On 6 Oct 99, at 10:29, Ted Fischer wrote:

> You didn't say whether or not you also used control nucs without the
> treatment, or whether the nucs were made up from Apistan treated mother
> colonies.  In the absence of controls, all these observations are simply
> that: observations.  The first step in the scientific method, but
> certainly no basis for making any kind of conclusion.  If you have no
> varroa, and your aim is production rather than science, it is perfectly
> fine.  Yet such observations must be verified by controlled scientific
> experiments by others as well.

WHY? I am totally baffled by this. Does this mean that *observation*
and discussion of it, is not allowed on this list?  Also why should
such observations be verified by anyone whether it be scientific or
otherwise? Are we to assume that I am for some reason fabricating
results of a free treatment?
        Tomorrow morning I will observe the sun rising, from that I will
conclude that it's going to get brighter and lighter. Does that need
a controlled scientific experiment to prove I'm correct in my
observation?
        I didn't set out to prove anything, I was only interested in keeping
my bees alive and healthy, hardly conducive to allowing bees to die
as a 'control'. Perhaps in future we should all keep our
*observations* to ourselves?  The old beekeepers used to do this
before Bee-L and the information age, from which we all benefit.
        Therefore, I would suggest criticism for the sake of criticism, is
distructive rather than constructive.









*****************************************
The Bee Works, 9 Progress Drive, Unit 2,
Orillia, Ontario, Canada.L3V 6H1.
Phone (705)326 7171 Fax (705)325 3461
David Eyre,
e-mail<[log in to unmask]>
http://www.beeworks.com
This months special:-Vest/veil combination
****************************************