Several on the list have commented about the apparent fuzziness in research protocol that we have encountered with respect to the use of various oils to treat mites, as well as funding for such research. I will comment about only a few of the points raised: 1) Jerry Bromenshenk wrote (in part): >....In the U.S., most Research Grants REQUIRE Publication and Dissemination >of Results - they do not impose a gag on the investigator. Failure to >publish in Peer-Reviewed Journals will bring one's research to an end in a >hurry. Most academic and national laboratory research falls into this >category. My comment: If I remember correctly, Dr. Pedro indicated that he would publish his techniques and results of experimentation so that we could all have the opportunity to independently assess the quality of work and successful results he has alluded to. So far, I have not seen such an account appear in print. (I want to see the data.) [Roy Nettleback said much the same in his comment: "Your work is not lost. It needs a published research paper that can pass the test of the scientific community."] >[Bromenshenk again: ....I encourage every beekeeper to help promote and >sponsor >critical research. >But if you send your check, you have a right to expect a full accounting of >what you paid for (how was the money spent, what was the research, what are >the results?). There are many good researchers in this world who would be >more than glad to have some support for a bit of equipment, or a student. >And many are non-profit. My comment: Only rarely would a person working alone be able to do all the experimentation, keep all the records and books, and send full reports to all those who contributed money. That is why we have university, USDA, and state research groups. The "overhead" from their grants provides wages for people to do much of the routine paperwork. (The sponsored researcher, though, must still write the proposals and reports.) ********* 2. Roy Nettleback wrote: >....I have no doubt about FGMO killing Varroa. We can kill varroa with many >different means. A fine mist of oil was used years ago to kill the mites. It >killed the mites and some bees along with it because the application did not >have a standard. Over the last year we have had beekeepers here in >Washington State, using spray bottles and killing all of their bees. A >little bit of information is inherently dangerous in the hands of >beekeepers. Carefully applied, means different things to different people. My comment: Relying on testimonials from people who successfully tinkered with their colonies is like too readily accepting comments from those who just returned from Las Vegas, Reno, or Atlantic City and reported on their winnings. You normally hear only from those who beat the system that last trip. The legion of people who lost money remain remarkably silent when they return home. (Those large gambling casinos were not built because players most often won!) So also with a beekeeper who has tried a method that failed. We can expect silence from such a person. Perhaps the technique was applied wrong. Perhaps the beekeeper is too embarrassed to admit to a large loss of colonies by being foolish. Many rationalizations are possible. And what about a technique working in one part of the country but not in another --- or in one season but not in another? 3. Another beekeeper wrote that he was switching to FGMO for all his colonies. Our research on Santa Cruz Island indicates that colonies can remain viable for more than two years after varroa infestation before collapsing. That collapse is sudden. As I have indicated before, colonies seem to have a morale breakdown --- they just give up. Do you beekeepers really want to put all your eggs in one basket and then wait more than two years before realizing that the experimental technique failed? 4. Someone else wrote that older beekeepers and researchers were too set in their ways and thus would not accept some new technique. My comment: I have found some of the older people actually become mellow and more willing to accept new ideas ("older and wiser"). Others remain fixed in their opinions until they die. I have also seen many young people come out of their education and/or training VERY fixed in their belief systems and totally unwilling to entertain alternative explanations to the "facts" indoctrinated into them. In other words, let's not consider one's age a factor in this discussion. ******** Yours for better science. Adrian (nearly 70 and still fighting mindsets) Adrian M. Wenner (805) 893-2838 (UCSB office) Ecol., Evol., & Marine Biology (805) 893-8062 (UCSB FAX) Univ. of Calif., Santa Barbara (805) 963-8508 (home office & FAX) Santa Barbara, CA 93106 *********************************************************************** * "Discovery is to see what everyone else has seen, * * but to think what no one else has thought." * * --- Albert Szent-Gyorgyi * ***********************************************************************