> Copper gluconate is not one of the dead horses. I reckon we have not yet
> learned to make use of it's features to best effect....
> Like so many other little niggles, this is another that requires proper
> testing.
That's true. Most of the time, one study is not enough to prove anything
and it takes time for an idea to be tested in the lab and in the field.
Adony did some reasonably good work with copper salts and found no effect.
Maybe there are other factors that are necessary to make it work. Others
have reported some success.
At any rate, I think that just because we have covered a bee-related topic
on BEE-L does not mean we cannot or should not revisit it. Old topics are
most welcome, and I hope that if someone wants to discuss something like,
say FGMO, that he or she will read the archives for a few minutes first to
see where we have been on this and go from there.
IMO, we need to see some progress in a discussion, and not just get
stalemated and/or get into the kind of "I am not", "You are so" argument
that generates heat, wastes time, and leads nowhere. If a discussion gets
to that point, we tend to cut it off for a time; otherwise, it can run on
as long as it is productive and/or entertaining.
We figure that BEE-L readers are people whose time has value, and who
expect BEE-L posts to be worth reading. Most of us don't want mailboxes
full of one-liners, pointless argument and redundancy.
No topic is ever closed on BEE-L, but we don't just want to re-hash the
same old debate unless there is something new to add, such as a personal
experience or new references or new ideas on application, and such.
Copper gluconate is a wide open topic, and the recent posts are most
welcome. Keep 'em coming.
We encourage all members to take a stab at posting if they have something
that they think should interest hundreds of serious beekeepers around the
world.
There are no dead horses on BEE-L. If anyone can make *any* horse run, no
matter how unlikely it looks, we'll watch, and we'll line up to place our
bets!
|
