> I know what mineral oil is, but what is FGMO?  Also, based on some of
> the comments here, it seems that FGMO is very effective against mites.
> Maybe better than A. strips, which is all that I knew to fight them
> with...
 
I'm glad you brought that up.
 
First let me say that I respect Dr. Pedro and all the others who are
working with him on FGMO and if I had varroa, I'd be experimenting with it
myself, so don't misunderstand me when I say the following:
 
FMGO is a new idea and relatively untested compared to Apistan which works
most places and is a simple no-brainer for dealing with the mite.
 
Apistan has been developed and tested very thoroughly by a large
chemical company with well trained scientific staff and large budgets and
also passed government screening in many countries.  It works pretty well
everywhere and under most conditions -- at least it has until some pockets
of resistant varroa had shown up.  They are exceptions and more or less
localized to Europe and *possibly* Florida.  The latter failure may be due
to a manufacturing defect in a batch of strips.  The jury is still out
AFAIK.
 
On the other hand, FGMO has been developed with very limited funds and
resources in Virginia and is now being tested -- somewhat unscientifically
as far as I can tell -- in several other places.  FGMO use in the USA
appears to correspond fairly closely to some other work in Italy with
vegetable oils.  There is also a very loose relationship to work with
grease patties for Tracheal mite control.
 
I personally regard FGMO as very promising and would like to see more
than anecdotal reports as to its effectiveness outside Virginia.  I am
reasonably satisfied with Dr. Pedro's work -- but it is only one test.
Good science requires that the test be repeated by independant people in
other unrelated locations.
 
The reports from users I have seen on this list are very anecdotal; we do
not know exactly what the users have actually done in each case.  In some,
they may never have had mites in the first place, in other cases, the
mites may well be prospering in the hives without yet killing them, since
mention of actual tests (mite drop, brood uncapping, sticky board and
Apistan, alcohol wash or other definitive measurements) of mite levels are
lacking -- in most of the reports I've seen.
 
So what I am saying is that Apistan is still the standard against which
other treatments are measured in America.  It is simple, cheap, and not
labour intensive.  It requires no knowledge of bees and the opportunity
for error in application is very low.  On the other hand, AFAIK, most all
other treatments require more expertise and timing as well as the use of
experienced labour -- so far.
 
*** FGMO is still in development and hopefully will become a simple and
proven tool.  But in the meantime you are a test pilot***
 
Having said that, last night as I relayed the many FGMO testimonials to
BoB, I thought what we really need to get FGMO better proven is a
questionnaire asking questions such as -- but not limited to -- the
following:
 
What is the location?
How many hives are involved?
What is their history?
What was the original varroa level?
When did application start?
How was it done?
What exact product was used (brand name, etc.)?
What was the schedule of application?
Were some hives left untreated or any hives treated with another product?
How are they doing (size, appearance, comparison to neighbours, etc.)?
What tests have been made to determine mite levels in the hives?
What tests have been made to determine mite levels in the controls?
Was the result consistent, or were there failures in some hives?
What other observations are of interest?
Do the hives appear healthy and do they make normal crops of honey?
Do they winter okay?
What are the tracheal mite levels?
 
This is just off the top of my head.  There are likely many more important
things to report.   If we had answers to these questions, the testamonials
would be much more meaninful and satisfying to those of us with enquiring
minds and move FGMO further along towards mainstream acceptance.
 
Dr. Pedro has been carrying the ball thus far, and he has borne the
expense, both of the work, and the loss of his controls.  I know we have
other trained scientists here on the group.  Would any one of them
care/dare to help design a standard format for a 'folk science'
experiment so that it can be carried out in the beeyards of those on this
list this summer in a somewhat standardized fashion, and so that the
results have some level of respectability?  As I see it, we need to
establish a standard procedure to follow and we need (electronic?) forms
to fill out.
 
We need a standard format to establish procedure & method, to make
observations, and to report conclusions.  If so we would make a large step
forward towards establishing the efficacy of FGMO in all situations.
 
Let's work together to make the many beeyard tests that will happen
anyways this year all over America and perhaps Europe  rigorous and
meaningful rather than vague and anecdotal.
 
Allen