> To my mind, the question was never 
> if the use of antibiotics to promote 
> growth was a good idea, but rather -- 
> if the practice is widespread. 

> And in fact, it is.

Not among beekeepers!  
There's not a single documented case. 
There are not even rumors of anecdotes of apiary use.

> note that even in this critical review 
> they refer to the "growth benefits 
> conferred by non-therapeutic antibiotics"

Multiple requests have been made for evidence in support of the bizarre
speculation about "growth benefits" from the use of antibiotics in bees, and
not a shred of factual basis has been offered, be it a metabolic explanation
or a footnote in any written document ever written.  The one paper cited as
if it were evidence turned out to clearly refute that speculation.

This speculation about such apiary antibiotic use, lacking even any rumored
anecdotes to support the claim that it occurs, is dangerous to the entire
industry.  Because it appears here, it will now appear in searches where
Google is use to confirm bias.  As such, it thereby creates more ammunition
for the "PETA/Vegan" complaints that beekeepers are horrible cruel people
exploiting and enslaving bees without concern for basic concepts of animal
husbandry.

As such, it can directly impact honey sales to people who wear Birkenstocks
and smell of patchouli oil and care deeply about the vibrations of the
planet.  Their money is more often spent on locally-produced artisanal food
like boutique honey than the typical soccer mom, who still grabs a random
squeeze bear at the grocery filled with glop blended from 5 different
countries, or a jar of mostly imported "raw" honey that looks like library
paste.



             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html