Robert/Bob

I think that this sums up the situation nicely - thank you Robert!

I would add that the indiscriminate use of Terramycin also masks the
symptoms of AFB, allowing it to be spread via spores in the scales in combs.
(Bob, presumably you did not mean 'difference in spores' - EFB does not form
spores).  It worries me when I see so many postings on the newsgroups that
go something like 'Hi, I'm a newbee (ugh!!!) - how do I medicate my bees?'

In the UK, we are working hard to stay off the drugs treadmill that you
folks seem happy with.  AFB is not a problem, but EFB levels are rising
significantly and this is where novel research is being concentrated.  The
first innovation (for us - I think that you invented the technique) was to
use the shook swarm technique; the colony is shaken on to new foundation in
a clean hive and the old comb burnt.  One dose of Terramycin is given - but
probably only because our legislation requires it; my understanding is that
the next move will be trials without the Terramycin. Whilst this has given
excellent results on a colony basis, EFB frequently recurs within the
apiary, so current thinking is to remove the colony immediately after
treatment to a 'hospital apiary'.

There is further, in my view more interesting, research into the use of
Paenibacillus larvae ssp pulvifaciens (PLP) to kill EFB.  PLP is related to
the causative agent of AFB, but does not cause disease.  This should work
because Paenibacillus larvae kills all other bacteria.

As you said, we will have to agree to differ on this one, but I am very
happy with our approach which I believe will lead to control of this disease
without antibiotics.

Peter Edwards

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Brenchley" <[log in to unmask]>
>     Except that we do treat for all but serious cases, with TM (which has
to
> be officially administered by the bee inspector), and the problem has been
> that the disease recurs later in too many cases. Experiments are currently
> being conducted on a new technique, which involves shaking down,
destruction
> of the brood, and treatment with TM. this appears to be more successful.
Dare
> I suggest that the success of TM in the States is due to its regular use
as a
> prophylactic, and that one-off  curative use might not be so successful?
The
> penalty for that is resistant AFB.