>Some suspect that bees require some molds to prosper (this
>arguement is one that makes one look twice at the use of antibiotics
>in beekeeping, but all results seem to indicate that bees fed TM
>often do better than those which are not.  An example of such
>research is recent work by Sammatoro et al that shows that bees with
>vampire mites that receive grease patties with TM do better than
>those which get only grease and sugar).
 
Here is where I part company with those using antibiotics.  The very worst
abuse of antibiotics (IMHO) is when they are not use for treatment, or for
prophyllaxis when some colonies in a yard are infected but just because the
"bees do better".  Chickens and pigs "do better" (grow faster, have better
feed conversion rates) when fed small amounts of antibiotics in their feed
on a regular basis.  This practice is contributing to the number of strains
of a whole bunch of bacteria now showing resistance to many antibiotics.
 
And in reply to Dave Black's wondering about how asexual bacteria evolve
resistance I am a little confused, because he answered his own query I
thought.  The bacteria mutate and evolve that way.  Although the process may
produce variation at a slower rate than with sexual reproduction, when the
numbers of individual bacteria are so large it can be sufficient.  And when
the environment includes "constant" or long term, routine antibiotic use
then eventually resistance can be expected.
 
I add my seasons greetings to all
 
Stan