Randy and whole list here:
I have read this too, in the past, but since references
used were, for example here's one: Effectiveness of Asuntol
(coumaphos), Perizin (Coumaphos), Mitac (amitraz) and
ppowder of sulphur with naphthalene for the control of bee
mites (Varroa Jacobsoni and Tropilaelaps clareae) in
Thailand,...... and other reference used: Mites, pests and
beekeeping with Apis cerana and Apis mellifera in
Thailand,....... and knowing how coumaphos effects/affects
honey bee reproduction and would then effect/affect mite
reproduction, besides probably side by tests in Thailand
done with hives in same yards, I really don't by into the
statement that the JGH III has been actually ruled
out..................Just my POV due to reference given!!


These two references by me are wrongly cited from my notes
and I appolige for that and hope it does not wrongly hurt
anyone. But I had them in my notes too since coumaphos is
used in breeding and has given problems in rearing brood,
besides queens. 


 While I still believe that the JGH not working is wrong in
thought, and the research showing this was done by
Rosendranz and others in the early 1990s, since nothing has
been shown in it's place, I have stayed with the JGH point
of view, as the JGH was applied to worker larvae in the
studies, which in a way is man applied and not bees
applying, and there is a difference in my mind here,
knowing applied means harveted and not bee directly used
and this could be a factor from timing used by bees and
storage by man.

As for the authors then listed on long-life and short-life
they are okay by relooking at my notes.

Regards,

Dee A. Lusby


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---