BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
James Fischer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Wed, 28 May 2003 18:30:50 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (65 lines)
Medhat Nasr said:

> High levels of coumaphos (Average= 45.53 ppm, n= 8) were found
> in wax samples from colonies where failing queens were found
> and subleathal toxicity to bees were observed. Wax samples (n=8)
> collected from good active colonies had an average of 23.66 ppm
> coumaphos.

I saw your abstract, and had a few questions about it.

Can you confirm that all the colonies from which the
samples were taken were treated strictly per instructions?

I ask because any talk of unusual levels of contamination
are often met with the claim that such levels must have been
the result of "misuse" or "unapproved formulations".
(Great marketing strategy, eh?  Blame your customers.)

> Coumaphos was found in 83% of honey samples with a range >3-8 ppm.

When you say "honey samples", do you mean jars of final product,
or specific samples of honey taken from brood comb areas?

In 2000, the US EPA set a tolerance for coumaphos in honey at
0.1 ppm (one tenth part per million, aka "100 parts per billion").
http://www.honey.com/pressrm/research/coumaphos.html

If the "samples" were harvested honey, does this mean that over half
of coumaphos users can expect to harvest honey that is from 30 to 80
times the US "legal limit"?  (Say it ain't so, please!)

Even if the "samples" were taken from the brood area, what are the
odds that the same few drops of honey could be moved to the supers,
harvested, and end up being "sampled" during a honey test?
(OK, it is a bit of a long shot, but who wants to bet their entire
crop on it?)


The US EPA tolerance for coumaphos in wax is a whopping 100 ppm.
(See the same link, above)

  a) If 45 ppm in wax is associated with queen failures

  b) and 23 ppm does not seem to have overt short-term effects

One starts plotting curves in one's head of how long before
foundation made from recycled wax becomes universally toxic
to bees.

I don't use coumaphos, but from your numbers, I must conclude
that I may soon be unknowingly exposing my bees to coumaphos
simply by buying foundation.

One hopes that the makers of foundation will "wake up" to this
problem, and start testing wax before they use it to make
foundation, but this will eliminate the "trade your wax for
foundation" game, as smaller lots of wax are not "worth" the
expense of such testing.

                        jim

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2