> A well known English beekeeper allegedly (and illegally) melted the wax
> from a colony with AFB, made foundation from it and set up a new colony
> on the foundation.  They did not get AFB.  It was speculated that the wax
> coated the spores and prevented them being activated by whatever the
> stimulus is that does so.
 
This is well known and has been discussed at length in the logs.  I
would recommend that those interested search and thus avoid the wasted
efford of re-hashing the question.  AFB has spawned a religion and
most of us know there is no sense in arguing with zealots of any faith.
 
It has been pointed out previously that beeswax traded internationally
*must*  be full of AFB spores as must commercial wax foundation, since
Canadian and US practice is to melt AFB combs for the wax.  It would be
interesting to take samples of wax foundation from the market and to check
for spores.
 
At any rate the whole question is one of whether there are sufficient
viable spores introduced to a hive to initiate an AFB breakdown.
There seems to be a "zero is barely few enough and I don't care whether
they are dead or alive" crowd  arguing for *total freedom from spores*.
IMHO, this is unnecessary and a huge waste of effort.
 
Most of us who deal with the question practically don't care about
spores as long as the risk of breakdown is not significant.
 
Allen
---
Newsflash!  Visit http://www.beekeeping.co.nz/beel.htm
to search BEE-L archives the easy, easy way or to
update or change your subscription options.
---