Peter Borst said:

> I suspect that many beekeepers do not take Coumaphos
> seriously enough.

I agree, but it is not the beekeeper's fault.  The instructions are
weak on warnings.  I'd suggest starting them with "This may be
the most hazardous item you have ever handled...", which
is an accurate statement for the majority of beekeepers.

> I have had cholinesterase baseline testing done...

Only because you use Checkmite in bee hives (using,
one would presume, "proper" gloves)?  This is a level of
concern much higher than anyone has ever expressed
within my hearing.

> On the other hand, I believe the product can be used safely.

On the other hand, your feet voted differently on the issue.
Your feet took you to the doctor's office, "just in case".

> I would like to see these assertions backed up with some
> documentation.

Anyone who knows about cholinesterase screening and works
in research at an Ivy League school need not ask mere
beekeepers in the hinterlands for "documentation", but I'll cite
some references if you'd like.

The EPA says, in their summary on coumaphos:

http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/op/coumaphos/summary.htm:

     "There are no registered uses of coumaphos on agricultural
       crops or in/around residences."

and

      "Three out of nine worker exposure scenarios EXCEED THE
       AGENCY'S  LEVEL OF CONCERN AT THE MAXIMUM LEVEL
       OF PROTECTION FEASIBLE.  These scenarios are: applying
       liquids...  applying dusts...  loading/applying dusts with a
       mechanical duster..."

The caps are mine.  Search the entire EPA website for other uses
of the phrase in caps.  You will find only 2, both about coumaphos.

While the Checkmite strips are clearly "lower risk" than dusts or liquid
sprays, the unique factor that is "higher risk" is beekeepers.  The archives
of this list and of the usenet group alt.sci.argiculture.beekeeping are clear
and compelling evidence that many beekeepers ignore labels, attempt to be
"creative" in mite control efforts, and even use unapproved chemicals.

So, I'll say it again.  The Checkmite instructions need work.  Lots of work.
The Section 18 "label text" needs to be re-written, preferably by Darth Vader.
The warnings should also be printed in large, bold text, to catch attention.

So, to summarize:

a)  Beekeeping is a hobby for the overwhelming majority of beekeepers.
     They have been lulled by years of "experience" with relatively
     harmless substances like Apistan.

b)  The Section 18s permit the first and only use of coumaphos that is both
     "on agricultural crops" and, in many cases, "in/around residences".
     One can only call Checkmite a "consumer product".  (Wow, from a
     nerve gas, banned by international treaties, to a consumer product!
     What marketing genius!)

c)  The verb "to use" is conjugated by beekeepers as follows in regard
     to any "treatment" for their bees:

        I properly use.
        You should use with care.
        He misused.
        They are using illegal stuff.

If the labels on Checkmite are not worded in the clearest and strongest
possible language, the industry as a whole will regret it.

To quote Bogart,  "...you'll regret it -- maybe not today, maybe not
tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of your life."


        jim