BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
TM in crisco
From:
dan hendricks <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 23 Nov 2000 02:40:42 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (14 lines) 
Hi, George Imirie.  I'm still struggling to understand
your position.  You regard the current use of TM to
result in more AFB in the Country than would exist if
it was not used.  So why didn't the period between
1922 and WW II when no TM or sulfa were availalbe
result in AFB prevelance as low as now or even lower?
Why were bseekeepers (including yourself?) inclined to
use sulfa when it became available and, later, TM?  Dan

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2