I posted about my Law of the Survivor long ago, but recent events have hit
home with me.

My Law of the Survivor is: Only the living give testimonials,.

That hit me strongly when I researched options to treat my Malignant
Melanoma five years ago. I was amazed at the literally thousands of "cures"
for cancer on websites. Most were selling things to cure it and all had
glowing testimonials from those who were cured.

I knew some people who decided to go with holistic treatments and all died.
And it dawned on me that the dead cannot let you know that the treatment did
not work. Only those for whom the treatment worked could speak (assuming
they were telling the truth).

I found an anecdotal correlation between stinging myself for arthritis and
the control of the Melanoma and have posted about that here on the BeeL.
With my background in science, I saw that there is a correlation between the
immune system, bee stings and the fact that Melanoma is treated by boosting
the immune system. Also, there was another beekeeper, who is a patient of my
dermatologist, who had exactly the same results- bee stings and cancer in
check. I always said to people that my findings were anecdotal because it
was not backed by any good studies. But I easily could have been a tout for
bee stings as a cure for Malignant Melanoma.Instead I noted that there
seemed to be some correlation and that was the immune system.

Recently, Aussie scientists found that about 25% of those who have Malignant
Melanoma which spreads to the lymph nodes, as mine did, survive because of
their genetic makeup. The rest die.So much for anecdotal evidence of bee
stings and it being a way to control Melanoma.Science is more dispassionate
and cruel. I had no magic bullet. The stings may have helped my own system
along and made it work better (interferon helps in about 10% of MM cases by
boosting the immune system but kills your thyroid gland. Which is why I
opted for bee stings- save my thyroid and still boost my immune system). But
the real reason I survived is I picked the right parents.

This does have a bearing on beekeeping. Murray's comment on FGMO brought
back a flood of memories. There were "studies" that proved it worked and
those that did not believe were castigated with the standard comment "I
would rather believe my eyes than science". But people like Allen, Murray
and others pushed for outside proof. Every outside study showed FGMO did not
work as advertised. One study, in the south, conclusively proved it but
those who ran the study were condemned.. "They did not test it correctly."

One of the outcomes was the true believers in FGMO set up a new website to
get away from the questions on the BeeL. That was Beesource, On that site
you could read testimonial after testimonial on how effective FGMO was in
controlling mites. (Another of my Laws- Anecdotal evidence trumps science
every time.) Posts from the FGMO group on the BeeL were met with questions
and requests for proof which were met with thermonuclear blasts.. It got so
hot that Aaron had to shift the BeeL to a moderated group. Talk about
personal attacks. The site today is mild compared to the FGMO flame wars.

I tried FGMO and found it wanting. (I tried about every new fad to test them
as I was the editor of our State newsletter and wanted to keep my readers
form doing dumb things- so I did them. Still do.). Same with small cell. Or
putting Hall's mentholyptus in the hive to control Tracheal. Did not work..

It is not that those of us who question and want studies are against
solutions to Varroa and all the assembled pathogens out there, We just want
more than anecdotal evidence. My anecdotal evidence of bee stings and my
survival from Malignant Melanoma was wrong even though the evidence
convinced me it was right.

I see the same things in the beekeeping world. If there is A and add B and
see C then it is a valid equation. On the face, it would seem to be
obviously true. But the problem is usually that the actual equation is
A+B+D+F+Z=C. Classic in this was the fact that the FGMO trials included
counting mite drops by using Apistan! In essence the mites were being
controlled by the counting method, not by FGMO.

I often meet people who are "organic" and are successful, but when I
question them they are using oxalic, formic, wintergreen, thymol or any
other "it is not a pesticide because it is found in nature" chemical to
control mites. With the same breath, they decry the "chemical treadmill"
that the commercial beekeepers are on.(I have also met "organic" beekeepers
who used Apistan and cumophose.) I have yet to meet anyone who controls
mites with no treatment or hive manipulation (drone trapping). I have read
about them here on the BeeL, but anyone can say anything here with no proof
at all.

I apologize for the length, but that is what happens when you wake up an
hour early.

Bill Truesdell (Standard disclaimer- I practice organic gardening and only
treat my bees with Oxalic in the fall, except last year when I decided to go
with no treatment and lost everything. .Another dumb experiment.)
Bath, Maine

****************************************************
* General Information About BEE-L is available at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm   *
****************************************************