I posted:

> We know that if the virus is not present then colonies can carry very
> large loads of varroa without these symptoms being present.

 Bob, I was rather taken aback by your response:

> What we know is that Norman Carrick & Brenda Ball (U.K.) are pushing the
> above hypothesis.

 Are you saying that they are wrong?

> The only solution Brenda  gave <snip> was that if we could get the varroa
> control in the 90% range the dwv problem would disappear.

 If there is no other solution at present, what did you expect?

> We already new (sic) the above would solve the problem. <snip> the U.K.
> provided no solution to the problem.

 (Note for Brenda:  Must try harder and provide only solutions in future!)

>So we are back to varroa munching on the pupa vectoring the disease.

> Vectoring - yes, but I understood your post to mean that the damage was
> caused by the 'munching' (define!) per se.

> THERE IS NO WAY TO RID A HIVE OF VIRUS SPORES! Other than
> melt the comb and boil  the frames which is not going to happen .

 Spores???  How would melting comb and boiling frames eliminate viruses from
 the bees?

> We call our virus problems PMS in the U.S.

> We use the term PMS also.

> It is wonderful Bailey named a bunch of virus for us beekeepers but
> without a solution...

 First understanding - then solutions?

> In the U.S. beekeepers have not wanted to see our precious research
> dollars
> poured into a virus project which has no solution.

 Without research, how can we know whether there are solutions?

> After four years of research on the Primorsky Russian bee I can say that
> the bee can carry a large varroa load in a hive
> with DWV spores and not get the virus! I have laid awake at night
> wondering why! The Russian bee shoots big holes in the U.K. hypothesis!

 Not if the bee is resistant to the virus and is able to carry it as an
inapparent infection?

 Peter Edwards
 [log in to unmask]

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---