# Possible recommended OA vaporizer dosage changes



## sc-bee (May 10, 2005)

This information may have already been shared or mentioned. I could not find it using a page search so I decided to share it here. Look for some articles on the subject in the future. See Below

Hi 
 I hope you are doing well amid the current situation. It is true that I have conducted some research here at the University of Florida that has shown the legal 1 g dose of OA per brood chamber to be completely ineffective. I conducted a follow up study to find the effective dose. We again confirmed that 1 g OA is totally useless and found that 2 g OA was better than no treatment, but not significantly better than 1 g. Treating colonies with 4 g did not appear to have negative effects on the health of honey bees, but it was not significantly better than treatment with 2 g. Thus, we can’t outright say that 4 g is better than 2 g, so the true best treatment is probably somewhere between 2-4 g. We have submitted this article for publication, but it has not yet been reviewed by other researchers.

All this said, I’ve been very careful not to make any recommendations of OA treatment, because telling beekeepers to quadruple their dose and that everything is going to be OK is not necessarily true. However, I do intend to take both articles (once the dose paper is published) to the EPA to advocate for a label change. I want OA vaporization to be effective for beekeepers because I feel that there are many positives to the treatment and the current dose does not appear to have any effect on the mites. However, until the label is changed I must only recommend that the label is the law.

Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can help in any way.

Best,

Cameron

Cameron Jack, Ph.D.
Lecturer and Distance Education Coordinator




Good morning 

I don’t mind you sharing our conversation on a bee forum. I would say that the current legal limit of vaporizing 1 g is totally worthless. I don’t necessarily mean that OA vaporization is a bust, because you start see some control at 2 g and a slightly better effect at 4 g. To be clear though, even after three rounds of treatment at 4 g once per week, we still had average mite loads of about 2 mites/100 bees. We started with high loads, so it did knock it down significantly, but we didn’t see the efficacy you would expect from something like amitraz. However, with resistance issues cropping up with amitraz, it is important to have a few more weapons in our arsenal. All that said, I am not recommending anything, just telling you our research findings. As I said earlier, we do plan to take our research to the EPA to advocate for a label change.

At this time, we are probably still getting our best control with amitraz, though we are starting to have some resistance issues ourselves. Thus, we use OA via trickle and vaporization during the winter and early spring. In Florida we don’t have much of a spring and jump quickly into summer, so if we still need a treatment in the spring before the nectar flows, we use thymol.

We really do try to practice what we preach and we use alcohol washes to sample our apiaries at least every other month to monitor Varroa populations. I feel strongly that frequent monitoring is a critical practice these days, especially after treatment, so you know if what you’ve applied is even working for you.


Best,
Cameron

Cameron Jack, Ph.D.
Lecturer and Distance Education Coordinato


----------



## sc-bee (May 10, 2005)

So I am trying to decide what schedule and regimen to use. I know many of you have shared your schedule but could you please add it to this thread for easy access? 

How Much?
How Often? 

And any other information you feel is pertinent....Thanks in advance.


----------



## Jack Grimshaw (Feb 10, 2001)

Do they have a broodless period in Fla?


----------



## JWPalmer (May 1, 2017)

I would do an OAV single application as soon as the supers come off. Count the mites. This is sort of your baseline. Hopefully it is near zero. Zap them about every two to three weeks and compare the mite drops. When you see a significant increase, say from 10 to 30, time to start a full program. Every three days seems to work best but sometimes that is impractical so at least every seven days until the mite counts drop to less than 10 again. The key is to never let the counts get high in the first place. Although I missed a few applications, the plan for me is essentially every weekend from August through October, about 13 applications. Plus the Thanksgiving and Christmas ones. So far, two years OAV only and no varroa related hive deaths.


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

When I first started using OAV about 6 or 7 years ago I tried the 3 treatments 7 days apart and although many mites fell I still had high counts so I discounted the 3 treatment regimen and just continued treating until very few mites fell after treatments. Since then I have shortened the time between treatments where I am now treating every 3 to 4 days for at least 6 treatments in a row and at this time will do at least 14 treatments through the year. My colonies go into winter reletively mite free so as we have an early spring flow the treatments will only start after harvesting in Late June early July after which my treatments start. I have always used more than the recommended dosage as over time I have found that there appears to be no ill effects on the colonies so for the normal 2 brood box configuration I fill my silicone capsand will have a half ball from the measuring spoonover the top of the silicone cap so I would estimate at least 31/2 grams. I have felt that the more vapor crystals in the hive the greater the chance of getting a higher efficacy and the longer the crystals will remain in the hive. I have used only OAV for the past 6 to 7 years and am at a loss with what to do with all the bees I have. At present I have more than 40 colonies and want to get down to 20 and I have been trying to do so for the last 3 years, maybe I should just go treatment free for a while.


----------



## gone2seed (Sep 18, 2011)

I use 4/4 treatment schedule and get good results. I use alcohol wash to check. I now have only a home yard, so I treat after sundown to be sure most of the bees are home for the day. I am considering doing a 4/4 treatment on half the colonies and following that with a once a month treatment to see how that works.


----------



## Bee Arthur (Mar 21, 2015)

The statement "the current legal limit of vaporizing 1 g is totally worthless" raises a flag to me. While I don't doubt that higher doses of oxalic acid could have higher efficacy, the idea that 1 gram doses (per brood box) are "totally worthless" is hogwash. If that were the case, then we should all rejoice, for there are many, many colonies around the world that have been surviving varroa for years with a "totally worthless" treatment regimen. His claims would effectively mean that our bees have already developed their own strong resistance to mites. Because I'm an exuberant mite tester, I can tell you that mine have not developed their own resistance; but they still survive and flourish year-after-year with my 1g OAV treatments.

I think I remember a Randy Oliver article in ABJ in the last year where he tested higher doses with good results up to a certain point, and then diminishing results thereafter. I can't for the life of me find that article though, so maybe I dreamed it. I'm not against higher doses if the science shows it's safe for the bees and much more effective--I just shudder at the idea that the current legal dosing limits are being discounted completely.


----------



## bushpilot (May 14, 2017)

Bee Arthur said:


> The statement "the current legal limit of vaporizing 1 g is totally worthless" raises a flag to me.


Bingo! Not my experience; the legal dose does help, even if not perfect. This makes me question the rest of what is being said. Maybe context is missing.

Perhaps they are trying to do a single-dose treatment? It is pretty apparent that a single dose at the legal limit misses the goal fairly often.

Is the solution a higher dose or more doses? Who knows? Does a higher dose "hang around" longer?

I have creeped up my dose by 50%, when heavily infested, but nowhere near the levels mentioned. No ill effect noted at my levels. I also dose multiple times, using mite drop as the indicator of whether to continue or not, and this seems to work. The evidence is that my colonies survive and thrive.

It seems clear that the "label" merits change, but with the little information given, I am not sure the change suggested is correct or complete.

Looking forward to more work on the "extended release" treatments being explored by various people.


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

One gram into what - a box ? How big is the box; how many bees are in that box; how well is that one gram circulating ... ?

I remember reading Johno's early posts about the experiments he conducted using a transparent Crown Board (Inner Cover) to check how well the VOA dispersed.

It's all relevant - maybe one gram vapourised from the bottom using a wand, into a box which is packed to the gunnels with bees, isn't all that effective. Whereas the same dose injected at the top, into a box in which the bees can move around more easily is indeed sufficient ?
LJ


----------



## JWPalmer (May 1, 2017)

All this talk about dosage got me to wondering how much I was actually using when I treat. I have been using the little scoop that came with the ProVap that is marked 1/2 tsp. I use a rounded scoop. Broke out the gram scale and sure enough, 3- 3.5 grams per double brood box.


----------



## sc-bee (May 10, 2005)

little_john said:


> One gram into what - a box ? How big is the box; how many bees are in that box; how well is that one gram circulating ... ?
> 
> I remember reading Johno's early posts about the experiments he conducted using a transparent Crown Board (Inner Cover) to check how well the VOA dispersed.
> 
> ...



I may have read more into it than I should have but I took it to be 1 gram per brood box and three treatments at one week intervals. I am sure the papers, when released,will be more detailed.

And thanks Johno for answering my message.


----------



## Arnie (Jan 30, 2014)

This is my routine. For the last 5 years I use OAV exclusively. No mite problems. 

When the supers come off I treat 5 times at 6 or 7 day intervals depending on my schedule. 

End of December I treat twice one week apart. 

In spring I do a treatment to check mite fall.
So far in spring I get maybe 3 mites on the insert. 

I use a rounded half teaspoon measure of oxalic acid. 

Mite drops after the supers come off are in the 150 to 200 range after the first couple weeks then they are lower as the treatments continue. 

As johno said, don't let the mites build up.


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

sc-bee said:


> I may have read more into it than I should have but I took it to be 1 gram per brood box and three treatments at one week intervals. I am sure the papers, when released,will be more detailed.


Yes, I'm sure that will be the case.

What I was trying to convey was a criticism of the basic rule, (an assumption on my part - never having read the 'official' US label) of "one gram per box".

An 8-frame medium is a brood box. A 12-frame Dadant is a brood box. They're *both* brood boxes, but with very different volumes, and thus the amounts of bees they hold, apart from variations in congestion also. Is it any wonder there are mixed reports of effectiveness ?
'best
LJ


----------



## Bear Creek Steve (Feb 18, 2009)

From my experience, timing of the OAV application to the paired life cycle of the Varroa mite and the honey bee is the key to successful Varroa mite mediation. For my geographic area, Early August is when the Varroa mite populating is rapidly increasing and and simultaneously the winter bees are emerging. Additionally the over all honeybee population is naturally dwindling. I OAV from the bottom of the colony one of two consecutive cycles of once a week for three weeks starting o/a 1 August followed by a single treatment between Thanksgiving and Christmas. I have a SBB and a cooking oil sprayed drop board on each colony and I do a powdered sugar roll for an additional mite count. My Varroa mite count has been close to zero for years. I'm an all medium apiary and I use a single heaping one gram measuring spoon per application per colony. My environment is similar to that of Arnie's: high altitude and very arid.
Cheers,
Steve


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

"I would say that the current legal limit of vaporizing 1 g is totally worthless. *I don’t necessarily mean* that OA vaporization is a bust, because you start see some control at 2 g *and a slightly better effect *at 4 g. "

So, now we have Michael Palmer, Randy Oliver, Kamon Raynolds and scientist Jack Cameron having doubts about OAV efficiency or practicality.


Who else do we need?


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

Juhani Lunden said:


> "I would say that the current legal limit of vaporizing 1 g is totally worthless. *I don’t necessarily mean* that OA vaporization is a bust, because you start see some control at 2 g *and a slightly better effect *at 4 g. "
> 
> So, now we have Michael Palmer, Randy Oliver, Kamon Raynolds and scientist Jack Cameron having doubts about OAV efficiency or practicality.
> 
> Who else do we need?


Yet another troll post from a TF enthusiast using the same "appeal to authority" as previously.

Quote: "Appeal to authority is a common type of fallacy, or an argument based on unsound logic. When writers or speakers use appeal to authority, they are claiming that something must be true because it is believed by those who are said to be an "authority" on the subject."

On the other hand - you could weight up your *misrepresented* examples against the many thousands of beekeepers who hold a very different opinion.
LJ


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

little_john said:


> Yet another troll post from a TF enthusiast using the same "appeal to authority" as previously.
> 
> Quote: "Appeal to authority is a common type of fallacy, or an argument based on unsound logic. When writers or speakers use appeal to authority, they are claiming that something must be true because it is believed by those who are said to be an "authority" on the subject."
> 
> ...



How many of those thousands of beekeepers need to say out loud their doubts of OAV efficiency and practicality, in order for me to be allowed to say any doubts on the efficiency and practicality of OAV? 

Ten?
Fifty?
Hundred?
Thousand?


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

Ah yes - the 'evidence' implicit within those who remain silent ... 

How about those who are more than satisfied with using VOA ? Don't their voices say something to you - or are such a growing band of people deluding themselves ? All those colonies which now survive the winter, whereas before they invariably died-out. Yes, we must be doing something wrong ...

I'm fascinated by why a TF beekeeper is looking for any opportunity to bad-mouth what must be the most simplistic, economical - and from the bees' point of view - the safest treatment for Varroa mites (when applied correctly of course) when compared with current alternatives. Or is it that you actually favour the use of commercial systemic miticides ? Because, from what you have previously posted - it would certainly appear so:



> *My rule of thumb has always been: what the profs use is good for a hobby beekeeper, but not vice versa. * (https://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?361089-Mites-Won-t-Stop!-Using-OAV/page2 post #22)


Extraordinary. I'm wondering why you haven't seen fit to post that sentiment over on the TF sub-forum ?

In Britain we have an expression for this - it's called "running with the fox, while hunting with the hounds." In essence - you can't do both - you can't hold two such opposing opinions simultaneously. (Unless you're a politician of course - they do that all the time). 
LJ


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

I'm interpreting this to mean that OAV under his conditions is not effective at the specified doses. Change the climate, change the timing, change the size hive and the results would likely be very different. It is very rare for bees to be broodless in south Florida. OAV is most effective with broodless bees.

They say no fence is wide enough that a good politician can't straddle it.


----------



## username00101 (Apr 17, 2019)

*I know for a fact that the brand of OA makes a big difference. *

I've had terrible results with some of the generic crap I found on amazon, and would never recommend using just any brand of OA. OA is not all made equally.

If you're starting to get into OAV, I strongly recommend buying laboratory grade OA, or try Florida labs.


----------



## username00101 (Apr 17, 2019)

I honestly think that the mode of OAV application makes a BIG difference as well.

For example, the Easy Vap or the ProVap110 are obviously better than sticking a "fire wand" in the bottom board.


----------



## HarryVanderpool (Apr 11, 2005)

More is better.
The instructions say otherwise, but I disagree.
Also, The most important thing I have found is that regular treatments _DURING ROBBING PERIODS_, that is to say, when your strong healthy hives are robbing out all of neighboring, crashing, "treatment free" hives and bringing back a stream of mites.
No matter what you have done prior to a robbing period, regular treatments are the only way to keep things under control.
In my area, this period typically begins in early to mid August and lasts until fall rain begins.
The days of "A fall treatment" is over.
Here is a quote fromMites of THE Honey Bee by Webster & Deleplane:
Chapter 10, page 136 Stephen J. Martin:
"Sakofski showed that 35% of the mites can be transferred into the robbing colony via the robber bees picking up mites or infested robbed bees which desert their hive and return with robber bees."

Therefore I believe that weekly (at least) oav is necessary in my area during the robbing period regardless of other mite control measures previously conducted in the year.
Also, testing is worthless during this period. If you want to chase your tail, go ahead and test during the robbing period.
I can save you some time and give you the results right now:
"HOLY COW are my mite loads spiking!!!"


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

little_john said:


> I'm fascinated by why a TF beekeeper is looking for any opportunity to bad-mouth what must be the most simplistic, economical - and from the bees' point of view - the safest treatment for Varroa mites (when applied correctly of course) when compared with current alternatives.


OAD is far better than OAV. (My view! )
I´m just concerned about the heath of beekeepers doing over 10 treatments couple days apart, not to speak about the lost time running on their yards all the time. And makes me wonder why this kind of attacks on me (and for instance msl) when discussion about OAV problems start. 



little_john said:


> Or is it that you actually favour the use of commercial systemic miticides ? Because, from what you have previously posted - it would certainly appear so:





Juhani Lunden said:


> My rule of thumb has always been: what the profs use is good for a hobby beekeeper, but not vica versa.





little_john said:


> Extraordinary. I'm wondering why you haven't seen fit to post that sentiment over on the TF sub-forum ?



I´m happy to post this on TF sub forum at any time. It is a general rule, not only about treatments.


----------



## Robert Holcombe (Oct 10, 2019)

Now you can appreciate the margin of error built into the scientific recommendation and the EPA specified 1 gram per brood chamber. After OAV's performance last Fall in my apiary, 13,759 dead varroa by count and now over-wintering with 9 for 9 alive, I am forced to conclude there is some decent efficacy but it is not as efficient as I would like. 

It would be nice if OAV was a Silver Bullet and killed all Varroa in one treatment. Maybe the solution for Florida beekeepers is to bring their hives up North for the winter treatment  

BTW, I have absolutely no faith in alcohol wash techniques as a useful, sensitive indicator of varroa infestation levels. Counting dead varroa is a clear indicator or so it seems to me. An example is offerred:


----------



## Robert Holcombe (Oct 10, 2019)

:thumbsup:


----------



## HarryVanderpool (Apr 11, 2005)

Another comment / question about "More is better" maybe one of you know the answer:
For a given vaporizer, I have a hunch that there is a MAXIMUM amount of crystals that can be sublimated in a given bowel design.
Beyond that amount, the additional crystals are just spewed out prior to sublimation.
Anyone know if this is true?
I have some very fine stainless steel screen that I could make a filter of and run some tests.
The question would be, "What is the maximum amount of OA crystals that a Provap 110 can sublimate per shot?"


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

We don't have any studys showing us more is better, in fact what we do has says it matters little with OAV 
Toufailia - ‎2015 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00218839.2015.1106777
by drop 










by wash 












> The most important thing I have found is that regular treatments DURING ROBBING PERIODS, that is to say, when your strong healthy hives are robbing out all of neighboring, crashing, "treatment free" hives and bringing back a stream of mites.


Yep, Dribble is my go 2 for fall re invasion, my main yard gets crushed by mite bombs (guy next to me keeps about 20 and regulay takes 75% losses ) it kills for 2 weeks not 2-3 days like OAV. Cuts way down on the amount of trips to the yards


----------



## username00101 (Apr 17, 2019)

Just remember, not all oxalic acid is created equally.

The bucket of wood bleach on Amazon has zero quality control testing.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

I haven’t read the entire thread but I have to tell you that I have never heard a PhD researcher use the phrase ‘totally worthless’.
Who is this Carmeron Jack? Did he link his study?
I believe that I’m calling baloney.


----------



## Arnie (Jan 30, 2014)

I respectfully disagree on some points here.

First, I used 2 gram dose on double deeps and 4 stack of mediums for years with 100 percent survival. 

Also, I used a wand for 4 years with no problems. 100% efficacy 

And I picked up some generic OA before I found the Florida Labs stuff. It worked wonderfully. And if you check Amazon their 'Amazon's Choice' OA is Florida Labs.

Just my experience. I don't want to start an argument with anyone.

These threads are very informative. 

Thanks everyone.


----------



## JWPalmer (May 1, 2017)

I cannot speak to the effacy of the various brands of OA. I purchased mine from Florida Labs and it has served me very well. I can understand OAV being impactical if one had to treat 1000+ hives every couple of days for several weeks, but to suggest that a properly timed and applied treatment regimen is ineffective is simply wrong. Perhaps you should tell my bees that they are all dead and should not be expanding so rapidly.


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

Can anybody Phd or whatever deny that oxalic acid crystals kill mites, It is my understanding that crystals on the mites feet or anywhere on the mites body leads to its death within hours. It is assumed that the foundress mite on emerging from the cell can shortly invade another for another breeding cycle, not so for the 2 immature females that the foundress has raised in the last breeding cycle. How long do these young females remain phoretic until they are ready to breed as they are the ones that are prime targets for the OAV treatments. So at the end of the day it becomes a matter of getting those crystals onto the mites that are either maturing or are between cells and a series of 3 treatments 7 days apart is not going to do the job of eliminating a large percentage of an infested colonies mites, Man I give my colonies 3 treatments when they are broodless, for me I am after every last one if I can. Depending on your situation and possible influx of mites from other colonies one needs to do multiple treatments 3 to 4 days apart until you see no more mites fall and then go back a few weeks later and try again and just remember a dose of OAV is just as good as any other test except that it is quicker kills no bees and kills more mites,


----------



## sc-bee (May 10, 2005)

beemandan said:


> I haven’t read the entire thread but I have to tell you that I have never heard a PhD researcher use the phrase ‘totally worthless’.
> Who is this Carmeron Jack? Did he link his study?
> I believe that I’m calling baloney.


I pick up on some conversation on another forum about Mr Jacks study. I contacted Cameron Jack and asked him about his in *progress study.* I asked permission to share his email. Mr. Jack is pro OAV but is looking for a better way/legal dose to put in legal statutes where required*. Mr. Jack has posted NOTHING.

*


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

sc-bee said:


> Mr. Jack has posted NOTHING.



Jack is his surname. OK.


----------



## username00101 (Apr 17, 2019)

Arnie said:


> I respectfully disagree on some points here.
> 
> First, I used 2 gram dose on double deeps and 4 stack of mediums for years with 100 percent survival.
> 
> ...


You may have had success with generic brands, but I would strongly advise against this course of action.

Stick with trusted sources of OA, preferably laboratory grade OA. 

OA is not expensive, it's worth spending the extra $5 on a lab grade OA than a cheap bucket of wood bleach imported from who-knows-what-country.


----------



## sc-bee (May 10, 2005)

Juhani Lunden said:


> Jack is his surname. OK.



Actually where I am from/live he could be Mr. Jack, Mr. Cameron, or Mr. Jack Cameron. You may not like it Mr. Juhani but that is just the way it is 

Maybe you have something to add to the thread other than petty comments :lookout:


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

sc-bee said:


> Maybe you have something to add to the thread other than petty comments :lookout:


???

Believe it or not, I really want to learn his name.


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

sc-bee said:


> Maybe you have something to add to the thread other than petty comments :lookout:



...and it seems I have contributed more than appropriate.



little_john said:


> Yet another troll post from a TF enthusiast ...


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

I find this discussion on oxalic acid interesting. I suggest we not dampen it with unneeded sharp language amongst ourselves. The tone was set to some degree by the imprecise and exaggerated phrase "totally useless" by the author of the quoted letters. Everyone posting is familiar with ploy of hyperbole: I am sure we have all used it to some degree

I am quite happy with OA but know its limitations in some scenarios but we need not give it such a black eye in general. I think the author should have stated things in neutral terms. Perhaps the label could be changed but if our personal adjustment of the recommendation gets the desired result, is it worth the effort and expense.

For dang sure all regulatory bodies the world over have a lot bigger fish to fry at the moment!


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

here is the paper in question 
https://academic.oup.com/jee/article-abstract/113/2/582/5697464

we dissused it in another thread...now it looks to be behind a pay wall here were my thoughts ans some qoates from when it was up




msl said:


> "In general, colonies with caged queens had statistically lower mite fall levels than colonies with uncaged queens starting from day 24 (P = 0.032) and continuing throughout the rest of the experiment (days 31, 35, and 62—P < 0.001). However, we did not observe any significant differences in mite fall during the OA treatment periods (days 8, 16, and 24) between colonies with caged and uncaged queens that were treated one"
> 
> they did not see a difference in mite drops between broodless and brood on hives ... this suggests there is a huge problem with the OA's effectiveness in this experiment
> a conculstion they also reached
> " colonies receiving three applications of OA still had high mortality rates and colony strengths similar to those of untreated colonies. Our inability to control Varroa effectively regardless of OA treatment suggests that the current labeled dose of 1 g per brood chamber was ineffective, at least under the conditions we maintained in our study."


late summer mites loads, brood on... only 3 OAV treatments and no folow up. any one else suprized the hives failed? 

What is surprising is the brood break hive/oav hives dropped the same amount of mites. 

so that leads us to 2 possibly coulstions .. OAV's effectiveness is impacted by the test site condistions (high temp and humidy, etc ) or there was a flaw in the data/ experiment design 

the went with the former and then blamed the dose size... witch I find inserting given the set up.
they made no effort to scientifically determine mite loads per and post treatment. No washes, no colonly euthistion and coun't of mite left, no testing of any kind to show the % of poretic mites killed 
sticky boards are just slightly better then tea leaves, we have know this for years and years.. (for the latest see https://tvbabees.org/resources/Docu...jv-LAsb_Rvr3WRZUxsI9avbRr-KUtW3gITVu29wZcVUFo) 
In the paper they harp on that they couldn't test a higher dose as it would be against the (label) law to do so, and then they go against the law and treat late summer while hives a brooded up.. 
and there brood break? why a 24 day cageing, seems an unnecessary impact on the colony 
It feels like they did this as fast and cheep as could be done 

Realy there is nothing here but questions, the only 2 real results we already knew
A-3 weekly OAVs with brood on and late summer mite levels will not give sufficient contoral 
B-a Sept brood break is a bad idea in most places


----------



## NCBeeGuy (Aug 14, 2018)

Juhani Lunden said:


> ???
> 
> Believe it or not, I really want to learn his name.


http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/people-directory/cameron-jack/


----------



## NCBeeGuy (Aug 14, 2018)

msl said:


> here is the paper in question
> https://academic.oup.com/jee/article-abstract/113/2/582/5697464
> 
> we dissused it in another thread...now it looks to be behind a pay wall here were my thoughts ans some qoates from when it was up
> ...


well stated all around. 

details in the papers always matter. 

as others have stated, there's not enough precision here on dose by volume to make sweeping statements. More data needed! It works, maybe it can work better...


----------



## Groundhwg (Jan 28, 2016)

username00101 said:


> I honestly think that the mode of OAV application makes a BIG difference as well.
> 
> For example, the Easy Vap or the ProVap110 are obviously better than sticking a "fire wand" in the bottom board.


No data that you can provide to prove that statement. I use the ProVap100 and it works great but nothing to prove that it kills more mites than the "wand(s)".


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

> I use the ProVap100 and it works great but nothing to prove that it kills more mites than the "wand(s)".t


in fact the only data we have on the subject(Randy may have something in the works ) suggests it may take the provap up to 4 treatments to get the same effect as a cold start wand https://www.albertabeekeepers.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/2019-Final-OA-vapourizer-report.pdf
Side note there was not a wand control, so the difrance vs wand studies may have been environmental or quality of OA, or maby procedural (not sealing the hive or what ever)


----------



## TehachapiGal (Mar 5, 2015)

My colonies are in the mountains about 10 miles from Mojave California. 

We used the vaporizing method for 2 years then gave up. 3 treatments 7 days apart was tedious, wearing a respirator that caused the glasses to fog up, placed wood sheets between the honey supers and brood boxes, invested in robber, moving screens to close the front entrance off after dark and the bees back home, got varroa bottom screens and put a thin wood sheet in the bottom of each hive so the vapor reached the bees, placed dampened towels over the front entrance and back area. 10 hives, 3 times and it didn't kill mites.

Although the shop towel method isn't approved it works like a charm against varroa mites. I had 10 hives going into winter and 10 healthy hives in the bee yard in the spring. Purchasing glycerin made from soy instead of palm took some time to find in gallon size.(Please protest against slashing and burning of rain forests to farm palm by using nothing with palm as an ingredient.) For anyone who doesn't know why glycerin is used it keeps the towels hold their moisture for a long time. 

Coreopsis, Fiddleneck, Phacaelia, Poppies, Chia, Jewel plant and all sorts of other wildflowers shot up in the last few weeks. Happy bees.


----------



## Hawkins (Sep 4, 2019)

I have been using OA before it was legal so I have a lot of experience with it. The problem is NOT the OA dose the problem is wands are useless. The OA must be sublimated to be effective. The method the Pro-Vape 110 uses is true sublimation and 1g is 100% effective. Example: Got a new package in March checked the mite board first week saw 4 mites. Since the Pro-Vape 110 is so expensive I decided to build my own last year. Used it to treat the hive checked the mite board next day counted 41 dead mites, next day 8 more none since. In order to get an effective OA sublimation the crystals must hit the cook pot floor at a temperature of 440 deg F. The crystals are instantly converted from a solid to a vapor. The vapor is actually microscopic crystals which the mites absorb through the legs as they move around. Within four hours they are dead. As far as I know from You-tube video search there are two other builders of a do it yourself sublimation vaporizer. Cost $160 to $220 plus shipping depending on which you buy. Parts cost me $110 and my charge is $160 plus shipping from Jasper, Ga. You can see a video at this link. https://www.facebook.com/100012324872420/videos/880441875709967/


----------



## John Davis (Apr 29, 2014)

This last post #46 probably should be in the for sale area.
Also not all wands are useless. 
Some are much better than others, often you get what you pay for.

Method and application control is important, as an example vaporizing under a screened bottom board seems easy but the wire acts as a heat sink and a lot of the acid will collect on the wire and not making it into the hive.
I use a Provap 110 and am very happy with it. Started with a Varrox and it works great as well but with 80 hives takes too long.
While making your own can save money, knocking off another's product and selling it is the type of thing that we ***** about if China does it to us but is considered Capitalism if we do it.
More OA - higher dosage - is not better.
Extra doses at shorter intervals should not be necessary if application is successful and you are not getting an influx of mites through drifting or robbing.

Monitoring is critical to determine root cause if something is not working as expected.
FYI I use VSH Queens and average less than 10% loss usually "stuck on brood" starvation issues in our highly variable spring weather.


----------



## Bee Arthur (Mar 21, 2015)

John Davis said:


> Monitoring is critical to determine root cause if something is not working as expected.


100% this. The act of monitoring the results of mite treatments is ignored by a great number of people, who then come here confused about why their bees didn't overwinter despite performing a few OAV treatments last August.

For what it's worth, I've used both the wands and the quick vaporizers. I also do pre- and post-mite assessments that have yet to indicate a divergence in efficacy between the two--though it's something I'm looking for. The rapid vaporizers are far superior, in my opinion, for anyone who has more than a couple hives. But both types kill mites pretty darn well.


----------



## Grins (May 24, 2016)

johno said:


> It is my understanding that crystals on the mites feet or anywhere on the mites body leads to its death within hours. ,


There was a very interesting article in American Bee Journal last year written by an engineer. He gave varroa mites OA crystals and watched them carefully under a microscope.. Exposure to mouth or feet did not affect the mites, the mites could play with the crystals with their legs and suffer no ill effects. But when the OA crystal came in contact with the carapace, the shell, the mite soon was paralyzed and died shortly thereafter. 

Lee


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

Lee, that article was by Charles Linder. I seem to recollect that no matter where the OA was placed the mites died within 4 hours. The common wisdom at the time was that the OA killed the mites through the soft pads on their feet so that was tried first. The only thing that troubles me a little was that OA crystals were used which is vastly different to sublimated OA as the crystals then are tiny compared to raw OA. Sublimated OA crystals will stick onto the hairs of the mites as well which I am not sure raw crystals will.


----------



## Grins (May 24, 2016)

johno said:


> Lee, that article was by Charles Linder. I seem to recollect that no matter where the OA was placed the mites died within 4 hours. The common wisdom at the time was that the OA killed the mites through the soft pads on their feet so that was tried first. The only thing that troubles me a little was that OA crystals were used which is vastly different to sublimated OA as the crystals then are tiny compared to raw OA. Sublimated OA crystals will stick onto the hairs of the mites as well which I am not sure raw crystals will.


I've a different recollection of his results but I'm glad you saw it.

Lee


----------



## patricksull (Jun 1, 2017)

> Although the shop towel method isn't approved it works like a charm against varroa mites.


What time of year/schedule do you use?


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

Patricksul, been there and done that a few years ago when the Argie Bargies first came out with it. I found that if your mite load was low it would keep mite growth in check but if you had a high mite load it did not bring the numbers down quick enough. I did OAV treatments on the 6 hives that I ran the tests on and had significant drops after 3 weeks of the glycerin/OA soaked cardboard strips. There was also a difference in colony behavior, some worked on removing the strips others just ignored the strips so I basically gave up on the strip method.


----------



## jimbo3 (Jun 7, 2015)

sc-bee said:


> This information may have already been shared or mentioned. I could not find it using a page search so I decided to share it here. Look for some articles on the subject in the future. See Below
> 
> Hi
> I hope you are doing well amid the current situation. It is true that I have conducted some research here at the University of Florida that has shown the legal 1 g dose of OA per brood chamber to be completely ineffective. I conducted a follow up study to find the effective dose. We again confirmed that 1 g OA is totally useless and found that 2 g OA was better than no treatment, but not significantly better than 1 g. Treating colonies with 4 g did not appear to have negative effects on the health of honey bees, but it was not significantly better than treatment with 2 g. Thus, we can’t outright say that 4 g is better than 2 g, so the true best treatment is probably somewhere between 2-4 g. We have submitted this article for publication, but it has not yet been reviewed by other researchers.
> ...


"1 g is totally worthless
2 g OA was better than no treatment, but not significantly better than 1 g
4 g was not significantly better than treatment with 2 g"

2 g was not really better than 1 g which was worthless and 4 g wasn't any better than 2 g so the recommended treatment is 2-4 g? Is this a troll post or something?


----------



## Trin (May 6, 2020)

A lot of variables at work here. Climate and location is just one. I have wondered about the mites themselves as it is possible that some of them aren't carrying much in the way of viruses. We don't have a virus map of the bee keeping world as far as I know. The so called resistance to mites might be more accurately a resistance to the viruses mites carry. It is true that mite bit bees are health compromised and will die sooner. So having a high mite load when bees are making winter bees is certainly a bad idea. Still a lot of unknowns.

I don't pay too much attention to a "study" that doesn't show careful data and all ancillary information. Maybe the guy should have provided a link to his work.

On the other hand I knew 2 phd. weld engineers that had competing theories. I worked with one of them and I can say that we did very careful data collection and could prove the worthiness of the theory in practice.

The other guy was caught fudging his data probably because it couldn't hold up to scrutiny, was plagued by a couple of fundamental flaws, and generally has been cast on the junk pile of history. 

I will take the advice of lay persons with experience on par with any academic. Or maybe I should have said I will listen and make up my own mind. I have become a bit jaded with work done in laboratories because there is an aspect of reality missing quite often. Whenever someone postures themselves as an "expert", I get a bit suspicious. Learning a lot of information doesn't make a person smart. Understanding information and knowing how to ask the right questions and keeping a bit of humility close at hand goes a long way toward figuring something out. Maybe.

What we need is a nano robot mite hunter/killer unleashed in the hive.  That should end the treatment free/ treatment debate.


----------



## patricksull (Jun 1, 2017)

Understood. Maybe I will treat with the vaporizer, then add the shop towel just to get me through until Fall (for a full vaporizer treatment schedule). I live in an area where I have a Blackberry flow for about a month (July1-August 1), then I like to treat for a couple weeks to get the mite load down before I move them north to a location where the Knott Weed flow lasts for 2 months. I can't wait until October to treat for mites, as the load count gets too high. That is why I like to do something in between the two flows. This shop towel approach might be the trick. Otherwise I loose 2 weeks or more of no supers on. If I didn't move them north, I would just start treating after the Blackberry flow at the end of August, but there is a lot of nectar that they are missing out on if I don't move them north.


----------



## TehachapiGal (Mar 5, 2015)

patricksull said:


> Understood. Maybe I will treat with the vaporizer, then add the shop towel just to get me through until Fall (for a full vaporizer treatment schedule). I live in an area where I have a Blackberry flow for about a month (July1-August 1), then I like to treat for a couple weeks to get the mite load down before I move them north to a location where the Knott Weed flow lasts for 2 months. I can't wait until October to treat for mites, as the load count gets too high. That is why I like to do something in between the two flows. This shop towel approach might be the trick. Otherwise I loose 2 weeks or more of no supers on. If I didn't move them north, I would just start treating after the Blackberry flow at the end of August, but there is a lot of nectar that they are missing out on if I don't move them north.


First. I personally wouldn't recommend treating with both 3 weekly vaporizing and then shop towel method. It's an overkill. Second. You should do a mite count before treatment to determine if you should treat. (I have varroa mite screen bottoms on each hive to easily check for mites. I do 3 day mite checks and count mites using a table top magnifier that has a built in light.

Shop towels are installed between #1 and #2 brood chambers. We cut the shop towels in half. 2 halves are stored in baggies. I have 10 hives so we make up 10 baggies. 

According to Glory Bee. INTRODUCING THE OXALIC SHOP TOWEL MITE TREATMENT METHOD

Before reading any further, please note the following mite treatment method has not been approved by the EPA and is considered illegal in the USA. This is for informational purposes only. For a complete explanation regarding the oxalic shop towel method, please read the scientific research by Randy Oliver on his website: http://scientificbeekeeping.com/

How is it supposed to work?

Bee Biologist, Randy Oliver, found that when oxalic acid is dissolved in glycerin (a non-toxic liquid used in foods as a thickener), it causes the oxalic acid to slowly be released over time. When a disposable shop towel is soaked in the oxalic/glycerin mixture and put into a bee hive, it creates a slow oxalic acid release that lasts about a month, killing those unwanted mites as they emerge from brood cells without the need for multiple treatment applications.

The technical stuff

Randy Oliver’s formula for Oxalic acid/Glycerin Towels – For formula mixtures for larger batches visit Randy Oliver’s website

INGREDIENT	PER TOWEL
Oxalic Acid Dihydrate (99.6% purity)	12 g
Water	10 ml
Vegetable Glycerin (food grade)	13 ml

A few mentions. 1.) Wear a mask + rubber gloves. 2.) Oxalic acid does not dissolve in water and glycerin at room temperature. It must be heated. We put the recipe into a mason jar with the lid a bit loose then heat the recipe in a pot on the stove with metal grill on the bottom to prevent the glass from breaking in the pot. (Similar to canning fruit where the bottles sit on a metal grill.) When the oxalic acid has dissolved, have your halfed Scott shop towels layed out on a right sized cookie sheet or other container all read to go. Then evenly pour the oxalic acid mixture evenly over the towels. We us clothe pins so the shop towels dry out just a bit maybe 15 minutes or 1/2 hour then place 2 halves in a baggie. Don't press down on the baggie because it's harder to separate them if they're squashed together with bee gloves on. Do a mite check monthly.


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

Let us give credit where credit is due, Randy Oliver did not discover the glycerin/ oxalic method. This was discovered by Argentinian beekeepers who still use it and also by other South American beekeepers. Mr Oliver played with the system in the hope of coming up with a method that he could put to the EPA as a treatment for varoa,


----------



## Trin (May 6, 2020)

I notice a number of BK using a mosquito fogger to apply oxalic acid. I just can't figure out how doing this applies the right dosage. Seems rather loosey goosey.


----------



## JWPalmer (May 1, 2017)

No serious beekeepers consider the fogger an appropriate means to apply OA. In my first year, I was a strong proponent. Now the fogger sits, almost unused, gathering dust. It does work, sorta, but there are far more accurate and effective methods available. Don't waste your money like I did.


----------



## GerrieRPh (Mar 10, 2015)

Raises hand - silent stalker here. 
Hypothetically, 3 x OAV, 5-7 days apart after supers are removed, followed by OA shop towels results in 100% survival rate X 2 years experience.


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

GerrieRph, with mites nothing can be taken for granted. You may get away with the treatment regimen above but it would be wise to make mite checks along the way, for me an OAV treatment from time to time will tell the story on the sticky board. There may be other beekeepers who will claim to have 100% survival over a certain time but it is consistency that counts.


----------



## Robert Holcombe (Oct 10, 2019)

:thumbsup: johno, Add to your list GerrieRph, winter OAV treatment. I find a winter treatment is a good indicator of how well I treated in the Fall. TO verify eradication of in-house bred and Fall horizontal migration by treating between Christmas and Jan 5 or so. There is very little brood then (as I am told) and a 2X treatment 14 days apart with reading the tea leaves on the bottom sticky board predicts the future ( Spring & Summer).


----------



## Robert Holcombe (Oct 10, 2019)

msi :thumbsup: - numbers tell a story! But where did is the source of " it kills for 2 weeks not 2-3 days like OAV." ?


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

Rademacher etal 2017 https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/8/3/84/pdf


> The macroCT analysis demonstrated a rapid
> and consistent distribution of OAD involving a reduction of the individual dosage over time. Even
> after 14 days, the density of the bees was still significantly higher than prior to treatment, indicating
> a potential efficacy of at least up to 14 days. The results from the field trials, where the maximum
> efficacy against mites was reached ten days after treatment, support this assumption


----------



## GerrieRPh (Mar 10, 2015)

Robert Holcombe said:


> :thumbsup: johno, Add to your list GerrieRph, winter OAV treatment. I find a winter treatment is a good indicator of how well I treated in the Fall.


Yes guys, I left that part off. We do treat once near the winter solstice. It just didn't seem to work very well combined with just the 3 x OAV during the dearth. The shop towels appeared to make all the difference for us.


----------



## Robert Holcombe (Oct 10, 2019)

msl said:


> Rademacher etal 2017 https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/8/3/84/pdf


msi - I read the report quickly and printed it to really read it again.. OAD in this case is not "dribble" I believe it is Oxalic Acid Dihydrate ( OAD) ---- topically distributed and orally distributed. The report is mainly about the effects of topically applied versus orally ingested (our USA defined sucrose syrup and OA called Oxalic Acid Dribble?) I have seen other data to support the 10 - 14 day conclusion but if you plot the rate of Dead Drops over time the curve drops rapidly after several days ( memory) implying efficacy drop off. It would be interesting to test the length of efficacy during horizontal migration. But! I am not sure my hive's winter brood can withstand the infestation rates. 

Like I said, I have to read this again - slowly, in print. I believe it makes a case for vaporization versus dribble with sucrose and vaporization can last for up to 14 days. Randy's blue towels was all about slow release using glycerin. It may have a use under cold conditions.


----------



## viesest (Jul 13, 2016)

> The treatments were conducted in November without brood. OAD (3.5% w/v in
> sucrose solution 50% w/w) was applied in the recommended dosage (according to package instructions
> for use-Oxuvar® ) by trickling onto the bees in the bee space.


In winter OAV is also longer effective.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

> In winter OAV is also longer effective.


source for the graft? I haven't seen that one but it says what I have been saying... double the dose and it has little efect on the mite kill 



> but if you plot the rate of Dead Drops over time the curve drops rapidly after several days ( memory) implying efficacy drop off.


thats OAV...
this study found peak drop at 10 days

Aliano,Ellis 2008 only counted for 6 days and found


> more mites fell by day 6 than days 2 and 4.


https://www.researchgate.net/public...xalic_acid_distribution_in_honey_bee_colonies



> I believe it makes a case for vaporization versus dribble with sucrose and vaporization can last for up to 14 days. Randy's blue towels was all about slow release using glycerin.


the reverse, randys work has shown when there is brood one dribble is as effective as 3 OAVs, presumably do the longer action 
this study also shows dribble killing more mites when a hive has brood... and like many studys, slightly less when brood less... againthe train of thought is the longer action period
https://www.apimondia.com/en/compon...UWhxjxLrLtrL6mtB02YHpYuh7vlBa2WE0lxTg9w8DtoAy


----------



## viesest (Jul 13, 2016)

msl said:


> source for the graft?


http://www.honeybeeworld.com/diary/files/__www.mellifera.de_engl2.pdf

OAV in spring (March) vs. OAD.














But IMO formic acid or OAD should not be used in fall. In fall it is not necessary to treat every 3 days with OAV. Treatment every 20 days is OK and more often only at the end of September, beginning of October.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

viesest said:


> http://www.honeybeeworld.com/diary/files/__www.mellifera.de_engl2.pdf
> 
> OAV in spring (March) vs. OAD.


yep.. link is in the post above yours 


> But IMO formic acid or OAD should not be used in fall. In fall it is not necessary to treat every 3 days with OAV


. 
for me I just don't hit winter bees w/dribble... 
of note most (as robert notes ) OAD studies were with dribble, but OAD stands for Oxalic Acid Dihydrate and the application mentod can be different 
Thanks for the link.. at says 


> Since the effectiveness of the vaporisation of oxalic acid lasts for a prolonged period, dead mites and dead bees were counted for five weeks after the treatment.


that was almost 20years ago and this just hasn't been proven the case.. the paper has some big holes and doesn't appear to be peer reviewed.
the bigest flaw is only colecting samples every 8 days 

day of treatment we see a 30% kill on day 8 almost 80%. after that, given the error bars the curve is not statistically significant compared to the contoral so I don't see this as any data suporting an extended action time of OAV, just poor experiment design based on the "knowledge" of the time and that this was a wide scale trial by beekeepers, not a controlled study.. 

if we look at the authors more modern work with daily mite drops we see a very different picture








https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00218839.2015.1106777


----------



## viesest (Jul 13, 2016)

msl said:


> the curve is not statistically significant compared to the contoral


Yes, little bit difference to control is from 8 to 15 days and it is similar in your graph which btw. doesn't specify OAV. Anyway, OAV works OK in fall and in winter and is better then OAD in those periods. OAD is maybe better then OAV in spring and summer.

p.s.


> The sublimation method used pure OA.


 What that means


> yep.. link is in the post above yours


 didn't read that


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

> doesn't specify OAV.


nope... dosn't say dribble eather but it matches outher OAV curves and dosn't match the outher dribble curves
as an example here is 5 OAVs with daily mite drops








http://scientificbeekeeping.com/the-varroa-problem-part-15/


----------



## viesest (Jul 13, 2016)

msl said:


> as an example here is 5 OAVs with daily mite drops


That graph is for treatments in September, not a winter treatment; mites are in thousands. (Also graphs for OAV vs. OAD are from different years)


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

not sure your angle... your focused on an almost 20 year old non peer reviewed paper from the dawn of OAV 
the authors modern peer reviewed works show very different picture.. ie post 71 with winter bees
every thing we know (modern) shows OAV is a flash type treatment with a short action regardless of the time..
site a peer reviewed and published study in the last 5 years that refutes that, heck try to find one 10 years back ...

We lock on to study's that that support our view and bias.. the key is to look at them as a whole and look for a trend
the trend doesn't support your view 
if you have more sources that OAV is long acting, please share. the studys I have shown and field experiences of many dispute this view

neither does it support the case for higher dosage (as is the point of this thread)

I can site studys that show cow piss is a great miteside and far superior to many being used to day








https://www.semanticscholar.org/pap...thur/eac133002430783ed1b514edb71ca250e7841cc2

trends matter...not one offs
look at what 4-5-6 are saying,not just the one that supports your views


----------



## viesest (Jul 13, 2016)

msl said:


> not just the one that supports your views


It is not about the views, it is about how to perform treatment. In winter the gap between two treatments should be 7-14 days and that is different in comparison to 3 days in summer. Also covering mite cycle makes more sense in winter, winter is the period when it is important to maximize the efficacy and reliability of treatment. In fall gap between two treatments is wider not because long acting OAV but because some buffering of phoretic mites is possible.


----------



## bushpilot (May 14, 2017)

viesest said:


> In winter OAV is also longer effective.
> View attachment 57189


The graph shows OAV effectiveness with winter brood. In the depth of winter, there is little, if any brood.


----------



## viesest (Jul 13, 2016)

bushpilot said:


> The graph shows OAV effectiveness with winter brood. In the depth of winter, there is little, if any brood.





> The temperatures in November and December were extraordinarily high, and at some
> locations the colonies even made pollen flights at this time.
> In practice this means that if it is not clear whether the colonies have brood or if a very high attack of
> varroa is present, a second treatment should be carried out for an effective winter treatment. This
> ...



This describes situation when it is not certain if colony is broodless.


----------



## JWPalmer (May 1, 2017)

bushpilot said:


> In the depth of winter, there is little, if any brood.


That statement may be a little too broad. Here in the South, the bees are well into the Spring brood cycle before our coldest weather hits sometime in February. This why for a lot of us, the treatment around Christmas is important as a final follow up. It assures that the hives are starting off with near zero mite load going into Spring.


----------



## bushpilot (May 14, 2017)

JWPalmer said:


> That statement may be a little too broad. Here in the South, the bees are well into the Spring brood cycle before our coldest weather hits sometime in February. This why for a lot of us, the treatment around Christmas is important as a final follow up. It assures that the hives are starting off with near zero mite load going into Spring.


Well then, you obviously need to move North! :lookout:


----------



## JWPalmer (May 1, 2017)

bushpilot said:


> Well then, you obviously need to move North! :lookout:


I did, I grew up in Ft. Lauderdale, FL. My interest in bees started when I used to see bee hives in the orange groves. Back in the 60s and 70s, Broward Co. still had large tracts of groves and I would ride by them often. Now it is all houses and strip malls.


----------



## username00101 (Apr 17, 2019)

OAV is quite harmless.


----------



## P.Dosen (May 17, 2016)

Juhani Lunden said:


> "I would say that the current legal limit of vaporizing 1 g is totally worthless. *I don’t necessarily mean* that OA vaporization is a bust, because you start see some control at 2 g *and a slightly better effect *at 4 g. "
> 
> So, now we have Michael Palmer, Randy Oliver, Kamon Raynolds and scientist Jack Cameron having doubts about OAV efficiency or practicality.
> 
> ...


Interesting how all the treatment free faith-based enthusiasts claim none of the treatments work even though they've never used any of them. NOw I have a question for all those bee-havers who insist on fludding the surrounding beekeeping landscape with virulent parasites and pathogens: why are organic treatments, treatments that have been known to effectively control varroa in the past, are not as effective as they used to be? There are no documented cases of resistance to any of these organic treatments so why are researchers and scientists having to up the dosage and use even these organic treatments more then ever before? Well in my opinion it is due to treatment free beekeepers who either intentionally or unintentionally are creating these colonies which are essentially mite factories making it 10 times harder for those who are trying to keep their bees healthy and alive the ability to do so with minimal treatments; then the treatment freeors turn around and point the finger at all those good intentioned bee husbandry practitioners and say: "you're treating 5 times a year why are you doing that?" because of you; all you thought free beekeepers who if I had it my way wouldn't be keeping bees at all! If everyone, were to use effective treatments to control varroa, coupled with mite resistant stock and kept their mite levels below 1% then varroa in my humble opinion would really be a non-issue. It's time to cull, and the culling of bee-havers needs to be our priorety. I've been a beekeeper for the last 10 years and have had many non-sensical conversations with both Michael Bush and Solomon Parker in regards to their beekeeping philosophy and methodology and given all the scientific research before us, every treatment free study conducted including Dr. Robyn Underwood's latest COMB Project experiment clearly show there is 0 evidence to support any of the claims held by those who are part of the treatment free beekeeping movement; everything to small cell foundation to surviver stock to pseudodrone theory to natural selection has proven time and time again to be of little value, simply because no bee scientist in the world can replicate the results of thousands of treatment free beekeepers. Furthermore, whenever a variable is considered, such as in Robyn Underwood's COMB Project, she spent an entire weekend with treatment free beekeepers, and was interviewed by Solomon Parker and Michael Bush to get a really good idea for all the 101 variables she would need to pull the project off, to really make it a success. Once the project was completed and all the results were in, results that did not put treatment free beekeepers in a good light, its gotta be her now, and all the scientists working at her lab at Penn State that are the real issue, why is it Robyn? Who were the brainiacs who gave her all the information? I spoke with Robyn throughout the entire length of her 3 year project and she kept reminding me that her goal, is to be objective, and that it didn't matter what the results were, all that mattered is how the project was conducted, the science behind it all, which in my opinion, was conducted very well and to the best of her ability. Am I jumping up and down for a label change in regards to OA, no I am not, but if the science shows that an increase in dosage offers better control, and no health risks to the bees or beekeeper, I'm all for it. What I'm advocating, is for every beekeeper, to employ and put into action, a solid IPM program and to treat for varroa mites to control their populations. Treatment free beekeepers are so far, part of the problem not the solution and if they monitored their varroa mite levels they would see that. Solomon Parker insists that mite levels are proxies, and that they do not mean anything, of course they don't mean anything when you don't know what you're looking for! What does a mite infestation level of 2% mean to a faith-based beekeeper when that individual has not only not taken a honeybee biology course, but has not mentored with an experienced beekeeper to gain an understanding and appreciation for why thresholds are what they are; they are what they are for a reason, and it is simply because of one thing, viruses! Viruses are always changing and evolving, they're mutating as we're seeing currently with covid-19, which by the way I bet you dollars to donuts that no treatment free beekeeper has been vaccinated against? Educate yourselves people, thats all I ask, bee good stuards of the livestock you're keeping, in the case honeybees, and you'll not only make beekeeping more enjoyable for yourselves, but for those around you! Monitor, monitor monitor, treat, treat and treat, with effective products which offer good efficacy and treatments that are appropriately timed, which you'll know if you have a working knowledge of bee biology. Let's get this show on the road and kick varroa's ass, we can do this, but we have to be in this together!


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

I think that the increase in the related opportunistic virus numbers is probably the greatest contributor to the increasing mite vectored virulence. Treatment level numbers for reasonable survival odds now have to be much lower than what was recommended 10 years ago.

That said, the ratio of colony numbers under commercial handling, compared to the numbers of would be treatment free beekeepers, is so greatly different that it makes me think that they are getting an inordinate share of the blame, here, according to your post.

I am not trying to support the treatment free ambition as I think the odds of success from that direction, in the hands of the usual level of expertise of the typical entrant, makes for very low success rates. Overstatement makes for loud cheering from one side of the field but doesn't change minds much. In general I think that in this country the peak of the movement to TF flavored beekeeping has been passed. Too many credible players are saying they gave it their best shot and it was not sustainable.


----------



## ursa_minor (Feb 13, 2020)

P.Dosen said:


> why are organic treatments, treatments that have been known to effectively control varroa in the past, are not as effective as they used to be? There are no documented cases of resistance to any of these organic treatments so why are researchers and scientists having to up the dosage and use even these organic treatments more then ever before? Well in my opinion it is due to treatment free beekeepers who either intentionally or unintentionally are creating these colonies which are essentially mite factories making it 10 times harder for those who are trying to keep their bees healthy and alive the ability to do so with minimal treatments; then the treatment freeors turn around and point the finger at all those good intentioned bee husbandry practitioners and say: "you're treating 5 times a year why are you doing that?" because of you; all you thought free beekeepers who if I had it my way wouldn't be keeping bees at all! If everyone, were to use effective treatments to control varroa, coupled with mite resistant stock and kept their mite levels below 1% then varroa in my humble opinion would really be a non-issue. It's time to cull, and the culling of bee-havers needs to be our priorety.


Correct me if I am wrong, but I gathered from a recent talk about the effectiveness of OAV by Medhat Nasr and Jack Carmen that the* legal* dosage was always at 1g, (I think 2g for Canada). They are saying that the current recommended dosage of 1g. is and never has been effective. If so, the increased dosage recommendations are not as a result of TF beekeepers. I too, am not a TF advocate but the OA dosages cannot be blamed on them.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

P.Dosen said:


> Interesting how all the treatment free faith-based enthusiasts claim none of the treatments work even though they've never used any of them. NOw I have a question for all those bee-havers who insist on fludding the surrounding beekeeping landscape with virulent parasites and pathogens: why are *organic *treatments, treatments that have been known to effectively control varroa in the past, *are not as effective as they used to be?*


So, are the *organic *acids are no longer effective?
Since when?


A bee-haver here, if comes down to it.


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

This dosage thing about oxalic acid in vapor can go on and on, fact is whenever a varoa mite comes into contact with OA crystals it dies. The variable here is whether the treated hive of bees is being totally covered in vapor. Most of the trials done are for single deeps or perhaps even double deeps but the method of vaporization varies, some are by means of the Varrox pan and others from other types of vaporizers. To date there has been no research on the outcomes of using different vaporizers which could skew results perhaps. Furthermore, there has been no research about where the OAV is applied up or down and in my estimation with more than a single box the higher one treats the better coverage of vapor you get. I have even seen a little breeze blowing alters the vapor cloud within the hive so there are many variables to be taken into consideration. I am often treating hives four medium boxes high in strong colonies so treating from the bottom does not cut it. End of story is the more OAV then the higher chance of getting a good coverage and the more treatments the hives get the more mites will be killed without damage to your bees.


----------



## P.Dosen (May 17, 2016)

ursa_minor said:


> Correct me if I am wrong, but I gathered from a recent talk about the effectiveness of OAV by Medhat Nasr and Jack Carmen that the* legal* dosage was always at 1g, (I think 2g for Canada). They are saying that the current recommended dosage of 1g. is and never has been effective. If so, the increased dosage recommendations are not as a result of TF beekeepers. I too, am not a TF advocate but the OA dosages cannot be blamed on them.


No, you're misunderstanding me, I'm not saying that the dosage does not need modification, I'm simply saying our need to treat more may be a result of non-treaters creating mite bombs which are creating issues for those trying to manage and maintain healthy colonies. Randy Oliver recently conducted an experiment where he took several colonies and moved them up into the mountains away from beekeeping operations, treatment free or otherwise. With no beekeepers up in the mountains, along with no feral honeybee colonies, he went from treating 4 times a year, to once a year, he had said he had never seen so many 0s in his life when doing alcohol washes. With this being said, yes I understand it is difficult to blame all the problems relating to beekeeping on the treatment free beekeeping movement, I'm simply saying they are no doubt part of the problem. I live up in Canada, in a location where everybody treats for varroa, not a single beekeeping neighbor of mine is treatment free, they wouldn't be beekeeping for long if they were lol! Everyone monitors and treats for mites, and I'm hearing no issues with mite bombs or colonies being overwhelmed with parasitic mites. My point, is everyone is on the same page, as a result they do the best they can to keep their bees alive, and I respect that. Furthermore, maybe there wouldn't need to be a discussion of a label change if everyone was treating for varroa, if there were less bee-havers and more bee-keepers we'd all be in a much better situation. 2 grams per brood chamber might have been good enough if the mite pressure was low enough, but it isn't low, in some areas of the United States it's extremely high, due in large part to thought-free faith-based bee-havers, which include but are not limited to Solomon Parker, Dee Lusby and Michael Bush.


----------



## ursa_minor (Feb 13, 2020)

P.Dosen said:


> Furthermore, maybe there wouldn't need to be a discussion of a label change if everyone was treating for varroa,


My point was that label change is needed regardless of the TF keepers since 1g. is not enough even for those who treat. 

I live in an area with two close new keepers who treat willy nilly, and often not in a timely manner, I can only control me, I cannot control them.


----------



## Jan Luesink (9 mo ago)

As many beekeepers I also gave other experiences with the dose of 1 gram per box (langstroth). Yes 2-4 is better but one shows more effect than is shown in this research. Could it be that the way the OA is applied gives a less effective result? I use a Vaporizer that has the right temperature before the OA is added and is able to maintain this temperature. The one that is used here looks like it starts with a lower temperature and is les able to maintain the correct temperature. Maybe something to look into?
Jan Luesink


----------



## NE Georgia Beek (4 mo ago)

patricksull said:


> Understood. Maybe I will treat with the vaporizer, then add the shop towel just to get me through until Fall (for a full vaporizer treatment schedule). I live in an area where I have a Blackberry flow for about a month (July1-August 1), then I like to treat for a couple weeks to get the mite load down before I move them north to a location where the Knott Weed flow lasts for 2 months. I can't wait until October to treat for mites, as the load count gets too high. That is why I like to do something in between the two flows. This shop towel approach might be the trick. Otherwise I loose 2 weeks or more of no supers on. If I didn't move them north, I would just start treating after the Blackberry flow at the end of August, but there is a lot of nectar that they are missing out on if I don't move them north.


You might consider a 3 day cycle between treatments for 13 days…1-4-7-10-13. This would probably reduce the mite load and meet your time line. I would, however, be concerned about shutting the queens down though.


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

Just as an experiment I treated my hives 3 medium box hives with 4 grams of OA every Monday and Friday for 7 weeks and saw no damage to the bees. When some of the hives were checked after this time I saw brood of all stages from eggs to capped larvae, so the queens were not effected by these treatments. Must admit after 4 weeks there was hardly a mite to be seen. The reason I did this was to debunk the experts and their theories that OAV damages the bees, the one story from a expert was that if OAV kills mites then it must do damage to bees. The other is that OAV only kills phoretic mites, well whoopie doo, soo does Apivar and that is the reason it is in the hive for 42 days which is more or less 3 brood cycles. So if you want to use OAV twice a week for 3 brood cycles OAV is just as good as Apivar just a liitle more labor intensive as you will probably need to spend around 5 minutes a week per colony for those 3 weeks.


----------

