# Fumagilin-B Honey?



## jbeex (Dec 26, 2014)

Hi all,

I'm wondering if some honey I have is safe to eat...

As a new beekeeper in 2012, I tried to leave my bees with as much honey as possible in the hive bodies. At the recommendation of the instructor of my bee course I also fed sugar syrup in the fall and treated the hives with Fumagilin-B. Over the winter the hives died. I didn't plan on getting any more bees, so in the spring of 2013 harvested what honey was left in the hive bodies (about 70lbs) and stored the old hives/frames. Is this honey safe for consumption? Or is the risk of the Fumagilin-B contaminating it too great? Also, because the bees were fed sugar syrup, is this honey any good? It seems like such a waste to get rid of it all, but I also don't want to consume it if it isn't good/safe.

As another question, would the hive bodies/frames be safe to use...as they have now been stored for two winters and the colonies which previously inhabited them died (and I don't know why).

Thank you


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Don't prepare honey for sale or consumption that had been adulterated in any way. 
Feed to bees.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

...I would add feed it to bees early in the season when they are not storing honey...like in a box under a nuc with no stores.

You should also not be using frames that are in the hive at treatment time (i would except organic acids here) for extraction. This is probably the best reason to have brood boxes and honey supers as different sized boxes.

But fumidil is nasty stuff to a mammal....more than any other beekeeping related chemical you want to make sure this does not get eaten by a human. Birth defects are not a simple mistake that can be fixed.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

The downside of Fumidil is that it causes birth defects. The upside is it has a short half life. 

http://www.apidologie.org/articles/apido/abs/2004/03/M4007/M4007.html


----------



## missybee (Sep 6, 2014)

I would say the hive boxes and frames are safe to use, unless you think you had something nasty that killed the bees. Inspect them, clean them up you should be good to go. But I am still real new at this, so others might chime in with different opinions.

Yours might have died from mites, cold, etc. My beek neighbors (16 years doing it) lost theirs during last winter. So did a lot of beek down in temperate Maryland. Two commercial types lost 60% of their hives. We had a colder than normal winter. good old polar vortex. For us to hit -15 is rare and we hit that last winter.

This winter my bees are still flying around, yesterday we got up to 60, first winter with bees for me.

We put the foam board in front of the hives to block the wind, they are at the top of our sloped yard.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Michael Bush said:


> The downside of Fumidil is that it causes birth defects. The upside is it has a short half life.
> 
> http://www.apidologie.org/articles/apido/abs/2004/03/M4007/M4007.html


Michael, I've looked at that article...even reviewed it before posting 8 this thread.
that paper ONLY discusses the half life in a lab when exposed to light...and it discusses that the exposure to light is the cause of the rapid degregdation.

I see NOTHING in that paper (or that I could find easily elsewhere) that referenced the half life in terms in syrup/honey, stored by the bees in combs and in the dark. I'm have no clue if UV or other frequencies of light freely pass through cappings.

I think it is poor advice without more data on what fumidil does in syrup, in combs, and over time.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

How and when, what time of year, did you feed the fumidil-B? I would use it myself. Feeding it to a new colony is not a bad idea. 70 lbs is a lot of honey for a family to consume.

As far as using the equipment to house bees again, I would. Storing it for two Winters doesn't have detrimental effects on equipment. Is the comb still intact or have wax moths eaten it all up?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>I think it is poor advice without more data on what fumidil does in syrup, in combs, and over time.

My advice is not to use it... but the only reason it was ever approved was the short half life. At the time, the assumption was that it would be fed in the fall, long before harvest. I wouldn't eat any honey I thought possibly had fumidil in it at any time...


----------



## jbeex (Dec 26, 2014)

Thank you everyone...we'll feed it to the bees. I'd rather not risk it. Unfortunately my husband made a batch of mead with it, so I'll have to break the news to him 

Another question then...how would we go about feeding it to the bees? Since it is no longer in the comb. Should I just lightly heat it and put it in a frame feeder or hive top feeder in the fall? I would assume this is a better alternative to sugar water?

Thanks


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

Michael Bush said:


> The downside of Fumidil is that it causes birth defects.
> http://www.apidologie.org/articles/apido/abs/2004/03/M4007/M4007.html



Does anyone have a decent source for that?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

You can feed honey any way you feed syrup. In frame feeders it will need better floats if there aren't any, as they get caught in it easier, but in an inverted jar or inverted can it works just the same. I would not dilute it as it spoils too quickly if you do.

>Unfortunately my husband made a batch of mead with it, so I'll have to break the news to him

Just leave it in the sun for a year...


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Nabber86 said:


> Does anyone have a decent source for that?


You don't like the link?


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

sqkcrk said:


> You don't like the link?


No, I don't. Unless I am overlooking it, the link does not mention birth defects. 

http://www.apidologie.org/articles/a...007/M4007.html


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Mark, I suspect that Nabber's issue is that the link provided did not seem to mention birth defects - at least I found no mention of that.

However, here is a link that_ does _discuss fumagillin and human pregnancy:
http://aidsinfo.nih.gov/guidelines/...on-and-treatment-guidelines/324/microsporidia


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Also fumidil is listed here.
http://www.purdue.edu/ehps/rem/ih/terat.htm


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Here is a list of chemicals known to cause birth defects (Teratogens):

http://www.purdue.edu/ehps/rem/ih/terat.htm

The list is alphabetical and you will find it under "fumidil"

It is the reason it is illegal to use in beehives in the European Union, Australia, New Zealand and basically all of the "civilized" world except US, Canada, and the UK.

For that same reason, it is not allowed to be used on humans except under very specific conditions in all those places plus the US, Canada and the UK.

Again, under fumidil in the "f"s:
http://ehsrms.uaa.alaska.edu/CMS/Laboratory/ChemList/Chemical Teratogens F.pdf

It is known to block the development of blood vessels in humans (hence it's use on tumors). It is know to cause birth defects in rats and mice. They apparently did not think it appropriate to try the experiments on pregnant humans... thank goodness...

Try a search on:
Fumidil Teratogen


----------



## RudyT (Jan 25, 2012)

thanks for this thread. I got some "in case" but am glad I haven't used. Definitely don't want it stored in the hive.


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

deknow said:


> Also fumidil is listed here.
> http://www.purdue.edu/ehps/rem/ih/terat.htm


Thanks for the info. I googled fumidil + teratogen and what I found was underwhelming.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I believe that once it was decided it had too many risks associated with it for it to be approved for human use that very little testing or reporting was done. DES and thalidomide were disasters.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

There is an episode of Doc Martin where someone is experimenting with home made aspergilllis treatments...growing the fungus and making the pills.


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

deknow said:


> I believe that once it was decided it had too many risks associated with it for it to be approved for human use that very little testing or reporting was done. DES and thalidomide were disasters.


"Not approved for human use", says a lot more than "honey from a hive that was treated with fumagil, causes birth defects". 

Thalidomide = straw man. Thalidomide was prescribed for morning sickness. That is different from saying that eating residual levels of fumagil in honey from a hive that was treated will cause anywhere near the level of birth defects.

i think your tag line sums it up pretty well; objectivism.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I don't believe I ever said that it would cause birth defects.

You don't want to consume the stuff. When used as directed it won't contaminate honey.

When not used as directed, like honey/syrup stored by the bees during treatment is consumed by people, none of us has any idea what the exposure is, and I doubt anyone would look into it unless they suspected a problem.

I'm not trying to set up a straw man....I'm pointing out that some bad incidences had already occurred, and the data showed it to be far to dangerous to pursue human use.

It would be unlikely for anyone to notice a coronation between consuming a particular batch of honey and birth defects discovered months or years later unless it was happening a lot. Remember, as with thalidomide, there probably isn't any left in the system of mother or child when the problem is noticed.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

...perhaps you are missing the point (i don't think it has been stated plainly here), that originally fumidil was being developed for human use as it had great promise in controlling some kinds of tumors (as Michael said, it prevents blood vessels from forming).

It isn't a random substance that isn't approved for human use...it is a substance developed for human use that was found to be too dangerous to use because of the potential of birth defects.


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

deknow said:


> There is an episode of Doc Martin where someone is experimenting with home made aspergilllis treatments...growing the fungus and making the pills.


Home made experiment = objective? Really?
Somebody making fungus does not mean that fumaglin causes birth defects. 
I think Neil Degrasse would agree.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> When used as directed it won't contaminate honey.


Maybe if you had stated that before there would have been fewer people who read this Thread that assumed otherwise?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Doc Martin is a fictional show....it was a complete aside in a post that mentioned nothing about birth defects. It was notable to me as I've never seen another pop culture reference for anything of the sort before.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I don't think anyone ever asked that question. I was answering and giving some context to my answer to the question asked in the original post.

Before I made my first post in the thread, I looked at the study that Michael later referenced to see if there was an established half life of days or weeks that would make consuming the honey ok (depending on the metabolites). When I looked at it, it only talked about half life WRT photodegredation. From the original post I assumed that the honey was still in the comb, and I couldn't find any data at all to give any indication as to how long it would persist under these conditions.

Honestly Mark, if you have a question you want answered and you want me to answer it, then ask the question....


sqkcrk said:


> Maybe if you had stated that before there would have been fewer people who read this Thread that assumed otherwise?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Actually I thought about making the statement myself. But you and Michael were being so antifumidil and authoritative and all that I thought it best to keep quiet in case there was something I didn't know that I thought I did.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Doc Martins are shoes too. Just making a statement. I never heard of the TV Show.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

deknow said:


> Honestly Mark, if you have a question you want answered and you want me to answer it, then ask the question....


Hmmm. Any question?


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Well, almost any.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> Honestly Mark, if you have a question you want answered and you want me to answer it, then ask the question....


Okay. Why didn't you say that if used as directed it won't contaminate honey before now?

Which seems a silly and snarkey question to ask now, doesn't it?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

No one in this thread or in the original question even mentioned proper use. I was not trying to be evasive, I was trying to answer the specific question that was asked and was being discussed.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Actually, thalidomide shares properties with fumadil....both were thought useful because of their ability to suppress blood vessel growth..which is (i assume...just my own instinct) related to their both causing birth defects (antiangiogenic).


> Thalidomide
> Despite the therapeutic potential of Thalidomide
> Despite the therapeutic potential of anti-angiogenesis drugs, they can also be harmful when used inappropriately. Thalidomide is one such antiangiogenic agent. Thalidomide was given to pregnant women to treat nausea. However, when pregnant women take an antiangiogenic agent, the developing fetus will not form blood vessels properly, thereby preventing the proper development of fetal limbs and circulatory systems. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, thousands of children were born with deformities, most notably phocomelia, as a consequence of thalidomide use.[20] drugs, they can also be harmful when used inappropriately. Thalidomide is one such antiangiogenic agent. Thalidomide was given to pregnant women to treat nausea. However, when pregnant women take an antiangiogenic agent, the developing fetus will not form blood vessels properly, thereby preventing the proper development of fetal limbs and circulatory systems. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, thousands of children were born with deformities, most notably phocomelia, as a consequence of thalidomide use.[20]


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

When a question is posed following a barrage of intentionally and uninteionally made inaccurate and and insulting statements, it is more than a question and requires more than a simple answer.



Barry said:


> Well, almost any.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

From scientificbeekeeping.com



> The long residual life of fumagillin in honey has led to its being banned in several other countries, for fear of honey contamination. Be careful in its use not to treat when it is likely to be stored by the bees in honey for human consumption. Cummins (2007) cites its uses in human medicine, and possible genotoxic effects.


So I suppose there is some basis to think the half life might be long enough to be of concern when in h9ney?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> No one in this thread or in the original question even mentioned proper use. I was not trying to be evasive, I was trying to answer the specific question that was asked and was being discussed.


Okay.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

How do you all think the public would react if they found out that something that causes birth defects is commonly fed to bees and possibly could end up in their honey? Something that, because of that danger, is illegal to feed to bees in most of the "civilized" world. Something deemed too dangerous to use on humans as medicine. Do you think it would change their view of honey?


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Michael Bush said:


> How do you all think the public would react if they found out that something that causes birth defects is commonly fed to bees and possibly could end up in their honey? Something that, because of that danger, is illegal to feed to bees in most of the "civilized" world. Something deemed too dangerous to use on humans as medicine. Do you think it would change their view of honey?


That's a fair observation. Historically fumigillan was almost always a fall applied drug to treat nosema. With the emergence of nosema ceranae it's more difficult to say with certainty that it isn't being used by some during summer honey production. Honey commands a high price because it is perceived by the public as being a healthy natural sweetener. Beekeepers should never lose sight of this fact.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Since Fumagilin-B is not supposed to have any effects on Nosema ceranae, according to people who study these things, why is it still being used by beekeepers, taking into consideration that Nosema apis has been pretty much widely displaced by Nosema ceranae? Are there some anecdotally perceived observations by beekeepers which makes them think otherwise? Or what?


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> Since Fumagilin-B is not supposed to have any effects on Nosema ceranae, according to people who study these things, why is it still being used by beekeepers, taking into consideration that Nosema apis has been pretty much widely displaced by Nosema ceranae? Are there some anecdotally perceived observations by beekeepers which makes them think otherwise? Or what?


It's not? I thought ceranae had become the dominant strain and all the "drenches" were to try to control it at a time when bees wont take syrup. Personally I haven't used it in years and my nosema counts have stayed really low.


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

Michael Bush said:


> How do you all think the public would react if they found out that something that causes birth defects is commonly fed to bees and possibly could end up in their honey? Something that, because of that danger, is illegal to feed to bees in most of the "civilized" world. Something deemed too dangerous to use on humans as medicine. Do you think it would change their view of honey?


The EU bans all kinds of things based on emotions (neonics:lookout. Science is not a democracy were we get to vote with our feelings.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I can't sight any papers, but that's what I have heard from folks who keep track of things such as mite counts and Nosema and mortality. Bee researchers.


----------



## davidsbees (Feb 22, 2010)

For some reason I've had nosema numbers in the 20 M and feeding fumagillin has brought the numbers to 0 so I know it does work. I think with the drought the bees have been under stress all summer also with all the protein supplementation I've raised s great crop of mites adding to their stress. I also feed fumagillin in drivert lessening the chance of it getting in the honey along the same line as tylosn in drivert not in syrup. It is also sensitive to heat and time if you talk to the manufacter they will tell you to use it as soon as mixed and to store below 77 degrees.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

When did you re-sample after treating with Fumagilin, David? N. ceranae will go to zero on its own midSummer, according to folks at the BIP, bee informed partnership. Dennis van Engelsdorp's people.


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

sqkcrk said:


> When did you re-sample after treating with Fumagilin, David? N. ceranae will go to zero on its own midSummer, according to folks at the BIP, bee informed partnership. Dennis van Engelsdorp's people.


I just spent an hour at the BIP site looking for this information, I can't find anything other than two months oct and nov on a persons blog about nosema results, I read an article a few years ago where they were gathering the statistics and were going to publish it, but I have never seen any of this published. Do you know where they published it??
I'm looking for specifically regarding Northern beeks, which would be nice. I had to go back and find an old post that you had made about your results three years ago, they would seem to dispute the quote above.

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?260108-Addressing-High-Nosema-Counts&highlight=nosema



sqkcrk said:


> Today I got the Lab Report from USDA-ARS Beltsville. Two composite samples were taken from each of three yards. The results are as follows.
> 
> O'Niel Yd Sample #1-- Had an average of 6,650,000 Nosema Spores per Bee.
> Sample #2--Had an average of 900,000 Nosema Spores Per Bee
> ...


even Randy Oliver has waffled back and forth about if nosema c. reacted differently in the North(cold) vs South(warm), was kind of hoping the data they collected would address this.


----------



## davidsbees (Feb 22, 2010)

Sorry but I don't have much faith in BIP they came out bumbled around the yard took samples ( don't get me wrong good kids but not beekeepers ) first report more that a month later second report over 6 month. Not timely enough to take any action. I had them come out because I saw some unusual brood took samples but no answers. I have been doing my own nosema testing for three years now and was trying to believe that nosema is not a problem like some have said but this last year proved not the case. Did a small experiment treated half the drop just drivert the other half fumagillin and drivert. Big difference 0-500k in the treated 15-30 M untreated in three weeks. So treated every thing and saw a mark difference. One think I noticed in May -June bees were slow building and not taking syrup, nosema was the last thing on my mind.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>The EU bans all kinds of things based on emotions (neonics). Science is not a democracy were we get to vote with our feelings.

Certainly birth defects do stir up emotions... but the fact that Fumidil supresses blood vessel development is not in dispute...

This study showed that fumidil makes Nosema cerana worse:
http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.ppat.1003185


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

Michael Bush said:


> >
> This study showed that fumidil makes Nosema cerana worse:
> http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.ppat.1003185


I'm with davidsbees on this, I have done my own testing similar to his, I consistently get more honey per hive, less winter losses, and better spring clusters when I'm able to treat.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

The word from Eric mussen at WAS is that although the counts seem to bounce back, that the WI terms survival is greater.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Our bees looked pretty good this fall so I didn't spend any extra time nosema testing. The state testing results from the 3 yards that they tested were all negative for nosema. No fumigillan, or thymol....but plenty of HFCS. .


----------



## apis maximus (Apr 4, 2011)

davidsbees said:


> I also feed fumagillin in drivert lessening the chance of it getting in the honey along the same line as tylosn in drivert not in syrup. It is also sensitive to heat and time if you talk to the manufacter they will tell you to use it as soon as mixed and to store below 77 degrees.


Are you using tylosin as a "preventative" for AFB? Routinely? On all the hives?


----------



## davidsbees (Feb 22, 2010)

Actually I haven't used Tylosin in 4 years and TM in 20years except last spring to see if it would help with the odd brood but did nothing.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Nosema Cenanae will linger, where as APIs will decrease in summer


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

here is an older post from bee-l regarding the study that Michael Bush posted.

http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/...1=bee-l&9=A&J=on&d=No+Match;Match;Matches&z=4

I do think that the title of the study cited, "Nosema ceranae Escapes
Fumagillin Control in Honey Bees" is a bit over-the-top, given that their
own data showed that Nosema ceranae DID NOT Escape Fumagillin Control when
the proper dose was given. Neither did Nosema apis.


----------



## HiveAlive (Jul 10, 2014)

Whether Fumagillin does or doesn't work, there is an alternative. HiveAlive has been shown to maintain colony strength which keeps disease levels low including Nosema. Dr Hatjina, who carried out research into the efficacy of HiveAlive, will be speaking about it at the American Beekeeping Conference in Anaheim, CA this Friday. 
This study also included spore levels before and after treatment with fumagilin compared to control and HiveAlive colonies. For more info on her research, check out the following link and click on the read more buttons http://www.advancescience.com/hive-alive/scientific-data-validating-hivealive


----------

