# Oxalic Acid: Interpreting the Facts



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

They drop from the Oxalic for about a week or so after the treatment. After that the drop should go back to normal drop and not from the acid.


----------



## Dan Williamson (Apr 6, 2004)

One other interpretation is that the OA didn't properly evaporate and didn't diperse adequately throughout the hive.

1). What did you use to vaporize the OA? crack pipe or the commercially available vaporizer?

2). Did you close off all entrances during and after you evaporated for at least 10 min after evaporating?

I usually have an increased drop after my first evaporation. Less drop as time goes on. 

I had trouble getting effective dispersement with the crack pipe type of evaporator. I'm sure it was primarily due to operator error as others seem to have no problem. I think that part of the problem was that I was trying to vaporize at the top of the hive and since heat rises most of it seemed to stay at the top and not much seemed to get deep down into the brood nest. Maybe you are having the same problem.

I now use the JB200 and it works well for me. I get 100% evaporation and it reaches all parts of the hive. I tape all entrances, any gaps and close SBB. Slide the vaporizer in and use foam to seal the entrance. Vaporize for the appropriate time (~1min) then quickly pull out vaporizer and reseal with foam. I then wait ~10 min before opening up the hive. 

Dan


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

At EAS in Ohio, there were some comments made
(I think by Marion Ellis, someone correct me
if I am wrong about "who") in a very detailed
workshop in the beeyard on OA about nearly
all the "fogging" approaches to OA that I
found interesting:
</font>
There is no fogger that will produce the
volume of vapor required to "get everywhere".</font>
While the puffs of "smoke" exiting the
hive at various cracks looks impressive,
the simple application of liquid OA to
the top bars seems to have more consistent
results.</font>
Use of liquid eliminates the health concerns
for the beekeeper. This issue is a "time bomb"
and it is only a matter of time before we take
the first casualties from vaporizing OA.</font>
I may not agree with all these points in exactly
the manner presented, but the mere fact that this
was being presented at EAS (where the workshops
are state-of-the-art and given by the researchers
who did the work about which they speak) implies
that the whole "vaporization" approach is being
downplayed by the US research and extension
community until at least one of them can make
it work with any sort of reliability.


----------



## George Fergusson (May 19, 2005)

>>After that the drop should go back to normal drop

Glad to hear it. Mebbe they'll even be below normal









>>One other interpretation is that the OA didn't properly evaporate and didn't diperse adequately throughout the hive.

Well I've thought of that Dan. Initially, I ran right out and built an evaporator and had at it. My initial design (an entrance evaporator) had a 18" copper tube on the end. It required some modifications, OA vapor was condensing in the tube and plugging it up. I ran some tests to see what was happening and how long it took. Thought I had it figured out. My current design uses about 6" of copper tubing, a couple of blocks of wood with 3/8" holes in them, and a brick to hold everything steady on the bottom board.

Just the other day, I actually set up 2 deep bodies on a bottom board with entrance reducer (no frames in them) and a piece of plexiglass to cover the top and proceeded to fumigate it. The 2 boxes filled up nicely with vapor. Filled with frames and bees, the vapor would have less volume to fill. The vapor actually sheeted up the front of the hive, hit the top, and rolled over to fill the box. Heating the magazine slowly for a longer time appears to work better heating it faster, for a shorter period of time. In any case, it appears the OA usually melts before it has a chance to sublimate, then it vaporizes.

If you over-heat OA, or heat it too quickly, it doesn't sublimate to OA vapor, it decomposes into carbon dioxide and water. Worst case, and it happened during some of my experiments, the OA melts and bubbles out as a liquid. Don't want that. I've read that using a typical propane-heated evaporator, only about half the OA actually becomes OA vapor. I'm pretty sure I'm getting a good deal of OA vapor, and when I'm done, the crack pipe is empty.

As for sealing up the hive, I closed up the entrance and slid my lid backward to close the notch in the inner cover, but other than that I didn't do anything special. Only a few hives have SBB's and those were closed. My hives are pretty tight now. When I was evaporating I'd usually see a bit of fog coming out around the entrance where the seal wasn't perfect. My test setup indicates that a little leakage isn't significant.

I left the hives closed up for 15 minutes.

I'd love a JB200 but it isn't in the budget, not this year at least. I'll stick with the crack pipe for now. The difficulty/problem with them is all in the heating really and not being able to see what's going on. And handling the OA. And breathing the vapor. That's all









George-


----------



## George Fergusson (May 19, 2005)

I appreciate your input Jim. I have this to say about that









Point 1 (volume of vapor) would appear to be an evaporator design issue. Largely.

Point 2 (satisfying puffs of smoke vs effectivness) would appear to be related to point 1 i.e., poorly designed or improperly operated evaporators (say that 3 times fast). From everything I've heard/read, OA drip IS more effective but the downside is it kills capped brood practically limiting its usage to those few times during the year when the hives are broodless, and it can only be done once a year without risk of killing the bees. In other words, if OA vapor is 1/3 as effective (per treatment) as OA syrup but can be safely (?) applied 3 (or more) times, it's a wash. Or perhaps a rinse.

Point 3 (health concerns) would appear to be a good point







Dripping OA-laced sugar syrup between the frames is simpler to do right, is easier, safer, and faster if you compare the time for one drip-session vs. 3-4 vaporizing sessions.

I did take the time to play with my aparatus and refine it based on my observations. I'm not certain I've got everything working just right yet, but I'm closer. Using OA vapor has a lot of downsides, that is for sure.

George-


----------



## dickm (May 19, 2002)

I have 2 yards. I cleaned up 13 hives in one and went to the other. After 4 treatments they still drop 100 a day in the other yard of 7 hives.

I'm going to try agai with a rainy day and muffling the hive better.

Dickm


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

>One thing I don't know is how long a single treatement of OA vapor is "good for" i.e., how long a single treatment will affect the mites. 

Axtmann in another link suggested that the treatment is viable for forty days.

>I had trouble getting effective dispersement with the crack pipe type of evaporator. Maybe you are having the same problem. I now use the JB200 and it works well for me.

Exactly what happened to me, I much prefer the JB200.

>I think by Marion Ellis, someone correct me
if I am wrong about "who") in a very detailed
workshop in the beeyard on OA about nearly
all the "fogging" approaches to OA 

MB and I attended the KHPA meeting last Spring that Marion gave his speak about his trials in using the trickle method the previous year. He was pleased with his findings but had not used any type of vapor or "fogging", nor had he done any misting.

I gave him a hive top plex box with attached crack pipe. He was going to do some testing with it as well as the JB200 that Heilyser had sent him. If he had the same results with the crack pipe as I did, I would doubt that he would be very impressed with the treatment. In any case I doubt that he would have had any results to post at EAS about the effectivness of OA as that would have been too soon in the year to know.

>I'd love a JB200 but it isn't in the budget, not this year at least. I'll stick with the crack pipe for now. The difficulty/problem with them is all in the heating really and not being able to see what's going on. And handling the OA. And breathing the vapor. 

I hope your budget improves, it's still a world of getting what you pay for but I found it very easy to justify the expense when compared to chemicals, loosing my bees, or my health. With the JB200 and a twenty foot length of extension cord I have no health concerns using OA.

>Dripping OA-laced sugar syrup between the frames is simpler to do right, is easier, safer, and faster if you compare the time for one drip-session vs. 3-4 vaporizing sessions.

That's a kool-aid I'm not ready to swallow, nor let my bees either. The damage to the internals of the bees by having to eat it is surely detremental to their health. The liquid pouring into the cells with the eggs and larva is going to kill the contents of the cells, and the fact that the liquid does not cover the entire hive like the vapor, makes it easy to see that there is not complete coverage of the interior.

BTW, I spoke to a commercial keeper here that runs 10,000 hives, he is using the trickel method now. Last year he lost almost all of his hives, he was down to 600 last spring. The chems completely quit on him.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

The practical side of me sees that the Europeans who were trickling ten years ago are now vaporizing. The ones that weren't using it ten years ago are now trickling. The ones that are not or were trickling say you shouldn't do it more than once a year because of how hard it is on the bees. The ones that are vaporizing say you can treat as many times as they want without noticablely affecting the adult bees.

Which would you want to use?


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> Europeans who were trickling ten years ago 
> are now vaporizing.

Has anyone documented the reasons why speciific
beekeepers and reseachers "switched"? 

You'd think that someone would have distilled 
the issues down in a form that could be utilized 
here in the USA. If what you say is true, we are
wasting time and money on work that merely follows
a path already blazed.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>If what you say is true, we are
wasting time and money on work that merely follows
a path already blazed. 

Axtman keeps saying almost exactly that "we are wasting time and money on work that merely follows a path already blazed."

Trickling is what they were doing a decade ago and gave up for vaporizing because trickling was too hard on the bees.


----------



## Walts-son-in-law (Mar 26, 2005)

Alienor is a German beekeeper. We (Walt and I) have discussed OA with her in the past. I will contact her about passing along lessons learned. From our discussions, it appears that the German beekeepers using OA are using mist or vapor. Apparently OA vapor has been the official recommended method for several years.

HOWEVER...

She did mention that she does not use vapor as there have been known cases of OA induced kidney cancer in Germany. 

OA is easily absorbed through all bodily tissues. She prefers to use a aerosol mist as eye protection, a standard half-face organic nuisance mask (she mentioned 3M 8825), rubber gloves, and full-coverage clothing will greatly reduce the risk.

As a long-time member of the Safety Commitee at work, I would recommend that anyone using this product should perform a websearch for precautionary information.

The following is an excerpt from an MSDS I found:
http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/o6044.htm

" OXALIC ACID...

8. Exposure Controls/Personal Protection

Airborne Exposure Limits:
-ACGIH Threshold Limit Value (TLV) :
1 mg/m3 (TWA), 2 mg/m3 (STEL)

-OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL):
1 mg/m3

Ventilation System:

A system of local and/or general exhaust is recommended to keep employee exposures below the Airborne Exposure Limits. Local exhaust ventilation is generally preferred because it can control the emissions of the contaminant at its source, preventing dispersion of it into the general work area. Please refer to the ACGIH document, Industrial Ventilation, A Manual of Recommended Practices, most recent edition, for details.

Personal Respirators (NIOSH Approved):

If the exposure limit is exceeded, a half-face respirator with an organic vapor cartridge and dust/mist filter may be worn for up to ten times the exposure limit or the maximum use concentration specified by the appropriate regulatory agency or respirator supplier, whichever is lowest. A full-face piece respirator with an organic vapor cartridge and dust/mist filter may be worn up to 50 times the exposure limit, or the maximum use concentration specified by the appropriate regulatory agency or respirator supplier, whichever is lowest. For emergencies or instances where the exposure levels are not known, use a full-face piece positive-pressure, air-supplied respirator. WARNING: Air-purifying respirators do not protect workers in oxygen-deficient atmospheres.

Skin Protection:

Wear impervious protective clothing, including boots, gloves, lab coat, apron or coveralls, as appropriate, to prevent skin contact.

Eye Protection:

Use chemical safety goggles and/or full face shield where dusting or splashing of solutions is possible. Maintain eye wash fountain and quick-drench facilities in work area."


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> OA is easily absorbed through all bodily tissues...

Not as easily as is any/all forms of coumophos (Checkmite strips).

Check out the actual data from the EPA on just how
nasty coumophos is, how low-level exposure accumulates
over time, and how is has the nasty habit of
shorting out your basic neurological wiring harness.

Then tell me that you trust whatever gloves you
bought, but forget to use.









Heck, if an organophosphate pesticide is somehow
"safe" for beekeepers, I can't imagine too many
regulatory problems with OA fumes, which can at 
least be seen as a reminder to wear the proper respirator.

Regardless, I'd expect electric vaporizers to have
a generous cord length. "Crack pipes"? Well,
the name alone says volumes, doesn't it?


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Walt and Jim before heating up the discussion please go to the following site. I think it safes lots of time. Beekeepers in Europe working with OA at least since 1981 and I never heard about an accident. There is all kind of accidents with formic acid but not with OA when treating bees against mites. 


http://www.apis.admin.ch/en/krankheiten/docs/saeuren/os_anwendersicherheit_e.pdf


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

..She did mention that she does not use vapor as there have been known cases of OA induced kidney cancer in Germany.

She probably mixes it up with kidney stones. Eating to many vegetables containing OA (Rhubarb, Spinach, Beans and many others) can produce kidney stones. 

Im not even wearing a mask, I work with a 6 meter (approx 18ft) extension cord and stay away from the hives during the evaporation. By the way, the hive must be totally sealed when evaporating OA otherwise the treatment will not work. As soon as you can see acid smoke there is something not 100% right.


----------



## Alienor (Mar 16, 2005)

@axtmann:
no, I don't mix it up with kidney stones...
And if you don't wear a mask while evaporating you are taking a giant risk on your health.
Not today, not tomorrow, but soon.
I know 5 cases of OA-induced kidney cancer. All persons were professional beekeepers and started working with OA vapor mid/end of the 80ies. It took 5-9 years to get sick and only 2 more years to die including surgery and chemotherapy...
Accidents with formic acid seem to be bad but they have only short-time consequences.
Accidents with OA are much more dangerous because of their long-time working in your body.

The experiences of the swiss institute in Liebefeld are the best documents für safe use of OA in the internet.

They recommend 3 methods of use:

1. Spraying a3%solution of OA/water on every single frame in winter if there is NO BROOD.
3-5ml per frame in very fine drops; best sprayer are this bottles which can be pumped up with air to make pressure (I don't know the right word for this).
For safe use you shall wear glasses, rubber gloves, and avoid ANY contact of the liquid with your skin.

This method can be used more than one time per winter.

2. Dripping a 3%solution of OA in a sugar/water 1:1mix.
Also ONLY in times when there is NO BROOD inside the hive.
Also 3-5 ml per frame covered with bees=30-50ml per hive.
This method can be used only ONE TIME because the winterbees can't stand it a second time.
Experiences were made that with a 2. application the winter losses increase to 50%......
To use with glasses, rubber gloves, etc.

3. Evaporating OA with heat, about 1-2g per hive.
The hive has to be sealed all around for 10 min.
It's highly recommended to wear a P3 mask as minimum .Also to wear glasses, rubber gloves, and to avoid ANY contact with the OA.


Method 1 is affording a lot of time but seems to be safe for bees and beekeeper. Because it doesn't work inside capped brood cells it is only effective in winter. Otherwise you will have to do the spraying about every 3-4 days in 21 days=one brood cycle.

Method 2 is useful only for a very last treatment in midwinter because the bees are not able to tolerate a 2nd or 3rd procedure. There are investigations persisting to find the reason...

Method 3 is safe for bees and beekeeper IF YOU TAKE CARE FOR YOUR HEALTH. Don't use it without wearing a P3 mask!!!!!
You can use the method around the year and as often as you think to need it.
The vapor also does NOT work in capped brood cells so you have to do the treatment every 3-5 day in one whole brood cycle.
80% of the mites are constantly in the capped cells so with only one treatment you get only very few....
The method is not practicable for hives with open/mesh bottom board because the hive has to be sealed that no vapor can come out. If done right you have a kind of very fine white "snow" inside the hive and on the bees.

My own method is is also an improved Swiss method but not official recommended yet.
I use OA mist made by an ultrasonic mist generator from a 3% OA/water solution. The mist is blown into the hive with the warm air of a hair dryer.
Because the mist is higher in temperature (40-42°C)than the bees and the hive it will condense and cover quickly the bees and the frames.
So my open bottom boards can stay open.
In most cases there is no mist to be seen coming out of the hives through the bottom boards before 5 min are gone.
If earlier than the population of the hive is smaller as usual....
In normal case (hive with 2 deeps) 4-5 min are enough to take in a working amount of OA; for splits or single deeps 2-3 min are enough:
The mist generator makes 1500ml /h = 25ml/min.solution to mist
1ml=1g
3%=0,75g/min. OA 
So in 5 min there is a theoretic amount of 3,75g OA input to the hive. 
Practically there is only about 2g Input because about 50% of the mist condenses in the tube and runs back into the maschine (we measured it).
Treatment is done from upper side of the hive; we prepared an extra-cover for the tube.
Standard cover down, special cover on, machine start, let go 5 min, machine off, special cover off, standard cover on, ready, the next one, please... 
This works fast, but not fast enough, so we're constructing a machine with a stronger mist generator and more tubes to treat 4-6 hives in one time but this isn't ready yet.
This treatment has to be repeated 4-5 times in one brood cycle because also the mist doesn't work inside capped brood cells.
I started with this method just this summer and have still no experience with it as a winter treatment.
I watched a nice increasement of mite fall till about 2 weeks after the treatment period.
Than mite fall decreases to 1 mite/week.
Last 4 weeks natural mite fall INCREASES again because of re-invasion from other hives in the neighbourhood.
So in my area we're expecting first night frosts in 2-3 weeks than I will repeat the complete treatment.

I wear a P2 mask (against aerosols), glasses, rubber gloves and a protection suit while treating the bees!
Naturally that is uncomfortable, but my health is the most important thing in my life.
OA is a very dangerous stuff and I prefer to be overprotected instead of underprotected.


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

Thanks Alienor for your imput! 
beekeepers are famous for taking chances with the handling of chemicals. Many never even read labels. They read lists like this one and think. Those guys are using OA without protection and they are not dead yet.
Takes a while for problems to show up. Sometimes many years! 
Especially when the group is small like beekeepers.
Years ago I bought a 10 color parafin wax dipping tank and starting making and selling dip & carve candles in the beekeeping off season. Found some information on the internet but not a huge amount. Then I was asked to carve candles at an attraction in Branson, Missouri at a place called Silver Dollar City. Was a bunch of fun. Each day we went into a huge wardrobe department and picked out clothes from the 1800 time period. To make a long story short I found out they might have to close down the candle carving as candle carvers were dying from a rare form of cancer from *long* term breathing of parafin wax fumes around the country. My outfit sits drawing dust!

5 cases in a small group of commercial beekeepers of the same cancer after using the same type chemical would give me cause for concern if using OA.
Chemicals are dangerous for the simple reason not a lot is known about long term use until people start dying.
From the posts I have read less than 50% of beekeepers using OA take any king of protective measures. I am glad Alienor had the guts to speak up! Put your mask on Axtmann! Why take a chance?


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

I would concur with Bob on the less than 50% number. I used to do auto body and human nature drives young and not so young, males to take huge chances with vapors!! 

Guys in paint booths without masks was not an uncommon sight. Or dust masks!!

I use the approriate mask even when cutting treated lumber. And use supplied air for any painting.

Be safe.................


----------



## Aspera (Aug 1, 2005)

Oxalic acid does in fact cause permanent, irreversible kidney damage even in relatively low doses. This is the reason that the consumption of rhubarb leaves can make you sick. Naturally, organophosphates also present many risks. Once OA has an EPA approved label with specified precautions, then I will feel a little more eager to give it a try. Apparently Germany has already started developing such guidelines.


----------



## Bob Russell (Sep 9, 2003)

Aspera
New Zealand has approved guidlines for own use of oxalic acid.

http://tinyurl.com/ak4n5


----------



## Robert166 (Mar 12, 2005)

Well does it do any damage to the SHB? If it is that potent maybe the SHB will be affected? Never tried it but I sure am thinking about it.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

A discussion from a year ago;
http://www.beesource.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000207#000000

My reply;
>What is the brand and model of your respirator? $25.00 sounds like a good price.
It is a Survivair bought from:
Galeton 1.800.221.0570 www.galeton.com 

Item # Discription
9731M Silicon half mask medium- 24.95
9743 -organic vapor cartridge--- 8.95
9748 -N95 filter for cartridge-- 1.95
9749 -Filter retainer----------- 1.95

OK, it was thirty eight and change, still a good deal for the real deal.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

Bill
I would be interested to hear the reason for the large hive losses you mentioned in your post, as experienced by the commercial beekeeper (all but 600 out of 10,000.New Zealand has three organic acids approved for use (to a code of practice).Formic,oxalic & thymol.
Regards
Bob.

--------------------
BOB

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 79 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Sep 2003 

BULLSEYE BILL 
Field Bee 
posted October 09, 2005 09:01 PM 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brent Barkman said the chems quit working and he lost his hives. Now he is trying OA in the trickle method. He was running 6000, and lost all but 600 last winter. This year he bought a few and split intensivly up to 10000 getting ready for tha almond pollination season.

--------------------
Bullseye Bill


----------



## Terry G (Feb 6, 2005)

I can't seem to find a link to web site for the JB200 Oxalic evaporator 

Please help me.


----------



## Joseph Clemens (Feb 12, 2005)

http://www.members.shaw.ca/orioleln/Vaporizer.htm


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

Bill,
600 into 10,000 is a nice split. I would say the Barkman family bought a bunch of hives! Most likely from the Horace Bell sell out. Brent's family could well run 10,000 hives but Brent hardly leaves his office. Told us at the KHPA meeting we had at his farm that he personally only had around 20 hives and did not really have the time to care for those.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

Yeah, I said he said he bought some. I tried to do some quick calculating while we were talking but couldn't quite figure how many times he would have to split each to get to that figure. He's keeping quite a few nucs here in Marion county in different yards, up to 100 per yard. 

Guess he's getting out more since he and his boy are doing all the local work. He has three full timers up north and hires some seasonal workers too. He's NEVER in the office when I call, I have to call his cell to talk to him. Things change huh?


----------



## franc (Jan 7, 2003)

Shoot I didn't realize the health risks with using O/A Alienor, if thats the case then O/A or Formic Acid may not be safe to use at all.Ive read where heating O/A contverts the O/A into Formic Acid so maybe Formic Acid is the cause.I personally don't feel check mite or Apistan is safe for humans either.Whats a beekeeper to do.


----------



## David VanderDussen (May 3, 2005)

franc;
Formic acid is safe in that there are no long term health concerns. The only concerns are at point of contact (inhalation, dermal, eyes) where it can burn tissue. It does not cause cancer, or any mutations. There are no concerns for pregnancy. It does not accumulate in the body. We had to document all this for the EPA to register Mite-AwayII formic acid pads. Mite-AwayII comes with the formic acid already soaked into the pad so there is no handling liquid acid. You'll be O.K. 

David v.


----------



## MichaelW (Jun 1, 2005)

I think, the OA only converts to Formic Acid if it is heated to "thermal decomposition" while "sublimation" of OA vaporizes into OA. Don't have any idea how much heat it takes to get OA to thermal decomposition.


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

"Formic acid is safe in that there are no long term health concerns"
"you will be o.k."

Time will tell. Always does!

As a small orchard owner its always the applicator that gets the health problems. Strong chemicals and acids are not what we need being exposed to. 

Sadly formic acid, OA , thymol, fluvalinate, chomaphos and other chemicals have become a part of beekeeping practice.

If one reads the above post"OA interperting the facts" from the start you quickly realize risks have shown up with OA. If you go back to beesource several years ago the promoters of OA swore to us no risks were involved. We now know different!

Takes time for problems to show up. 

The thing most beekeepers think is " it is always the other guy which has health problems" 

I had a close friend taken by throat cancer in the prime of his life because he would not wear a respirator while spraying his apple orchard. He always told me he got upwind from the spray. Stay out of the drift and you will be O.K. he told me.

His doctor confirmed the cause of his cancer was breathing the sssspray chemical as other apple spray applicators had the same form of cancer in the same place caused by not wearing the proper respirator.

I grow organic.

"What we do not know is so vast it makes what we do know seem absurd" Bob Harrison


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> Formic acid is safe in that there are no long 
> term health concerns.

This seems a somewhat irresponsible view for
someone who, in essence, wants to sell formic
acid to beekeepers.

Perhaps this is a valid statement when using
Canadian "standards of safety", but the general
view in the USA and other countries is a little
different:

It is a suspected mutagen, may cause long-term
liver and kidney damage. (The use of the
terms "suspected" and "may" are the sort of
watered-down language you get from any
government that is not provided with a truckload
of dead bodies, each accompanied by a coroner's
report listing the specific substance at hand
as the sole cause of death.)

Here's the view from New Jersey, just as an
example:
http://www.state.nj.us/health/eoh/rtkweb/0948.pdf 

Low level exposure to fumes, and even occasional
exposure to "direct contact" appear to be
considered to have specific long-term risks.

I don't think is is fair to pooh-pooh the
long-term effects when we simply have no good
model for the sort of exposure a beekeeper
would subject himself to in handling and
deploying Mite-Away. If anyone agreed that
there were *NO* long term effects, the 
instructions would be much more simple than
they are - something akin to "try not to get
any on your skin".

[ October 11, 2005, 08:40 AM: Message edited by: Jim Fischer ]


----------



## George Fergusson (May 19, 2005)

>>I think, the OA only converts to Formic Acid if it is heated to "thermal decomposition"

I'm no chemist so I can't say, but I've read that OA breaks down upon over-heating into CO2 and water, not formic acid. This could account for people experiencing poor results with vaporization as the byproducts of over heated OA are harmless to bees.

George-


----------



## MichaelW (Jun 1, 2005)

here's where I got that

"Hazardous Decomposition : Thermal decomposition can produce irritating and hazardous fumes including formic acid, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide."

from: http://www.chemistrystore.com/ChemicalMSDS/Oxalic.pdf

I'm no chemist either


----------



## David VanderDussen (May 3, 2005)

Hi Jim and Bob;

Here is the link to the data tables for registering a biopesticide: 
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/biopesticides/regtools/guidelines/biochem_gdlns.htm

FYI Mite-AwayII had to meet Tier 1 toxicity data, due to it's chemical properties. 
All data submitted had to be generated and documented to meet EPA standards. Click on the links in the biopesticide table for those standards. I don't know what the source of the data was for the NJ document.

Also, Canadian requirements were quite different and in a different format. The registrations went through totally seperately, submitted to the respective agencies three months apart. 

NOD Apiary Products has taken the responsible route of properly registering a formic acid product, formulated to be as safe as possible, and make it available to the beekeeping community. Franc seemed quite concerned about the situation so, based on what I know from all the work done for the registration process, I thought I should respond. It is in the context of using the Mite-AwayII formulation for treating beehives, with the label being followed, not any other method.

Oxalic acid will probably have to go through the same EPA biopesticide process before it can be used legally in the US.

Bob, Mite-AwayII is in the process of organic pesticide registration. It could not be initiated until the EPA registration was completed. They are two separate processes. Hopefully it will also be completed soon! 

regards,
David v.


----------



## franc (Jan 7, 2003)

Without atleast experimenting with some alternatives theres really no way that an effective treatment for mites will ever be found.Honey from bees treated with any chemical shouldn't be sold on the market.


----------



## George Fergusson (May 19, 2005)

>>here's where I got that

That's a lot more impressive data sheet on oxalic acid than I was looking at.

George-


----------



## jean-marc (Jan 13, 2005)

Terrt Gr:

You can call at 250-656-8727. You need to sen payment first $80 Cdn each. That includes shipping costs. 

You can also try:
www.members.shaw.ca/orioleln

Jean-Marc


----------



## nursebee (Sep 29, 2003)

Marion Ellis was the presenter on this at EAS. I heard him speak inside but not out in the yard. His comments prompted me to stay away from Apistan and Coumaphos (anyone want to buy the rest of it?)

90% effective via trickling
fumigation also worked on tracheal mites
worked better when hive was broodless

Interesting talk on here about kidney cancer. If you read the MSDS it seems to indicate that the kidneys get blocked up with calcium deposits if it gets in your bloodstream. This would be kidney failure from OA not cancer. What else were those beekeepers playing with??? 5 beekeepers with CA of kidney that used OA does not prove OA was the cause. Kidney cancer is not that common. I am a nurse that works the transplant floor and my wife is a nurse that works the kidney failure floor.

Another note on the Ellis lecture: his solution strength appears to be twice that of the Canadian guidelines referenced in the Nov 2005 ABJ

OA has been used for a while by people other than beekeepers. My brother (an ED nurse) lives on the water and sails. Many folks use OA to clean boats and the community is not a hotbed of OA problems.


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

Joe,

"What else were those beekeepers playing with"


Not a problem if you want to use OA, smoke unfiltered cigarettes or whif OA.

But the list should know that those which have posted on beesource that OA is *safe* and use *Germany as an example* that we are now hearing of five beekeeper deaths from a person in Germany. All used OA and all had the same form of problem.


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Bob I would say all beekeepers in Germany must die soon or later. The same with the rest of the humans they all must die soon or later. 

If someone told you 5 German beekeepers past away because of OA ask this person for the name of the 5 beekeepers and the town where the lived. 

IMO I think this special person told you a joke.


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

"IMO I think this person told you a joke".

I think you should address the post addressed to you such as the Alienor post on THIS thread dated Oct.9, 2005.(page 1)

She addressed the information to you but got no reply.
Will be standing by waiting for your reply to her.


----------



## Robert Brenchley (Apr 23, 2000)

We're talking about a substance which is openly on sale as as woodbleach; I wonder what proportion of the total production isused by beekeepers? OK, it's a poison, and I don't think any of these substances is really safe. But is there any confirmation of these deaths, or any evidence that any other deaths have been linked to oxalic? 

I wouldn't use the vapour myself,as I don't see how I could be sure that I wasn't going to inhale it. But I don't currently see a problem with trickling, provided sensible precautions are used.

[ November 13, 2005, 02:44 PM: Message edited by: Robert Brenchley ]


----------



## JJ (Jun 22, 2004)

Hi yall, If oa is not approved and it could be bad for the beekeepers health why is this even being discussed? I also see Mr. Ellis name on this subject, if he is saying stay away from Apistan and checkmite why would oa even be brought up by him. Take care JJ


----------



## jean-marc (Jan 13, 2005)

I cannot speak for Mr. Ellis but Varroa is resistant to checkmite and apistan, so that seems like a good reason to stay away. So now what Apilife-Var (too cold now)or unregistered products like Amitraz (pretty sure there is resistance. Formic can be a good choice and so is OA. Europeans have been using it for 10+ years with success. I'm pretty sure it can be used in organic honey production, at least in Canada anyways. OA is inexpensive and relatively safe to the applicator, especially liquid applications. Fumigation of OA is somewhat hazardous to the applicator especially in a commercial situation.

JJ, beekeepers can, will and have used OA for sometime now. Sharing of information and technics will benefit all regardless of what the regulators say. 

Jean-Marc


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I have spoken to Dr. Ellis on the matter. Concern over people inhaling the vapor is why he is pursuing the trickle method.


----------



## Aspera (Aug 1, 2005)

I'd be interested to see some writing about the trickle method, especially if it includes mite counts, honey production figues and honey OA levels (I'm not being sarcastic). If anyone has English translation info on this, then please post it or PM me.


----------



## MichaelW (Jun 1, 2005)

research of oxalic acid trickling can be found by doing a search on
http://scholar.google.com/


----------



## Aspera (Aug 1, 2005)

If it were a snake, then it would have bit me..


----------



## shoefly (Jul 9, 2004)

In toxicology, the pathway of exposure definitely makes a difference in terms of causing known adverse health effects. For many chemicals, the intake path through the respiratory system, lungs and diffusion into the blood stream has very limited barriers. In other words, many chemicals can easily enter the body through the lungs. Oxalic acid vapor probably follows that pathway. 

Interestingly, if ethylene glycol (Anti-freeze) enters the body it is metabolized into oxalic acid. When oxalic acid builds up in the body it reacts with calcium to form insoluble crystals. The crystals can deposit in small blood vessels, damaging brain and renal tubule cells (kidney cells). This condition is called Oxalosis (calcium oxalate deposition). 
Too high of a dose of ascorbic acid (Vitamin C) is endogenously converted to oxalate and can also cause Oxalosis.
Apparently, a diet containing radishes increased urinary excretion of calcium oxalate. ...and the the disclaimer as always is: more research is needed.

I haven't done a comprehensive search on the toxicology of oxalic acid vapor but oxalic acid must not be considered all that toxic. It is allowed in household products such as cleaners and rust removers. One of them is BarkeepersFriend. It contains 10% oxalic acid dihyrate.


----------



## Antero (Jan 9, 2005)

Aspera this might help you 
http://www.honeycouncil.ca/users/folder.asp?FolderID=3254

Terry


----------



## drobbins (Jun 1, 2005)

Hello All,

I just started my first hive from a package last spring and didn't see any mites all summer
I first started seeing them in september, and the numbers were low. in a 4 or 5 day natural drop I'd see maybe 25~30, so less than 10 a day
I was debating whether to treat at all
well I had made up a crack pipe and took the 3 inch leftover piece from cutting down a deep to a medium and a piece of plexiglass and made up a vaporizing rig.
in testing it I was dissapointed, poor distribution of the vapor and lots of it condensing in the end of the pipe
so I went in with a buddy and got a JB 200
huge difference
it made a lot more vapor, really to the point where it made be worry a bit about using it on the bee's (am I gonna kill em?)
so I gassed em with the JB 200 this past sunday and just pulled the sticky board
there must be 300 mites there
I'm impressed 
and to be honest, I was nervous enough about the whole process I skimped on the dose a bit
so, aside from the health concerns (I really don't see how it can be a problem when you plug it in and walk away from it) the effectivness seem pretty impressive to me

Dave


----------



## Dave W (Aug 3, 2002)

drobbins . . . 

Your PRE-TREATMENT count was about 10 per day and your treatment killed 300 mites. That sound GREAT!

But . . .
If there are MANY, MANY more mites left in the hive, how will you know? If you killed 300 of, say 10,000, thats NOT a very effective treatment.


----------



## drobbins (Jun 1, 2005)

DaveW said "If you killed 300 of, say 10,000,"

stop dude, you're scarin me  

I'm debating whether to treat again
like I said, I used less than the recommended dose
there's been discussion going on all summer about what level of natural fall indicates one needs to treat at all. I believe the generally accepted level is in the range of 50~60/day. so I was well below that level. now I believe those figures are used in connection with using hard chemical treatments where there are clear downsides to treating when not absolutely necessary. chemical contamination of wax and mite resistance. but those concerns don't exist with OA.
it's also my understanding that OA is not as effective as the hard chemicals so it would probably be wise to be more aggresive about treating when a lower level of mites is observed

isn't there some formula for estimating the total mite load from the daily natural fall? do you recall it?

Dave

oh yea, that was 300 mites in about 36 hours 

[ November 22, 2005, 12:09 PM: Message edited by: drobbins ]


----------



## George Fergusson (May 19, 2005)

>I believe the generally accepted level is in the range of 50~60/day.

I would maintain that with a natural drop of 50-60 mites per day, a hive is already in serious trouble, given that a mite population can increase 12-fold in the course of a single brood rearing season. Also, the impact on a hive of even a relatively small mite population is often unseen until it's too late.

>it's also my understanding that OA is not as effective as the hard chemicals

Which hard chemicals- the ones the mites are becoming resistant to, or the ones that poison your honey, your wax, and your bees?









"Effective" is a relative and in some cases, irrrelevant notion. There are a lot of factors involved in an "effective" treatment almost to the point where what you're treating with is secondary i.e., when you treat, how often you treat, mite population, etc. I think under the right circumstances, OA is a VERY effective treatment.

>isn't there some formula for estimating the total mite load from the daily natural fall?

There are opinions. It's a moving target, literally. It depends on the time of year, the weather, the temperature, the kind of bees and whether they're more or less "hygenic", whether there's brood in the hive or not, etc.

About the only thing the researchers can agree on is that mite fall is largely dependent on the number of mites in the colony and largely indpendent of the number of bees in the colony. Not totally indpendent, but *largely* independent. This is a good thing in that it allows us to consider mite drop counts more or less irrespective of the number of bees in our hives, as opposed to opening brood and counting mites, or doing a sugar or ether roll where you then have to estimate what percentage of your total population your bee sample represents.

The rule of thumb I'm using at this time and will continue to use until such time as I find a better thumb is (quoting from my source):

"..the ratio of live to dead mites will change dramatically between periods when bee brood is present or absent. However, since the ratios were shown to be stable within the periods, the mite population can be estimated throughout the year by multiplying the daily mite drop by (approximately) 250–500 or 20–40 when brood is absent or present, respectively."

One phenomena that is unexplained to my satisfaction so far is the oft-seen explosion in mite drop count numbers in the fall leading one to ask "Where did all the mites come from all of a sudden?"

George-


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>One phenomena that is unexplained to my satisfaction so far is the oft-seen explosion in mite drop count numbers in the fall leading one to ask "Where did all the mites come from all of a sudden?"

I agree. Although you can explain some of it with the following:

o The population of bees is dropping as the field workers die off.

o The mites that were hiding (and reproducing) in the brood are not hiding anymore.

o The bees are robbing out crashing colonies and bringing back mites.

But, IMO, that still doesn't quite seem good enough to explain that explosion. It's not just an increase. An explosion is about the only word that seems adequate.


----------



## drobbins (Jun 1, 2005)

George,

somehow the formula you posted sounds backwards to me.
take DaveW's SCARY number of 10,000 mites in a hive
then take the high range for your multipliers

10,000/500 = 20 mites/day for brood absent
10,000/40 = 250 mites/day for brood present

it seems to me that during a broodless period, more mites are available to fall out of the hive for whatever reason 

why, for a given mite load, would more fall out of the hive when brood is present?
I would think that very few of the mites inside the capped cells would "fall out"

Dave


----------



## George Fergusson (May 19, 2005)

>somehow the formula you posted sounds backwards to me.

It is TOTALLY counter-intuitive. You'd think the more free (phoretic) mites there are, the higher the drop counts would be.

The reason is that a sizable percentage of "natural" drop is actually due to mite mortality while in the cell and immediately after emerging (a result of grooming upon emergence and/or failure to catch a ride on a bee). Roughly 25% of the mites born in a cell don't make it to adulthood- the percentage is probably somewhat lower for drone brood and somewhat higher for worker brood. So look at it this way: When there is brood in the hive, a good number of the mites that end up on your sticky board were never really part of the "adult" mite population; so one mite goes in a worker cell to breed, and 2, maybe 3 live mites (the mother and one or more daughters) emerge along with 2-4 dead or immature mites. The numbers are different for drone brood: 1 mite in, 3, likely 4 live mites emerge, with 2-3 dead ones. When you have multiple mites entering the same cell to breed (which you do when brood rearing is slowing down and/or the mite/bee ratio is high), the mortality rate goes up considerably.

The phoretic phase of a mite's existence (3-10 days) is a comparatively safe experience for them. After emerging, they jump on a bee and slip in between the segments of the abdomen (the tergum) from which they are almost impossible to see and very difficult to dislodge. When there's no (or little) brood in a hive, all your mites are phoretic. Except for some grooming and natural attrition (a mite can mate 2-3 times, then they die), mite mortaliity is nil. There's a period when they're transferring from their host bee to the comb to find a cell to enter when they're more at risk of dropping off.

For these reasons, any factor you use to estimate mite populations when there is no brood (a big multiplier) would have to be reduced considerably (a small muliplier) when there is brood present.

It's enough to boggle the mind.

George-

[ November 22, 2005, 05:20 PM: Message edited by: George Fergusson ]


----------



## drobbins (Jun 1, 2005)

George,

dude, we just might have to give you the moniker of "Mr Mite"








you've certainly done the work and gotten a handle on what's going on

your comments are quite an eye opener
when I look at my sticky board, the mites that died from the OA are clearly larger than the ones I'd seen before
back in the summer when I wasn't seeing any, I was at a friends house one day when the state bee inspector was there
I told him I didn't see any mites on my bee's
he flipantly asked if I knew what they look like, then quickly backed down thinking he'd offended me
I told him he might be right, since I'd never seen one I might not know what they look like
but I was looking for them with a nice big magnifying loop, I was pretty sure I'd be able to see them if they were there
well, once I did begin to see them, I ws surprised how small they were
even with a nice magnifying loop they were hard to distinguish from litter on the sticky board

fast forward to current situation:

what I'm seeing now is different
the mites are clearly visible with the naked eye
obviously I was seeing imature mites before
hmm, very educational

Dave


----------



## George Fergusson (May 19, 2005)

>"Mr Mite"

Oh please!

>you've certainly done the work and gotten a handle on what's going on

I'm gaining on it. Not there yet, not sure where I'll be or what I'll do when I get there







Having fun though. I figure you can't know to much about the little buggers. I'm still chewing on the population explosion problem, which I'm coming to think is purely an effect of normal mite population growth and the time of year. We'll see.

>what I'm seeing now is different the mites are clearly visible with the naked eye obviously I was seeing imature mites before

Or something. You get used to spotting them.


----------



## drobbins (Jun 1, 2005)

George says "You get used to spotting them"

nope, these are clearly larger

Dave


----------



## Dave W (Aug 3, 2002)

drobbins . . .

>stop dude, you're scarin me . . .
GOOD!








Please do MORE mite couts NOW!
If your pre-treatment count was 10, and you kill some mites, AND your treatment was EFFECTIVE, you should have FEWER mites that you started with. Hence, mite drop (sometime) AFTER treatment should be less than your "10".

If treatment is NOT effective, you may not kill any (or just a few) mites AND/OR after-treatment drop will be the same or probably INCREASE.

Please do MORE counts.

thanx


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>If your pre-treatment count was 10, and you kill some mites, AND your treatment was EFFECTIVE, you should have FEWER mites that you started with. Hence, mite drop (sometime) AFTER treatment should be less than your "10".

If you do the treatment when there is no brood, I agree. If there is brood perhaps "effective" should be measured by no increase instead of a drop. If you didn't kill any you'd actually keep getting more. If you did, the emerging mites might still make the natural drop stay steady.

Of course, I think the only real solution is keep them from reproducing so fast.


----------



## drobbins (Jun 1, 2005)

I'm afraid if I do mite counts now I'll still be seeing the residual effect of the OA
I think what I'm gonna do is treat again tommorrow
we're supposed to have a 60 degree day and then fall off to colder temps so I thought I'd give em another shot before it gets cold 
then wait 10 days till the following weekend to do another count 
I skimped a bit on the dose of the first treatment and I want to give em the full dose

Dave


----------



## George Fergusson (May 19, 2005)

>Hence, mite drop (sometime) AFTER treatment should be less than your "10"

We'd like to think so. I certainly thought so after I treated with OA, which is what caused me to start this thread in the first place! I've learned a lot since then....

Just remember that during the height of brood rearing (and hence, mite rearing), at any given time upwards of 50-70% of your total adult mite population are in cells reproducing.

It's a scary picture. Say you have 5000 mites in your hive, 2000 are phoretic and 3000 are in cells reproducing. You're seeing 24 hour drops of 100-123 mites or so. In a panic, you treat and knock down 2000 mites! Wow! There are now 3000 mites in your hive, in cells reproducing. Let's say that 2 mites emerge from each cell, the original mother, and a new mated daughter, over the course of the next 12 days. Now you have 6000 mites in your hive. Over the course of the previous 12 days you'll have seen a significant mite drop too, perhaps 3-4000 mites or more and you might attribute this to the lingering effects of your treatment, but in reality, they're just immature females that failed to mate and emerged either dead, or infertile.

So all in all, 12 days after treatment you've found 4-5000 dead mites on your bottom board, and you have 1000 more mites in your hive than you did when you started. Your daily drop counts are now on the order of 150 mites or so. You scratch your head, and wonder what's going on.

I just pulled numbers outa my hat. It's all hypothetical but not necessarily improbable. Don't try and make me eat them, it was just an exercise









>Of course, I think the only real solution is keep them from reproducing so fast.

What he said.


----------



## Dave W (Aug 3, 2002)

>I just pulled numbers outa my hat . . .
Can you reword your statment USING my ACTUAL NUMBERS? (see Apistan tmt) Im not trying to make you eat them I kinda think we are all saying the same thing. Just want to make sure.

In a way, it sounds like "if you kill some mites, treament was effective". If so, I dont agree. Just killing "some mites" (5,10% may seem like a lot) may NOT be enough. This may be why we often hear it declaired, "this or that" treatment is a good one. When, in fact the treatment is very ineffective. Just killing a small percentage of the TOTAL MITES IN HIVE does not equate to "a good treatment".

[ November 23, 2005, 03:57 PM: Message edited by: Dave W ]


----------



## dickm (May 19, 2002)

I treated with O/A last year and it seemed very effective. This year, I didn't get the same post treatment drops. Anyone else note this?

Dickm


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Did you have the same pretreatment drops?


----------



## George Fergusson (May 19, 2005)

>Can you reword your statment USING my ACTUAL NUMBERS?

I'll give it a try after some more thought.


----------



## dickm (May 19, 2002)

>>>Did you have the same pretreatment drops?<<<

Yes, just about the same. I think I'm going to try for a mid Jan/Feb treatment if I get a warm day.

Dickm


----------

