# Treat for Varroa mites or let them suffer & die..........



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

1. Treat
2. Let them suffer and die.

What's your choice?
Vote on the top of the page on the pole bar.


----------



## cheezer32 (Feb 3, 2009)

2. Been trying to kill them for years now, there still kicking though.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

You should work for Gallup. Word it so they can't answer the way you don't want them to...


----------



## rniles (Oct 10, 2012)

I agree with Michael, poor options.

How about a "Work towards treatment free, responsibly" option?

I like Randy Oliver's "Rant", "_Allowing domesticated package colonies to die year after year is not in any way, shape, or form a contribution to the breeding of mite-resistant stocks. There is a vast difference between breeding for survivor stock and simply allowing commercial bees to die from neglect!_"

Even so, treatment free is my goal, so I'll choose "Work towards treatment free, responsibly"


----------



## burns375 (Jul 15, 2013)

fantastic wording there....im sensing a little bias


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

Just thought I would add..... 


We shake bees every spring..... we also treat.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

rniles said:


> Even so, treatment free is my goal, so I'll choose "Work towards treatment free, responsibly"


Does that not mean that you're treating them versus letting them die?


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney (Feb 29, 2012)

What!! No, option for treatment of choice! I can't vote


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>1. Treat
>2. Let them suffer and die.

I don't believe anyone is choosing "let them suffer". They may be choosing to "let them die". Suffering is not important to the outcome and I've never met anyone to whom that was the appeal of letting them die. How about these two:

1. Continue to propogate all of the problems bees are having by treating your bees and continuing lines of bees that will will not only continue to suffer from those issues but will water down the genetics of those that could survive by producing drones that will mate with them.
2. Allowing nature to find her course and raise bees that can survive without treatments while removing those that can't survive by not treating.

That sounds like a different poll doesn't it? But in my opinion that is what your choices are.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

Michael Bush said:


> They may be choosing to "let them die". Suffering is not important to the outcome and I've never met anyone to whom that was the appeal of letting them die.


Suffering is not important? Really? Would you say the same things in your 1 or 2 about your farm animals?


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

Michael Bush said:


> >
> 2. Allowing nature to find her course and raise bees that can survive without treatments while removing those that can't survive by not treating.


That would be like getting rid of all the hospitals, dentist offices, Doctors offices ect... Just let nature take it's course.


----------



## texanbelchers (Aug 4, 2014)

Keith Jarrett said:


> That would be like getting rid of all the hospitals, dentist offices, Doctors offices ect... Just let nature take it's course.





snl said:


> Suffering is not important? Really? Would you say the same things in your 1 or two about your farm animals?


I'm undecided about treatments, so I'll not jump into that debate. However, bees are insects NOT human or anything even close. Animals, farm product or pets, are NOT human. Physical pain can clearly be sensed by animals; insects I'm not so sure about. I'm not advocating abusive or improper care or attention of anyone or anything. I AM saying that insects don't have human feelings, emotions, or rights. I get sick of the ASPCA adds begging for money. They spend more on management and raising money than they do on animal health services. http://www.aspca.org/sites/default/files/financial-statement-2012.pdf They would save a lot of money by applying a small, inexpensive shot to each problem. They are NOT human beings.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

Don't forget, you can view WHO voted for what by clicking on the numerical poll results.........


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

deleted


----------



## bnm1000 (Oct 12, 2011)

This topic I always find very interesting from a philosophical point of view. No other social insect do we prop up with chemical treatments. We leave them to adapt to the forces of nature. However, on the other hand, as Randy Oliver has mentioned, is the honey bee a "natural" insect or more like livestock? It seems like the more we manipulate them, the worse it gets.

I guess since there is such a demand for the bees' product (Honey) that mankind manipulates the insect to our own purposes and therefore brings forth problems that probably would have never occurred otherwise.

And, it is hard to say you are on the bees side when your goal is to pull 40 pounds of honey from each hive, substitute their natural food with a less nutritious diet of sugar water and pollen substitute, and then complain about others making the bees suffer by not inundating them with chemicals.

I am not sure which side I fall on - but I understand commercial beekeepers treating their bees because it is their livelihood. I don't understand the vitriol on both sides.

What I don't understand is why some people think that treatment free is impossible. Aren't there bees somewhere in some areas of the world who live in a wild state without treatments. Now, I will grant that maybe you can be treatment free, and the natural turnover rate of the hives will be greater and the surplus of honey, if any, will be smaller. But is that a bad goal?


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

texanbelchers said:


> Physical pain can clearly be sensed by animals; insects I'm not so sure about. I'm not advocating abusive or improper care or attention of anyone or anything.


Don't we owe a measure of responsibility to anything, be it human, farm animal or in this case, an insect, that is under our care?


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

This thread is headed for deletion.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I wonder how many insects (never mind rodents) are maimed and killed to grow an acre of broccoli. Between turning soil and pesticide application it is a massacre, no?

And if we are only concerned about the suffering of bees, seems to me Almond pollination would have a much bigger impact that the TF beekeepers.....anyone want to run the numbers of TF hives vs the number of colonies negatively impacted in the almonds last year?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Barry said:


> This thread is headed for deletion.


dubious from the start, jmho.


----------



## bnm1000 (Oct 12, 2011)

I have been exposed over the last year or two, to a whole worldwide community who keep ant colonies. It is amazing the difference in philosophy between the two groups. I guess it comes down to one is a commodity and one is not.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

Makes me wonder what a thread discussing the silkworm Bombyx mori might contain 

silk scarves for the holiday's anyone?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

...or how many insects are killed to make a pound of shlellac.


----------



## jrhoto (Mar 2, 2009)

Bees prey up on no other creature on earth, they produce a food that in its self can sustain human life. If these were the only two reasons to protect and keep them wouldn't they be worth it?
John
poor valley bee farm


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

squarepeg said:


> dubious from the start, jmho.


agree


----------



## beepro (Dec 31, 2012)

I have not yet voted....
Still trying to determine whether or not to treat for this season.
I do see some are suffering from the mite infestation. But majority are still surviving not threatening the
colony activity. Maybe at 60% mortality level then I will treat. Until then they have to just suffer thru.
And the bee farm said they are the mite-resistant bees too. We'll see!


----------



## KQ6AR (May 13, 2008)

My bees don't suffer & die any more than those who treat.
Average losses under 20%


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

jrhoto said:


> Bees prey up on no other creature on earth, they produce a food that in its self can sustain human life. If these were the only two reasons to protect and keep them wouldn't they be worth it?
> John
> poor valley bee farm


Exactly, my whole reason for starting this poll........


----------



## Waggle (Mar 7, 2013)

snl said:


> Exactly, my whole reason for starting this poll........


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

snl said:


> Suffering is not important? Really? Would you say the same things in your 1 or 2 about your farm animals?


Larry, another topic for discussion, but, what evidence is there that bees suffer?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> ...or how many insects are killed to make a pound of shlellac.


The cochineal beetle was an 18th Century source of red dye. No way to know how many tons of beetles were used to dye yarn and cloth before other methods came into being.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

jrhoto said:


> Bees prey up on no other creature on earth, they produce a food that in its self can sustain human life. If these were the only two reasons to protect and keep them wouldn't they be worth it?
> John
> poor valley bee farm


Bees produce a food that can sustain human life? Is there a Honey Only Diet that I am unaware of? Billions of people live w/out eating honey. I think you are off a little bit there John.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds (Apr 15, 2012)

Sounds like a one sided sells pitch type question.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

sqkcrk said:


> Bees produce a food that can sustain human life? Is there a Honey Only Diet that I am unaware of? Billions of people live w/out eating honey. I think you are off a little bit there John.


I think what he is saying here Mark, is that Honey by itself, can sustain human life.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

sqkcrk said:


> Larry, another topic for discussion, but, what evidence is there that bees suffer?


While there is no absolute proof that bees suffer as we humans define suffering, we know that mites certainly irritate bees. Many of us have seen bees attempting to remover mites from themselves. There is also stimuli (heat for instance) that will cause bees to retreat from it. 

So No, no proof that they suffer as we think of suffering but without a doubt we know that mites can and in most cases will cause their demise.

There is another post "Do insects feel Pain?".............some good info there......


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

snl said:


> I think what he is saying here Mark, is that Honey by itself, can sustain human life.


What does that mean? That I could eat nothing other than honey and be just fine?


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

sqkcrk said:


> What does that mean? That I could eat nothing other than honey and be just fine?


Yes you could live eating honey alone. Boring, but you could do it. Google it and you'll find lots of info.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

"Given that a teaspoon of honey is insufficient nutrition for even the lightest of eaters, the question really boils down to "How long does it take to starve to death", unless you assume plenty of water and no vital salts to replenish, in which case it's more "How long until hyponatremia (loss of sodium in the blood) kills you?"

In the former case, 2-6 weeks depending on size, health, and metabolism. In the latter, that depends heavily on the water intake, ambient temperature, and physical activity, although it would certainly be a quicker death than starvation.
posted by Saydur at 4:09 AM on August 13, 2011 [1 favorite]​​​

Not sure if he drank water, but Bobby Sands died after 66 days of hunger strike. I imagine with a tea-spoon of honey every day, you would last considerably longer.
posted by molecicco at 5:04 AM on August 13, 2011​​​

I don't think you would last considerably longer. The "average" human requires 2000 calories a day. There are 20 calories in a Tsp of honey. Leaving you 99% deficient in your daily caloric intake.

Honey isn't some magical, hyper dense, nutritional miracle; it's just food. And in this case, not enough."

Besides being boring, I think there would be some things missing.​​​


----------



## cg3 (Jan 16, 2011)

I think you'd need a little protien, at least.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

You would think that such a sweet thing would be so bad for your health. Not so at all! Honey does not have *any fats or cholesterol*. It does not contain any sodium either. You could actually live off a just-honey diet because it is considered to be the only kind of food that has all necessary substances to sustain a normal human life, though it would be quite boring to have nothing but honey, eh?

Some say "yay" some say "Nay."


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

snl said:


> You would think that such a sweet thing would be so bad for your health. Not so at all! Honey does not have *any fats or cholesterol*. It does not contain any sodium either. You could actually live off a just-honey diet because it is considered to be the only kind of food that has all necessary substances to sustain a normal human life, though it would be quite boring to have nothing but honey, eh?
> 
> Some say "yay" some say "Nay."


I would love to see the people who make this claim actually go out and live by it.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

snl said:


> You would think that such a sweet thing would be so bad for your health. Not so at all! Honey does not have *any fats or cholesterol*. It does not contain any sodium either. You could actually live off a just-honey diet because it is considered to be the only kind of food that has all necessary substances to sustain a normal human life, though it would be quite boring to have nothing but honey, eh?
> 
> Some say "yay" some say "Nay."


You and jrhoto should both look up what nutrients are necessary to sustain human life.
this if bordering on the ridiculous, as is the pain conversation.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

snl said:


> You could actually live off a just-honey diet because it is considered to be the only kind of food that has all necessary substances to sustain a normal human life, ...


Larry,
Where is this coming from? I recall seeing something like this on a Truck Stop Diner place mat, but there was no substantiating documentation, no supporting data. You told me to google it and I did. But I didn't see what you thought I would.


----------



## HarryVanderpool (Apr 11, 2005)

Barry said:


> This thread is headed for deletion.


No, Barry no!
Just say no to deletion!
Please don't push that button down......

My wife just had a partial knee replacement on the 17th of September.
Now she is getting around like nothing ever happened.
I recently had a crown in place of a toofy.

It is amazing to think that just a couple of year ago my average expected life span was 36 years!!!

I am very grateful for those that look after our health and prefer to pay it forward with our bees.
And in doing so for the past 24 years, things have gone pretty darn well! 

I for one think the poll questions are based in reality.
I know scores of beekeepers across the nation and NONE of them just set back and let their bees die.

Remember; "Everything will die if you let it".


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

snl said:


> Honey does not have any fats or cholesterol. It[HIGHLIGHT] does not contain any sodium either[/HIGHLIGHT]. You could actually live off a just-honey diet because it is considered to be the only kind of food that has all necessary substances to sustain a normal human life, though it would be quite boring to have nothing but honey, eh?


Larry, has your Beesource account been hijacked by someone else? :scratch: 
This is getting ridiculous. 

Humans can't live without _*salt *_in their diet. If you are not getting "sodium" from honey, and honey is all you are eating, then where is the necessary salt coming from?

. . . . . . . . .

Just for the record, I do _not _agree that honey does not contain salt. There IS salt in honey. But either Larry's assertion that there is no salt in honey is wrong, or else his assertion that humans can live on honey exclusively is wrong.


This whole "poll" is very similar to asking "When did you stop beating your wife?" :no:

.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

No.....no one worth listening to has ever claimed that a person can live on honey alone.

There are claims that all the amino acids needed for humans can be found in pollen, and I can imagine a claim that someone could live on honey and pollen...ive seen weirder diets and/or cleanses.

99.5% of honey (by weight) is sugars and water....might as well try to live on gummy bears and 7up....which is a stupid (and imcomplete) diet until you add corn chips and coffee.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> The cochineal beetle was an 18th Century source of red dye. No way to know how many tons of beetles were used to dye yarn and cloth before other methods came into being.


Was? Look up carmine (the dye) while drinking your morning ruby red grapefruit juice.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

In regards to bees suffering, this is where I got my information.



Eduardo Gomes said:


> Insects feel pain ?
> 
> Yes , bees and other insects feel pain , according to Gilberto Xavier physiologist , researcher at USP , " São Paulo University " :
> "Insects have similar to nerve endings that we humans have. Therefore , it is reasonable to assume they have some sort of sensory perception equivalent to what we call pain. In addition , the animal is able to make an avoidance learning , moving away from something that causes you discomfort . " The insects have converged nerve receptors - their nerve endings are in the skin and also have different locking mechanisms pain and more efficient than human . Through these mechanisms , a cheap continues to walk even after having a leg torn off. If you have locking mechanisms of pain , it is because they feel pain.


In regards to whether you can live on honey alone:

I've read several places on the internet that you could sustain yourself on honey alone and have posted what I read here. If it is incorrect, I stand corrected and take my lumps.... it happens...


----------



## drlonzo (Apr 15, 2014)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Just for the record, I do _not _agree that honey does not contain salt. There IS salt in honey.


From what I have come to understand watching my bees, I must agree with Graham on this one. My bees will take up salt while foraging and take it back to the hive. I've watched them many times do this. I've even tested with small amounts of salt added to the syrup to see if they preferred it one way or another. In each case the bees took the syrup with salt faster than without. 

It makes more sense than not to believe that the bees need salt in their diets just the same as we do. 

Now as for the idea that a person could sustain theirself on nothing but honey,,, I can see both sides of the fence on that one,,, just not sure if honey holds all the vitamins and minerals needed for sure to make a real assertion on belief there... 

I once had an uncle that tried it for a while though.. Surprisingly, he lost about 30 pounds during that summer and worked like a horse building a massive chimney on a house. lol


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

snl said:


> In regards to whether you can live on honey alone:
> 
> I've read several places on the internet that you could sustain yourself on honey alone and have posted what I read here. If it is incorrect, I stand corrected and take my lumps.... it happens...


Well, you did read it on the internet.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

An interesting page with extensive details on the nutritional analysis of honey:

http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/sweets/5568/2

Note that towards the upper right you can click to select the "serving size" of the food (in this case, _honey_) in question.

If a person was eating honey exclusively, in order to get to the 100% Daily Value for _salt_, according to the calculator, you'd need to eat 99 cups of honey daily. 

That 99 cups of honey would amount to over 99,000 calories daily. 


In the modern world, salt is readily available and very inexpensive, but it has not always been that way. Salt has a long and rich history as a VERY valuable trade item among ancient peoples.

.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Humans can't live without _*salt *_in their diet. If you are not getting "sodium" from honey, and honey is all you are eating, then where is the necessary salt coming from? Just for the record, I do _not _agree that honey does not contain salt. There IS salt in honey.


Honey does NOT contain salt, it contains sodium, there is a difference.

http://chemistry.about.com/od/moleculescompounds/a/Sodium-Versus-Salt.htm


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Well, the USDA says honey has 4 mg of "Sodium, Na" per 100 grams of honey. Here is the page:

http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/s...at=&count=&max=25&offset=&sort=&qlookup=honey

The Na in "Sodium, Na" is a reference to the chemical element symbol "*Na*", i.e. Sodium. Table salt is usually NaCl, sodium chloride. 


Hard to square Larry's current assertion that honey DOES contain sodium with his previous assertion that honey does NOT contain sodium! 


snl said:


> It does not contain any sodium either.


Which Larry should we believe? :lpf:

.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Humans can't live without _*salt *_in their diet. If you are not getting "sodium" from honey, and honey is all you are eating, then where is the necessary salt coming from? . . . . . . .Just for the record, I do _not _agree that honey does not contain salt. There IS salt in honey.


True Radar I was wrong about no sodium, I admit it, but you were just as wrong about honey containing SALT!


----------



## Gypsi (Mar 27, 2011)

I didn't even vote. For a backyard beek not near any commercial keeps there is definitely a middle ground


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

When speaking of nutrition, "salt" is not a precise term, I do agree.

But its hard to argue that "salt" as most people understand _table salt_, and Na (sodium) are not _closely _related.

The nutrition label from one of those familiar round boxes of SALT ...







Photo Credit

Table SALT: zero calories, zero fat, zero carbohydrates, zero protein ...
... what IS in it:s ... 590 mg of sodium in 1.5 grams ... over 1/3 of total volume


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

So many wrongs in this thread... Lol 
i think we can label this thread as an opinion piece


----------



## TalonRedding (Jul 19, 2013)

Ian said:


> So many wrongs in this thread... Lol
> i think we can label this thread as an opinion piece


Well...that's your opinion.  lol


----------



## biggraham610 (Jun 26, 2013)

Michael Bush said:


> >1. Treat
> >2. Let them suffer and die.
> 
> I don't believe anyone is choosing "let them suffer". They may be choosing to "let them die". Suffering is not important to the outcome and I've never met anyone to whom that was the appeal of letting them die. How about these two:
> ...


:thumbsup: G


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

I treat, And I chose not to vote out of respect to those whose passion is trying to breed treatment free bees. My problem is with those who leave the impression to the inexperienced that the control of varroa is a secondary consideration in successful beekeeping.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes (Nov 10, 2014)

Jim very wise words.:thumbsup:


----------



## jrhoto (Mar 2, 2009)

In my earlier post i should have said that honeybees are the only insect that produce food that man can sustain himself on, and sustain has several meanings. I Know of no other insect that produces food that we can eat. If I'am wrong then I stand corrected. To borrow a quote if you don't stand for something then you will fall for everything. I Treat my bees and will continue to do so until someone shows me a better way. Just my opinion and I respect everyone else's and their right to express it.
John
Poor Valley Bee farm


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Barry said:


> This thread is headed for deletion.


i had my hopes up and so i bailed out of it, but since it is rocking on i'll weigh in.



snl said:


> Exactly, my whole reason for starting this poll........


i choked on my coffee when i read this.



Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> Sounds like a one sided sells pitch type question.


exactly. the message is loud and clear - if you are not treating you are guilty of animal cruelty, i can help you, place your order with oxavap today!



HarryVanderpool said:


> Remember; "Everything will die if you let it".


brilliant harry. hopefully this thread will be no exception.



jim lyon said:


> I treat, And I chose not to vote out of respect to those whose passion is trying to breed treatment free bees. My problem is with those who leave the impression to the inexperienced that the control of varroa is a secondary consideration in successful beekeeping.


best post of the thread. jim and i are at opposite ends of the beekeeping spectrum with very different objectives guiding our management decisions, but that has never undermined the mutual respect we have for what the other is doing. we could use a little bit more of that around here.


----------



## mathesonequip (Jul 9, 2012)

this is how it goes 90 % vote one way. 10% vote the other way and do not like to be in a severe minority. so lets change the subject to salt and the all honey diet and whine that the original question is unfair.. classic.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

mathesonequip said:


> this is how it goes 90 % vote one way. 10% vote the other way and do not like to be in a severe minority. so lets change the subject to salt and the all honey diet and whine that the original question is unfair.. classic.


interesting reply, but i think you may be confused.

1. not one single comment regarding salt and the all honey diet was made by any of those included in 'the minority'

2. i can't speak for others, but following the crowd and being in 'the majority' has never meant that much to me nor do i have a compelling need to be different from the rest. ending up with bees that don't require treatments came as a welcomed bonus.

3. no whining here, just pointing out the potential conflict of interest that may in part explain why the original question was phrased like it was.

4. i don't begrudge anyone for using mite treatments as they see fit, nor do i begrudge larry for marketing what appears to a decent product for that purpose.

but alas, here we are again arguing about arguing... classic.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

mathesonequip said:


> this is how it goes 90 % vote one way. 10% vote the other way and do not like to be in a severe minority. so lets change the subject to salt and the all honey diet and whine that the original question is unfair.. classic.


There is no Right or Wrong, it's a Poll.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

squarepeg said:


> but alas, here we are again arguing about arguing... classic.


I disagree.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

sqkcrk said:


> I disagree.


good one mark.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

mathesonequip said:


> this is how it goes 90 % vote one way. 10% vote the other way and do not like to be in a severe minority. so lets change the subject to salt and the all honey diet and whine that the original question is unfair.. classic.


It was _*snl *_(the poll/thread originator) that _first _posted about the 'honey diet', which is not relevant to the thread title. I certainly challenged his premise by bringing salt into the forefront, although I don't agree that *I *derailed the thread. 

But this is a "public" poll, meaning anyone can see who voted which way. Go ahead and check, you will see that I did did _not _vote on the 'losing' side. Nor did I vote on the 'winning' side. As I said in my _first _post in this thread post #44 the two choices for the the poll are ridiculous.

The whole point of Larry starting the thread in the first place is just another marketing exercise for the vaporizers that _snl _is selling. I have _no _objection to vaporizers being sold, but its a "vaporizer marketing" thread, not a real poll.

I also have no objection to treating hives for varroa with oxalic acid, if that is what you want to do. I have not used OAV, but I did buy a glow plug and am preparing to build my own vaporizer.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> The whole point of Larry starting the thread in the first place is just another marketing exercise for the vaporizers that _snl _is selling. I have _no _objection to vaporizers being sold, but its a "vaporizer marketing" thread, not a real poll.


Darn Graham,
Now your mind reader? Just because one is selling a product, they can't start a discussion without it being seen as a sales ploy? Yes, I sell vaporizers and yes I believe OAV is a great treatment but I also participate in many other threads that have nothing to do with OAV. 
So anyone who is selling anything cannot start or participate in a discussion that is or may be related to a product they are selling?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Others have and when they have been obviously self promotional I have complained about it and have been told that w/in their own, paid for, Forum they can do what they wish. I don't see Larry doing that at all. But I have been called a blind ostrich by some, so what do I know?


----------



## Gypsi (Mar 27, 2011)

I'm sticking with powdered sugar and screened bottom boards, ya'll have fun


----------



## biggraham610 (Jun 26, 2013)

squarepeg said:


> good one mark.


:lpf:


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>That would be like getting rid of all the hospitals, dentist offices, Doctors offices ect... Just let nature take it's course.

I am not recommending it nor do I wish it, but it would improve the human race a lot. We are not insects... we are not even farm animals... thankfully, we do not apply the same concepts to humans as we do to insects.

>Suffering is not important? Really? Would you say the same things in your 1 or 2 about your farm animals?

I did NOT say it was not important. I DID say it is not important to the outcome. In other words the purpose of not treating is not to CAUSE suffering as you poll implies. The purpose of not treating is to have less suffering in the long run.

>everything dies if you let it

Everything dies whether you let it or not. It's only a question of when and why and to what end.


----------



## dsegrest (May 15, 2014)

rniles said:


> I agree with Michael, poor options.
> 
> How about a "Work towards treatment free, responsibly" option?
> 
> ...


Treatment free is my goal too. I only have 4 hives so to lose 1 would be a 25% loss. I had 2 hives last year and lost both. This year I monitored and treated 3 of the 4 hives.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

"Everything dies if you let it." mocks Michael Bush's tag line "Everything works if you let it.", doesn't it?


----------



## dsegrest (May 15, 2014)

texanbelchers said:


> I'm undecided about treatments, so I'll not jump into that debate. However, bees are insects NOT human or anything even close. Animals, farm product or pets, are NOT human. Physical pain can clearly be sensed by animals; insects I'm not so sure about. I'm not advocating abusive or improper care or attention of anyone or anything. I AM saying that insects don't have human feelings, emotions, or rights. I get sick of the ASPCA adds begging for money. They spend more on management and raising money than they do on animal health services. http://www.aspca.org/sites/default/files/financial-statement-2012.pdf They would save a lot of money by applying a small, inexpensive shot to each problem. They are NOT human beings.


If you don't think bees feel pain, hold one in the palm of your hand and gradually squeeze it until it hollers (or you do).


----------



## dsegrest (May 15, 2014)

KQ6AR said:


> My bees don't suffer & die any more than those who treat.
> Average losses under 20%


I don't know how much mine suffer, but when they are in a bad mood they make me suffer every time I go in the yard.


----------



## dsegrest (May 15, 2014)

snl said:


> I think what he is saying here Mark, is that Honey by itself, can sustain human life.


Honey by itself can sustain life if you sell enough of it.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

:thumbsup:

Sustain life? Maybe I don't know what the word sustain means. If someone says that a food can sustain life, doesn't that mean that one can eat nothing but that substance and live just fine? Thrive actually? I think that saying that Honey by itself can sustain life is a silly idea. Otherwise, wouldn't there be a RDA for honey? Wouldn't we be missing something in our diet if we didn't eat it?

Oxygen sustains life. Without it we would die. But honey?

Who has "HONEY, it sustains life" on their label.

Larry, am I picking on you? I hope it doesn't seem like it.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Just wondering if this thread is treatment for cabin fever or the result of it! 

I read somewhere that "Man does not live by bread alone"! Sure is sustaining though with honey on it, and a glass of milk for a chaser.

http://edhelper.com/poetry/Animal_Crackers_by_Christopher_Morley.htm


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

:applause:


dsegrest said:


> Honey by itself can sustain life if you sell enough of it.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

sqkcrk said:


> Larry, am I picking on you? I hope it doesn't seem like it.


It's all good Mark, I got my big boy pants on!


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Why did you set up a public poll?


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

I'm thinkin' about starting a poll about this poll. The question would be: 'Do you believe that this poll was started as a poorly concealed effort to promote a product?....Yes or no' Anyone want to venture a guess at to the result of that poll?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Well Dan, there are facts and there are beliefs. Ask Larry if you want an answer. If not, then set up a Poll.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

Ian said:


> Why did you set up a public poll?


It was an attempt to discover percentages that would treat vs not treat. Should I have worded it differently as some have suggested, in hindsight, yes.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

The real absurdity (and dishonesty) is in the word "suffering" applied to honeybees.

I'm thinking of the pure biomass of insects killed by insecticides on the acreage that is stationary and migratory pollinated by beekeepers.....and no one complains or considers that it would be better not to kill so many insects unless the insect is a honeybee.

If one is concerned about the suffering of insects, bees would hardly be at the top of the list.....unless one is only concerned with the "suffering" of creatures that are useful to you personally.....the moral code that is based purely on self interest is an ugly one.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

snl said:


> It was an attempt to discover percentages that would treat vs not treat. Should I have worded it differently as some have suggested, in hindsight, yes.


Yes obviously but why a public poll?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>I'm thinking of the pure biomass of insects killed by insecticides...If one is concerned about the suffering of insects, bees would hardly be at the top of the list.....unless one is only concerned with the "suffering" of creatures that are useful to you personally.....the moral code that is based purely on self interest is an ugly one.

Maybe I should post a poll asking:
"If the ****roaches in your house were dying from some new parasite would you :
Treat
Let them suffer and die."


----------



## BEESERIOUS (Feb 25, 2009)

jim lyon said:


> I treat, And I chose not to vote out of respect to those whose passion is trying to breed treatment free bees. My problem is with those who leave the impression to the inexperienced that the control of varroa is a secondary consideration in successful beekeeping.



Jim, very well said


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

Another amen to that. All the basics of management are important , but varroa has to be the number 1 issue with keeping hives alive and healthy.


----------



## KQ6AR (May 13, 2008)

Yes, IMO the way you worded it probably kept many treatment free beekeepers from responding to you're poll. It became very biased towards the treatment crowd.
If you wanted to know how many treat/ vs how many don't maybe you should have asked that specific question without the other commentary.




snl said:


> It was an attempt to discover percentages that would treat vs not treat. Should I have worded it differently as some have suggested, in hindsight, yes.


----------



## dsegrest (May 15, 2014)

Michael Bush said:


> >I'm thinking of the pure biomass of insects killed by insecticides...If one is concerned about the suffering of insects, bees would hardly be at the top of the list.....unless one is only concerned with the "suffering" of creatures that are useful to you personally.....the moral code that is based purely on self interest is an ugly one.
> 
> Maybe I should post a poll asking:
> "If the ****roaches in your house were dying from some new parasite would you :
> ...


maybe treat the parasite so they won't "suffer and die"


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

snl said:


> It was an attempt to discover percentages that would treat vs not treat. Should I have worded it differently as some have suggested, in hindsight, yes.


larry, fwiw i think it takes some character to make a statement like that and i for one appreciate it.

regarding the percentages of treating vs. not i would predict that those that treat are in the clear majority. in my area there are only a handful of us keeping bees off treatments out of a group of several dozen. at the last meeting i attended the discussion was on how to start rotating out old comb that had been subjected to years of exposure to synthetic miticides.

polling the forum could lead to a skewed result because there are likely a lot of beginners as myself that get so overwhelmed with learning everything else in the first year that we don't even know that we might have to control varroa.

if we would like to know percentages i think a poll could be worded something like this:

for those of you that have kept bees for 12 months or longer, are you

a. treating all or most hives preventatively for mites
b. treating only those hives that have high mite counts (ipm)
c. not using any treatments for mites


----------



## philip.devos (Aug 10, 2013)

*Let them suffer and die* is the reason I buy bees.... REALLY MAN!!!?

Phil


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>maybe treat the parasite so they won't "suffer and die"

Yes, I hate to think of all those poor Varroa suffering...


----------

