honeybees and have a long residual life span in combs is inexcuseable.  while some 
segment of the industry awaits the Silver CCD bullet and the Bayer Tooth Fairy to bring home the 
bacon, the rest of us can see through the denial and get a clear idea of what needs to change. the 
sooner the industry take some responsibility for the mess we are in the sooner we can move 
forward. 

****************************************************
* General Information About BEE-L is available at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm   *
****************************************************