> ....here is some evidence to support the theory that terramycin in the 
> hive will negatively affect some of the bacillus that inhibits 
> chalkbrood...leading to an increased infection.  not proof, but pretty 
> strong evidence....any thoughts?  [URL] "2. Excessive treatment with 
> antibiotics increases susceptibility of bee larvae to A. apis and 
> therefore must be reduced."

Yes.  This is pretty interesting and looks, from my quick scan, to be good 
work.   I also note the word, "excessive" is used, not "any" to modify 
"treatment".

From my cursory examination the conclusions appear to be based on direct 
applications of bacteria to larvae, and even oral application.  I was not 
clear on how that was accomplished  I had limited time for in-depth 
analysis.

I am also not sure that this proves that not using antibiotics will actually 
reduce chalkbrood in an actual working hive.

At any rate, I don't think any of us dispute that there are beneficial and 
harmful activities by microflora and microfauna going on in any given hive, 
or that suppressing one or giving another an advantage may upset whatever 
balance exists, in the short run, at least.

All this is interesting and worth knowing, but I wonder how significant the 
disruption due to medications -- if applied necessarily and judiciously --  
actually is in the real world.  I recall Andy said that beekeepers he knew 
applied oxytet regularly because the bees just thrived better, and it was 
obvious.

I realize that perfectionists and extremists may argue that no disruption in 
any hive is justified, but most of us keep bees for the economic benefit and 
there is reduced or no benefit from maintaining bees which break down with 
foulbrood, and that is sometimes the alternative to treatment.

I think, also, that most thinking people question whether
a.) the natural state of any particular hive is intrinsically optimal
b.) it is not possible to improve that state by manipulations, treatments 
and other means
c.) where pathology is obvious or likely, that measures should not be made 
to remedy or forestall the problem
d.) the economic health of the beekeeper trumps other considerations

I think it is all a matter of perspective, and commercial migratory 
beekeepers are going to think  and act very differently than stationary and 
hobbyist beekeepers or those who keep bees for philosophical reasons and 
make decisions based on theory or hypotheses.

All in all, it seems that this is a question of theory and idealism vs. 
necessity and practice.  What is obvious in a lab or research setting may 
have little or no importance on a commercial setting, or be trumped by 
larger considerations.

Besides, we can deal with chalkbrood very easily.  Just get better bees.

In summary, my position is that all the above does not negate the importance 
and interest of the studies cited, but we do have to balance many 
conflicting forces, and this consideration is just one.

And the word is "excessive", after all.

allen
http://www.honeybeeworld.com/diary/menus/topics.htm
---
Remember that fear always lurks behind perfectionism. Confronting your fears 
and allowing yourself the right to be human can, paradoxically, make you a 
far happier and more productive person. -- Dr. David M. Burns 

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