# Latest varroa cure by BAYER



## JRG13

It wasn't clear, does it kill mites already inside the hive too? I'd be skeptical of the efficacy of this thing and wouldn't use it when honey is being made, but it might be good for hives not being used to make honey.


----------



## Riskybizz

Goat 

No more chemicals? As stated, the entire premise of the article and the revolutionary "varroa gate" is to insure (and I quote) "fresh supplies of the chemical are immediately released from the core of the plastic strip to its surface, ensuring long term protection". So each bee passing through this device is inoculated with a pesticide to spread throughout the hive, the wax and food stores. Gee, what a clever little device. Bayer makes chemicals and pesticides. Let us all not soon forget where they make their money from.


----------



## Goat Man

One of these things won't be going into my hives.


----------



## virginiawolf

"_This transfers a mite poison (acaricide) to the bee and kills any mites it may be carrying._"

I wish it did not need a chemical. I don't want chemicals in my bee stuff.

I often wondered if something like this could be tight enough to scratch the mite off the bee but that is such an obvious strategy I figured that it wouldn't work and if it did the mite would still be alive unless it dropped into oil or something.

I'm glad that people are working on such things even if it is still chemicals that make it work.


----------



## Goat Man

BAYER is the company that makes NEONIC's. That's the stuff that is killing bees by the millions!
Be aware of that when you hear BAYER is "helping bees". Propaganda


----------



## WBVC

Is the product imidocloprid as in advantage?


----------



## burns375

i don't think this particular application is meant to reverse infestion rather to guard against it, a "gate" a "barrier" of protection.


----------



## RAK

Looks like bees won't be able to get pollen inside.


----------



## JRG13

I just wonder when bees are coming in so fast how effective it will be and how much time til they start chewing it up


----------



## Steve459

looks alot like a Mouse Guard to me. I wonder about mites already in the hive.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

> Looks like bees won't be able to get pollen inside.

Pshaw ... that is the wrong way to look at it. The _Big Picture_ is ... This will provide an opportunity for a Bayer licensee to sell Bayer _*Synthesized Pollen*_® to beekeepers. 

Just think of how many new jobs will be created, or at least they will spin it that way ...


----------



## Goat Man

Bayer is also working on a Genetically Modified bee that can tolerate all their chemicals. When they accomplish that they will own the patent and take over the beekeeping market just like they did corn production. Get ready boys and girls BAYER is coming to "rescue" the bees!!:ws:


----------



## Chemguy

Yes, Bayer is a chemical company and that is exactly why they are proposing a new way to apply chemical acaricides to a hive. I understand the cynicism, but I do not see how this is any different from fumigating a hive via other treatments. It may in fact be a new way in which much lower levels of currently approved substances can be applied. It sounds as though the new technology is the way in which the chemical is released, not the identity of the chemical. In the absence of needed information, I do not have enough information to make a personal judgment. From the release, it sounds as if they are beginning field tests, and I would be interested to know if the agent they are using accumulates in the hive or not (and what that agent is). Once a patent is filed, this information will be available.

ETA: Ah, here is a synopsis of the patent application. The chemical is cyromazine: https://www.google.com/patents/WO20...a=X&ei=DMuMUrvhNKu0sATa5IHABg&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAA


----------



## Paul McCarty

Yeah, no thanks Bayer. Looks expensive.


----------



## clyderoad

FWIW--they use an application system similar to this on the white tail deer population in the more densely populated suburban areas and gov't controlled park and protected lands. Around the feed stations are placed 'collars' of tick-a-cide (ticks=lyme) and I think a birth control drug (pop. control) so the deer has to put it's head and neck through a stanchion like collar like those you see in dairy barns. The stuff rubs off on them when they feed.
Needless to say, none of the deer hunters I know want anything to do with the deer in those areas, including me. And there are still lots of ticks and deer.


----------



## Goat Man

Personally I don't put any chemicals in my hives. They will either adapt or die. IMHO, and I don't want to start
a big debate about treating or not, this is the only way to eventually beat the problems plaguing bees today.
More chemicals, no matter if BAYER says they are good or not, need to be added to the list already being dumped
into the hives by some...


----------



## JRG13

Another GMO bee conspiracy theory?? You don't even understand the implications, costs, and regulations it would take which make the possibility just about nil.

I think this is an interesting concept, but I don't see it really delivering an effective product.


----------



## D Coates

Goat Man said:


> They will either adapt or die. More chemicals, no matter if BAYER says they are good or not, need to be added to the list already being dumped into the hives by some...


Adapt or die... brilliant thinking. I assume you use the same tough stance with your families illnesses? How about we use that thinking for the elderly, and premature babies as well? If not, why not if chemicals are so bad for them why not us.

Already convicted of a world wide conspiracy without ever reviewing or knowing the actual product or having proof of any of the claims spouted.


----------



## Goat Man

Natural selection. It has worked for millions of years, why mess with it now?
Only when man tries to intervene in the process do problems begin.

If the bees don't put it in the hive, then I won;t either.


----------



## skosma

The bees bring lots of junk (chemicals) into the hive unknowingly. So if it might work why not try.


----------



## WLC

Once the commercial guys see the price tag for the product, they'll just say 'no thanks' and continue to use OA for pennies per hive.

It'll likely end up as another gizmo that ends up in the shed on a shelf.


----------



## gmcharlie

looks like an interesting idea... Cost will be a factor.... 
At least there trying. I see a lot of conspiracy theory post, but its funny how none of them have any other ideas......


----------



## Goat Man

http://www.ibtimes.com/bayer-cropsc...ion-blasts-bee-killing-chemical-giant-1403820

http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/03/bayer-pesticide-bees-studies

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2012/04/26/bayer-pesticide-profits-or-bees/

All these people can't be conspiracy theorists can they?


----------



## gmcharlie

I try not to argue with points. I cannot convince you, your mind is set. so I would look foolish argueing. But yes If you quote Mother Jones, in my mind your are the epitome of a conspirator. 
Bayer and Monsanto have changed and added to the world. Just like GM and Case. its called advancement. many disagree, and yes some steps are not as forward as we think....... it does not change the fact that the companies mentioned have increased yields and quality of the worlds food supply more in the last 30 years than in the previous 3000 years. but if you like you can go back to planting fish heads with your corn..... 
But what have you done for the world in general with your life?? Try to look at your stance before you start casting stones....... Kinda like Al Gore... maybe you should read your eletric bill before you chastize others.......

Does your cat/dog have a flea collar or treatment?? IF not, fine... if so.. just as fine.. they are choices I try not to prevent others from making choices..... others here want to stop my choice to use certian things like possibly these treatments.

JMO


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

> But yes If you quote Mother Jones, in my mind your are the epitome of a conspirator. 

Note that _Goat Man_ also linked to _Forbes _ in the same post. Not many people would consider _Forbes_, whose slogan is "_Home Page For The World's Business Leaders_" to be a radical conspiracy outfit.


----------



## sqkcrk

gmcharlie said:


> Does your cat/dog have a flea collar or treatment?? IF not, fine... if so.. just as fine.. they are choices I try not to prevent others from making choices..... others here want to stop my choice to use certain things like possibly these treatments.
> 
> JMO


Or has anyone ever taken an aspirin? Bayer Pharmasuiticals anyone?


----------



## gmcharlie

I can't comment on Forbes, because I have not followed or read it. LOTS of junk articles out there in fact 95% of what I read anymore is terrible biased and inaccurate. The number of well written works is so small it scares me. It is the real problem with us as Americans and humans. We want to read and accept gossip and trash....

I heard a saying once.. don't remeber it exactly but the jist is

Small people talk about people
Bigger people talk about things
grown ups talk about ideas...

We have become a nation and a world of small people where gossip and trash talk rule us.


----------



## D Coates

Goat Man said:


> Natural selection. It has worked for millions of years, why mess with it now?
> Only when man tries to intervene in the process do problems begin.
> 
> If the bees don't put it in the hive, then I won;t either.


I for one will cautiously listen to the Bayer sales pitch and listen to those who have ACTAULLY tried it and consider if I want to try it on my own hives. There are products introduced al the time that improve the quality of life. This may or may not be one of those products but I'll at least consider it. Throwing out unsupported claims followed with conspiracy theories to justify trashing a product that hasn't yet hit the market makes one look like a cracked pot.


----------



## Goat Man

Wow! This has gotten personal really quickly. I just put out my personal opinion on an issue in bee keeping. I think that is what this forum is all about. You may not like my approach to something but give me the opportunity to do it without personal attacks. It matters not to me if you will use these things are not. But I will not.


----------



## Paul McCarty

Can't have any heretics, man.


----------



## gmcharlie

Didn't intend for it to be personal at all. Your first tow post attacked Bayer. not a review of the product or the idea... I consider that a personal attack on Bayer..... I don't use much if any of their products. but don't begrudge those that do a bit...... I try to look at the big picture, notas a conspiracy to take over the bee industry.

Many fail to realize that there are some great people working really hard to solve problems. those guys are no different in my mind than the ones here giving advice on how to keep bees. dramaticly different approaches, but each is doing what they can to help others.. Yup one side draws a check..... but so do the others we all have our motives, some its a paycheck, others its selling nucs or queens or whatever....


----------



## Goat Man

Yes, I do not like BAYER. Just do a Google search on BAYER, World War 11, Germany. BAYER is also the company that manufactures NEONICITINOIDS. And many studies have shown this chemical to be a big contributor to CCD. But it doesn't matter to me if it is BAYER or Monsanto or any other company proposing putting more chemicals in bee hives. Introducing more and more chemicals to the hives is not working. surely everyone can agree on that. more colonies are being loss each year. If you keep walking down the same path why would you think you will end up at a different place. Personally, and everyone has their own idea on issues and I respect that, I prefer not to continue down the same path. I may loose all my bees. But at least they won't perish because of any chemicals I put in the hive. And if they survive I feel they will be a stronger bee.


----------



## Paul McCarty

You don't have to justify anything GoatMan. "Better living through chemicals" has been a miserable failure in many aspects. For every success story there are probably 2 other nightmare stories. Speaks for itself. I would have more respect for these corporate raiders if they practiced pure science as opposed to applied science for profit. Money kills the good in things. Money for true research is curtailed and shunted to these multinationals so they can control it. It is bad for humanity and the world. Sad really. We end up with expensive, contaminating junk, when what is needed are real answers and not more consumer products to sell us. Give us a consortium with the best and the brightest, with no profit margin involved or proprietary products, and then maybe we we see real solutions. Until then, we get expensive bee gates.


----------



## WLC

Did someone mention Forbes? I've mentioned this before, but Jon Entine has ties to NeoCon, far right, organizations. Yes he did write an article featuring Randy which basically said that there was no science behind the EU neonic ban.

As for the product itself, many of us would agree that we need to develop resistant bees rather than more/newer treatments.

In fact, the USDA has mandated that we develop resistant stocks of Honeybees.

It's the better option in my opinion.


----------



## Paul McCarty

Yep, but that is hard to sell back to us and the beeks remain in control. Basic predatory capitalism 101 - eleminate or discredit your competition. Don't see a lot of research dollars being pumped into this do you, at least not in the US. The USDA has tried, but they are not funded like they should be, nor do they get a lot of support and rely on our university system.


----------



## WLC

I think that it's Marketing 101. If there's a demand for resistant stock (which I believe is being driven by small timers/hobbyists rather than commercial beekeepers), then that demand will eventually be met.

Paul, look at it this way, you're on the ground floor.


----------



## TheBuzz

I checked a couple of my boards and don't see any mites. Maybe because I allow for a strong healthy colony without meddling with it?


----------



## Paul McCarty

True enough WLC.


----------



## melliferal

Right, yes, evil Bayer and their equally-evil neonicotinoid chemical, etc etc. But why is this a reason not to give the proposed, purely mechanical IPM device a try?

If it's all the same I'd personally rather wait to find out that it actually doesn't work before rejecting it.


----------



## JRG13

Melliferal, it's not purely mechanical, it uses a pesticide to kill the mites simlar to how a dog collar works, a constant supply is wicked to the surface of the entrance where bees coming and going come into contact with it.


----------



## Lburou

Goat Man said:


> Natural selection. It has worked for millions of years, why mess with it now?


Natural selection has eliminated about 99.9% of all the organisms that have ever lived. 

In my view, there is some sanity in between the extremes of aggressive chemical application and the so called 'bond' method. IPM is where its at for me. The acids are working well against the mites, do not contaminate the hive, and pose no known or expected resistance by the mites. Tried my first OA sublimation this week. 

If the Bayer system uses a synthetic miticide, I won't use it.


----------



## gmcharlie

Any idea where or if the Bayer product is avalible yet??


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

> Any idea where or if the Bayer product is avalible yet??

Bayer has not even figured out which chemical they intend to use as an acaricide in the BeeGate / VarroaGate yet:



> Scientists are still fine-tuning the formulation and application rate, and are testing two Bayer substances on bee populations in the field at various concentrations.
> 
> http://beecare.bayer.com/media-cent...w-way-of-protecting-bees-against-varroa-mites


Then they have to do field tests to support their EPA paperwork, and wait for the EPA bureaucracy to wake up and get of its collective butt. 

It would be quite amusing if the chemical that Beyer finally settled on was .... _oxalic acid_!  :lpf:


----------



## melliferal

JRG13 said:


> Melliferal, it's not purely mechanical, it uses a pesticide to kill the mites simlar to how a dog collar works, a constant supply is wicked to the surface of the entrance where bees coming and going come into contact with it.


Okay fine, but the point still stands - it's irrational to reject this treatment independently of its efficacy just because it's being developed by Bayer and Bayer also makes neonicotinoids. If you're sinking in quicksand and somebody holds out a pole, you don't refuse the help and drown just because the guy who offered it is that one jerk who always cuts in the cafeteria line.


----------



## JRG13

I agree melliferal, it could potentially be a very effective method but it's also another chemical going into the hive that hasn't been tested very much.


----------



## ryan

I think one of the first prototypes was just a checkmite strip with a bunch of holes drilled in it. The idea isn't so much about a new chemical, it's about a better way to apply whatever the chemical is. 

Keep the meds away from your combs, apply it in a smaller dose right on the mite, and protect against mites drifting into your hive from a neighbor. Probably not ready for migratory commercial use, but it's a nice idea and I'm sure some can make it work.


----------



## melliferal

The impression I get from the article is that it's very much in the R&D stage; not close to any kind of commercial release yet.


----------



## mac

melliferal said:


> The impression I get from the article is that it's very much in the R&D stage; not close to any kind of commercial release yet.


Well tactic is back on the market


----------



## Josh Rollins

LOL! Bayer has a solution to helping bees.


----------



## kkauf

We kind of threw natural out the window when we put bees in a box, no?


----------



## Phoebee

We had a Bayer bee expert give a talk to our regional beekeeper's association. Not saying I'm a fan of neonicotinoids or seeds laced with pesticides, and I think the big agribusiness corporations make us too dependent on their proprietary strains and chemicals, but I thought what he had to say was worthwhile. If nothing else, their "beetown" research center in NC uses a lot of research methods that I can use myself.

I expect they'd be crushed if somebody could design one of these things that used, say, powdered sugar instead of a patented miteicide (let's be honest ... pesticide), and could demonstrate that it works just as well.

Anyway, evidently Bayer is hitting the road with their "Second annual Bee Care Tour," and my wife and I plan to attend when they hit DC. I expect we'll learn something new.

http://www.bayercropscience.us/news/press-releases/2014/02062014-0018-bee-care-tour-launch


----------



## Phoebee

Oh, this little tidbit is fun. If I were working in Bayer's propaganda ... excuse me, public relations ... department, I think maybe I'd do a reality check on this before using it as a measure of commitment to bee research:

The Bayer Bee Care Support Facility will include:
Nearly 1,215 square foot building dedicated to
promoting and protecting bee health.

I'm sure if you are not numerically inclined and never bought a house, 1215 sounds like a large number. But 1215 square feet is about 35 ft by 35 ft. That would make a nice garage, although a little small for my tastes. Our log cabin is 1440 square feet, and I'd classify it as cozy. My new garage is almost 2000 square ft. in two stories. 

I think this number applies to their old "Butler Building" at their NC bee yard. The new facility should be larger, and they really ought to update their "Bee Fact Sheet". And the real work is done outdoors by the bees, so the numbers of interest are numbers of hives and acres worked.

http://www.bayercropscience.us/~/me...ur-Commitment/documents/BeeCareFactSheet.ashx


----------



## Michael Bush

>Nearly 1,215 square foot building dedicated to promoting and protecting bee health.

My house is 5,200 square feet... my barn is 2,380...

>it's irrational to reject this treatment independently of its efficacy just because it's being developed by Bayer

You don't think their morality and values have an effect on the safety of their products and their honesty about that safety and their honesty about its effectiveness? I don't think it is that irrational to assume that people who have lied before will lie again. People who have marketed things that kill bees (pesticides), and people (see the list in wikipedia below) will again market something that is really not good for bees and may not be as efficacious as they would have you believe. It's hard to come up with too many companies that you could characterize as this evil based on their history.

They stole the formula for making aspirin in 1897 (it had been synthesized by various other scientist or groups between 1848-1869, long before Bayer claimed to have invented it)

They invented and marketed Heroin in 1895.

During WWI they made chemicals for gas warfare.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_weapons_in_World_War_I

During WWII they made chemicals used in genocide.
http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/bayer-nazi-role-article-1.701925

I forgot, they apologized for that one...

In 1956 the chairman of Bayer was convicted at the Nuremberg trials for “carrying out experiments on human subjects at Auschwitz, plunder, spoliation, slaver, and mass murder. “

Then there is a long list of products over which they have been sued which have now been taken off the market after they ended up being very dangerous, despite their research that they were not. And then there are allegations of defrauding the US and state governments… most of these are recent...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer#Controversies

And now they are courting the beekeepers who are suing them and sponsoring their conferences and trying to sell them more of their products...

I don't think it's irrational to not trust a company that has not proven trustworthy.


----------



## Goat Man

You do man, Michael! :thumbsup: :applause:


----------



## beemandan

Phoebee said:


> The Bayer Bee Care Support Facility will include:
> Nearly 1,215 square foot building dedicated to
> promoting and protecting bee health.


The devils! How dare they try to convince us that they can promote and protect bee health from a measly 1,215 sq ft building! Preposterous! 

It's akin to trusting a Beesource poster who only has 100 posts under his belt. Who, in their right mind would do that? Not me! Anything under 3,800 posts is cause for suspicion.


----------



## Michael Bush

I may have turned that around a bit. Here is the quote from Wikipedia (with a reference to back it up):

"Nazi chairman
In 1956 Fritz ter Meer became chairman of Bayer's supervisory board. He was convicted at the Nuremberg trials for his part in carrying out experiments on human subjects at Auschwitz. He was found "guilty of count two, plunder and spoliation, and count three, slavery and mass murder" and sentenced to seven years imprisonment and served five years."

Maybe they made him chairman AFTER he was convicted and punished for being a slaver and mass murder and I misread it. The above is from here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer#Nazi_chairman


----------



## beemandan

I would hate to be held accountable for the misdeeds of my ancestors.


----------



## Michael Bush

>I would hate to be held accountable for the misdeeds of my ancestors. 

Agreed. But most of the issues here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer#HIV_infected_blood_products

start in about 2006 and run to the current day...

My guess is the people responsible for those things from 2006 to now are still in charge. My point is not just ancient histor, but that they have a history of imorrality that runs from the 1800s until now. I don't see any real lapses or changes in the company's values...


----------



## beemandan

Every business of consequence, in my experience, has employees who are our neighbors, friends, family and loved ones. Bayer (or Monsanto...or whomever) are no different. The vast majority of those employees have children, grandchildren and loved ones and are environmentally concerned, honest and conscientious. 
If you have specific objections to a particular practice or person or product, then so be it. To suggest that the entire corporation is corrupt is to paint all of those honest people with the same brush that one paints the unethical few, simply because they belong to the same company, is inappropriate and improper, in my opinion


----------



## Phoebee

I actually rather liked the Bayer Bee Guy who talked to us. He has a company story he has to tell, of course, and I take all that with a grain of salt. However, it was quite evident that he knew his stuff. I have zero doubt that he is exceptionally good at spotting reasons bees die that have nothing to do with Bayer products. He has kept bees since the 70's, I think.

What I particularly liked is his willingness to discuss their methodology that could be useful to ordinary beekeepers. I was already planning to instrument our hives, including electronic datalogging of weight, because that sort of geek stuff is what I live for. Since what I planned to do was very similar to how their research hives are set up, I felt justified. But there are also other tricks I've not heard described elsewhere. He puts rectangular corpse traps in front of their hives, elevated off the ground a little and with hardware cloth bottoms (like screened bottom boards, but outside). This gives him a way to count the corpses, examine them to determine life phase, deformations, etc., and do autopsies. That's simple enough to do for any of us.

As for what they say about pesticides, that's an experiment I'm fortunately able to skip. Our lucky bees will have to search far and wide to find any.


----------



## Goat Man

beemandan said:


> The devils! How dare they try to convince us that they can promote and protect bee health from a measly 1,215 sq ft building! Preposterous!
> 
> It's akin to trusting a Beesource poster who only has 100 posts under his belt. Who, in their right mind would do that? Not me! Anything under 3,800 posts is cause for suspicion.



Well I have 179 posts. So you gotta listen to me..
Not everyone signs up for Beesource on the day they start keeping bees and post on every subject offered.


----------



## Phoebee

Interesting, originally Bee Man Dan said "Anything under 10,000 posts ..." I'm suspicious! I see an edit.

If anyone wants to be suspicious of my exceptional experience keeping bees, they are very, very _*wise.*_

The ten thousand posts are elsewhere on other subjects, mostly science-related.


----------



## beemandan

Goat Man said:


> Not everyone signs up for Beesource on the day they start keeping bees and post on every subject offered.


I hope you're not trying to tell me that you took my statement seriously. Otherwise.....I'm a bit worried about you.


----------



## beemandan

Phoebee said:


> Interesting, originally Bee Man Dan said "Anything under 10,000 posts ..." I'm suspicious! I see an edit.


I did indeed edit it down. I've discovered that folks take my humor seriously sometimes....so I figured that I'd include myself in the trusted group....just to cover myself.


----------

