The posts from Keth Benson and Jum Fischer today (29 Aug) show the
discussion started as 'Healthcare of bees', then carried forward as a side
issue in 'Wax Foundation',  is getting lost in side issues. Can anyone who
has medical understanding help us to get back to the path?

To remind all what the discussion is about:
1. Durk received a colony suffering from virus symptoms for treating
homtoxicology;
2 I suggested the reason the colony had failed to resist virus might be due
to feeding with sugar, causing dietary deficiency;
3 Dave objected to implied criticism of sugar feeding as his bees were
fine - but that did not expain of course to why someone else's colony might
be sick;
4 Keith refuted the suggestion of dietary deficency on grounds that all bees
need is sugar and pollen (his case put the  nutritionist view and needs
further discussion in a later post) - Keith challenged me:"Can you name a
necessary substance (not sugar), found in honey, but not syrup, that is not
also found in far more massive quantities in pollen?"
5 As evidence that floral honey can have some component not available in
sugar honey - presumably not in pollen as honey is used in healing on its
own - I quoted research into the healing qualities of floral honey that has
been shown to be more effective than sugar honey, giving the reference to
IBRA, Healing and Honey, 2001, ISBN 0-85092-240-8.  My point being that if
honey had been found to act differently to sugar honey in healing,  then we
could not logically exclude the possibility that sugar honey was not equal
to floral honey  in other biological uses - it might be, it might not be, it
would depend on where the difference lay and whether that difference was
relevant in the other biological use (here, the development of bee grubs) .
I would want to then take the argument on, that if there was that
possibility, did anyone actually know?  If not, was there any basis in
reason for forming a hypothesis - and if so then perhaps we should then shut
down the thread until more research was conducted, with everyone retaining
their own opinion on the probabilities.

But, as said, we are bogged down in irrelevancies and mis-information.  The
research on honey in healing is being denigrated unread, not accepted as
evidence of some difference between floral and sugar honey.  Keith is
concerned it is only work on the fringe saying:"I have also stated that
there are better, more consistant methods for dealing with wound healing.
Do you have evidence to the contrary?  I thought not."  It is not relevant
to the argument either way, but the evidence is given in Honey and Healing
if Keith would only look. Keith again:" I will tell you that I have not read
that document, but I have read a few dozen articles on honey as a topical
therapy.  They were either wildly sensational or simply claimed that the
stuff is moderately efficaceous and better than a simple super saturates
sugar solution (likey because of the variable levels peroxide that can be
generated by honeys).  Haven't really seen one vs modern medical methods
though."   Because he has not looked at Honey and Healing, which republishes
articles by scientists that have been peer-reviewed and first published in
Bee World to other scientists the world over.

So , A CRY FOR HELP!  Would someone with medical understanding review Honey
and Healing for the benefit of the members of this list, as anything I try
to put forward is so resisted.  We might then, just might,  be able to get
back to the discussion on possible causes of vulnerability of bee colonies
to virus attack.

Robin Dartington
(who admits to sometimes liking to wind people up, but is trying hard to
reform - and offers this unexceptional post as an example of good
behaviour).

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::