The posts from Keth Benson and Jum Fischer today (29 Aug) show the discussion started as 'Healthcare of bees', then carried forward as a side issue in 'Wax Foundation', is getting lost in side issues. Can anyone who has medical understanding help us to get back to the path? To remind all what the discussion is about: 1. Durk received a colony suffering from virus symptoms for treating homtoxicology; 2 I suggested the reason the colony had failed to resist virus might be due to feeding with sugar, causing dietary deficiency; 3 Dave objected to implied criticism of sugar feeding as his bees were fine - but that did not expain of course to why someone else's colony might be sick; 4 Keith refuted the suggestion of dietary deficency on grounds that all bees need is sugar and pollen (his case put the nutritionist view and needs further discussion in a later post) - Keith challenged me:"Can you name a necessary substance (not sugar), found in honey, but not syrup, that is not also found in far more massive quantities in pollen?" 5 As evidence that floral honey can have some component not available in sugar honey - presumably not in pollen as honey is used in healing on its own - I quoted research into the healing qualities of floral honey that has been shown to be more effective than sugar honey, giving the reference to IBRA, Healing and Honey, 2001, ISBN 0-85092-240-8. My point being that if honey had been found to act differently to sugar honey in healing, then we could not logically exclude the possibility that sugar honey was not equal to floral honey in other biological uses - it might be, it might not be, it would depend on where the difference lay and whether that difference was relevant in the other biological use (here, the development of bee grubs) . I would want to then take the argument on, that if there was that possibility, did anyone actually know? If not, was there any basis in reason for forming a hypothesis - and if so then perhaps we should then shut down the thread until more research was conducted, with everyone retaining their own opinion on the probabilities. But, as said, we are bogged down in irrelevancies and mis-information. The research on honey in healing is being denigrated unread, not accepted as evidence of some difference between floral and sugar honey. Keith is concerned it is only work on the fringe saying:"I have also stated that there are better, more consistant methods for dealing with wound healing. Do you have evidence to the contrary? I thought not." It is not relevant to the argument either way, but the evidence is given in Honey and Healing if Keith would only look. Keith again:" I will tell you that I have not read that document, but I have read a few dozen articles on honey as a topical therapy. They were either wildly sensational or simply claimed that the stuff is moderately efficaceous and better than a simple super saturates sugar solution (likey because of the variable levels peroxide that can be generated by honeys). Haven't really seen one vs modern medical methods though." Because he has not looked at Honey and Healing, which republishes articles by scientists that have been peer-reviewed and first published in Bee World to other scientists the world over. So , A CRY FOR HELP! Would someone with medical understanding review Honey and Healing for the benefit of the members of this list, as anything I try to put forward is so resisted. We might then, just might, be able to get back to the discussion on possible causes of vulnerability of bee colonies to virus attack. Robin Dartington (who admits to sometimes liking to wind people up, but is trying hard to reform - and offers this unexceptional post as an example of good behaviour). :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and other info --- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::