BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Paul Walton <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Discussion of Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 29 Jul 1996 13:21:21 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
In article <[log in to unmask]>, Andy Nachbaur
<[log in to unmask]> writes
<snip>
> It is not a new chemical, or one with
>inherent dangers to the public or the beekeeper, only a new use of a
                                        ^^^^^^^^
>old natural occurring chemical, and one at that which has been approved
>in other countries.
<snip>
 
Andy,
 
I think that this statement is a little missleading.
 
My understanding is that formic acid is a particular nasty chemical and
should really be used in a fume cupboard. I believe that it can also be
absorbed through the skin. It is not, therefore, without danger to the
beekeeper.
 
 
--
Paul Walton
[log in to unmask]
Toddington, Bedfordshire, England.
Tel. +44 (0)1525 875570

ATOM RSS1 RSS2