Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sun, 18 Apr 2004 20:01:57 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
James Fischer wrote:
>>I am wondering (and my knowledge of AFB is limited being South African) if
>>the chloramphenicol was not used by beekeepers as a remedy for AFB locally
>>as opposed to in China. Chloramphenicol would be more suitable than
>>penicillin et al. because there has been very little resistance build-up
>>to it. Is it not perhaps American beekeepers that are using BW honey to
>>disguise dubious honey?
>>
>>
>
>It is hard to imagine a beekeeper in the US or Canada gaining access to
>Chloramphenicol without the use of safe-cracking tools. Both countries
>tightly control distribution of the drug. The reason is simple - human
>infections that are resistant to other antibiotics are often treatable with
>Chloramphenicol.
>
There is another reason - Chloramphenicol, in certain susceptable
individuals causes aplastic anemia. Nasty - and irreversable. It is
also a carcinogen. The FDA feel that there is no safe level in food
products. And it is more available than you think . . . . though I
agree - it is not readuily available in a form most beeks would find usable.
Part of the reason we like the stuff for nasty infections is not because
it is a particularly big gun, it bacteriostatic in most instances (and
there are bacteriocidal bigg guns out there) - but it penetrates all
kinds of tissues and lesions - very well - something many antibiotics do
not .
Keith
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
|
|
|