# FGMO Discredited in Bee Culture



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hello folks.
A Spanish saying (translated literally) says:
"There is no blinder man than he who does not want to see."
Hundreds of beekeepers, including commercial beekeepers, are reporting that FGMO (especially FGMO/thymol) is effective for them.
 For the last 12 years I have used nothing but FGMO (and FGMO/thymol during the last eight years)both in the United States and in Spain. I have zero mites. I am a man of God. I tell no lies. 
I have challenged those who do not believe to come and see my colonies. To date, no one has taken me on my challenge. 
But what is more important, NO ONE has replicated my work. The trend has been to defeat FGMO rather than to prove its worth. Some foreign countries are benefiting from the effectiveness of FGMO to the point that laws have been enacted allowing the use of FGMO for mite control. 
Why?, one might ask. The fact is that there are no huge benefits from FGMO research. Researchers are interested in working with "chemical" products that provide big incentives, i. e. grants. 
Unfortunately, negative comments about FGMO are depriving beekeepers from obtaining the benefits provided by FGMO: cost-effectiveness, developemnt of mite resistant bees, development of hygienic behaviour, definitely no development of resistance to FGMO, no residues in either honey or wax proven by independent gas chromatography laboratory analysis, huge bee populations disease-free. All of the above are conducive to greater economic returns. 
Then I ask, name the chemcial miticide presently in use that matches these qualities. I know of none. 
Those who claim that FGMO does not work base their allegations saying that my research is not "scientific" because my work lack some of the parameters used by those who work with grant money. I use my personal money for my research. I have tried time and again to collaborate with the research community to no avail. My phone calls and correspondence have been ignored. For the last 12 years I have attempted to obtain funds in order that I may include the parameters that researchers claim that I am lacking in my work. Again, my phone calls, letters and e-mail have been ignored. Not even the courtesy of a reply. 
I have spent "a small fortune" as the saying goes for my love for honey bees in particular and humanity in general. By contrast, in 12 years of work, I have received $3595.00 in donations for my work. I am appreciative. This means less of my pension money that I had to spend.
I thank The Lord constantly for the blessings He bestows upon me: love, kindness, health, faith, and perseverance.
May He grant us all peace and blessings.
Dr. Rodriguez


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

iddee, how about you?? What do you think?


----------



## iddee (Jun 21, 2005)

Why not ask Collinson for his?
I used fgmo and thymol for the first time yesterday, and not only did I see a much larger drop in mites in 24 hours, but also, and I didn't even know I had them, I saw either wax moth or hive beetle larva drop with the mites.I have seen many wax moth larva, but never SHB larva. They looked like wax moth.
Don't ask me to explain that one, I just know they were there.
Maybe the doctor can help. Does it really help with wax moth or SHB?


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

Good question iddee.


----------



## JJ (Jun 22, 2004)

Hello Pedro and all. I agree with Sundance lets not start this bickering back and forth. Maybe Mr.Collison reads this forum or someone can get him the message of his proof that FGMO and FGMO/THYMOL does not work and maybe he will take up Pedros offer to go and check is hives. If Im not wrong Mr.Bush was at one time using only FGMO and small cell and he said it worked. I have had better results with the FGMO/THYMOL.I think Sundance has the right idea, for those saying that FGMO/THYMOL does not work show how and why it did not. Take care JJ


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

Thanks JJ........


----------



## Joseph Clemens (Feb 12, 2005)

I appreciate that I don't need to defend FGMO, Apistan, Coumophos, Oxalic Acid, Powdered Sugar, or any other of the miriad treatments touted for control or parasitic mites of honeybees.

Since these mites seem to be such an insidious scourge to many beekeeper's bees -- I am truly saddened by the great losses I've heard about and have an intense curiosity concerning my apparent immunity to these losses.

Good luck to all of you who use various chemical treatments on your honeybees for your many reasons. *As for me and my bees we will continue to restrain ourselves from using any chemicals. If this causes the untimely loss of any of my colonies (so far they have all remained healthy and vigorous - going on 9 years now) I will be very sad, but I will continue to try keeping honeybees as long as I am physically able.*

My guess is that honeybees, with or without our intervention, will persist on this earth for a very long time to come. Word is they have already existed for possibly millions of years.


----------



## clintonbemrose (Oct 23, 2001)

I have used FGMO over 5 years as Dr. R outlines and the results have been good for me.
I was a traveling pollinator for 30 years with 500 + or - hives depending on losses.
1970's losses were averaging 15% T mites and varroa

1980's losses increased to about 20% T mites and Varroa

1990's losses increased to yearly about 33% due to T mites and Varroa with 3 hives lost to AFB and the ever increasing chemical resistance of the V mites

2000 started with 500 hives and mite counts exceding 500 per hive.
Used FGMO cords and fog and the mite counts droped by fall to less than 200 by foging every 14 days.
losses again droped to 12% for the year.

2001 started with 500 hives again but increased the foging to weekly and the mite counts droped to lass than 50 by the end of the season

2002 started out with 500 hives with a mite drop of 225 average and foged weekly and the mite count droped to less than 50 by the end of the season.
the losses this year were 10 hives but all but 1 were stolen.

2003 started with 503 hives with an average mite drop of less than 200. I fogged weekly and the mite count droped to less than 50 average. This year I lost 14 hives all to AFB and 3 we think to Varroa.

2004 I started with 505 hives but added Thymol to the FGMO as Dr R instructed. I fogged every 7 days and the mite count had droped to less than 5 per hive by January 5 2005. At this time I was made an offer for the business that I could not turn down so I have retired but now have 10 hives started at my home in Michigan to play around with. I still use FGMO/Thymol in my hives and read all of the articals about how FGMO can't and wont work and I just sit back and smile. FGMO WORKS FOR ME!!!
Clint


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

Great going Clinton!


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hello folks.
We, in this forum, must be careful as to what and how we ask for information. The way questions are being asked up to now regarding FGMO studies, we are bound to receive many allegations that the subject has been researched.
In 43 years of professional work and 8 years of university level study, I have read thousands of of subject related research papers all of which have been properly crossed referenced including anecdotal evidence. I have yet to read research reports of any kind in which my protocol was referenced or even mentioned. Allegatins have been made that my work lacks "scientific" work procedures. I am the first one to recognize that my work could/should include missing parameters such as control colonies and more delicate expensive equipment. However, this is not entirely true because I teamed up with a group of scientists in Spain in an experiment that included all the parameters (it even included DNA identification of the classes of bees utilized)required for the test to be considered as scientific. 
The findings were published but were readily ignored. This fact leads me to believe that failure to recognize my work with FGMO is not personal. My thoughts indicate to me that it is all against FGMO because use of FGMO is very economic for mite control and a formidable contestant against chemical control measures. 
You be the judge, dear friends.
The reason for my "caution" remarks is that there are several "studies" performed with FGMO for mite control. However, those that I have read have failed totally in replicating my work. Only one person, a graduate student, wrote asking for advise on how to conduct an FGMO study project, but then he did not follow the parameters and protocol that I told him that I had used for my work. Result: Unsatisfactory conclusions. Other reports have followed a similar pattern, i. e., blatantly attempted to ridicule the use of the Burgess 1443 Insect Fogger, not only disregarding my widely published FGMO procedure but also grossly ignoring the manufacter's instructions, concluding that FGMO was not effective for mite control and that use of the fogger was a safety hazard. Other reported studies have concluded that FGMO might be "okay" if used as a vehicle for applying miticides but no mention was made of having followed my established protocol that demonstrates FGMO efficacy. Judging by these "reports" I tend to think that the intent and purpose of these reports were not for the purpose of demonstrating effectiveness or lack of effectiveness of FGMO. 
I wish to make clear that I am not quarreling about the subject. I am justifiably defending my hard, unselfish, sincery work of 12 years which I have readily donated to beekeeping and humanity.
May The Good Lord enlighten all of us.
Dr. Rodriguez


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

Your work is appreciated.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

So far as the "studies" I've bothered to read on both FGMO or small cell the researchers never seem to be willing to actually follow the established protocol. They just make up their own and then say it doesn't work. I don't know of any research that has followed Dr. Rodriguez's protocol at all, let alone one that proves or disproves that it works AFTER following the protocol.

Clinton on the other hand has folowed the protocol and certainly has used it on the most hives of anyone I know, and under real world conditions of pollenation. I think that's a pretty significant "works for me". Several hundred hives over five years is a pretty significant test, don't you think?


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

Good point.


----------



## JJ (Jun 22, 2004)

Hi everyone. Joseph I dont know what you are doing but its great that you dont have to treat your bees, all I can say is you need to be oh so thankful. Clinton, very well said and thanks for all the great info. MB, you are correct. Everytime small cell or FGMO/THYMOL is brought up it never done the way it is suppose to be done. Someone is always adding to or taking away from the procedure or method. I hope we are going to get on this again. It seems like every couple months its brought up and here we go again. DR.R, Thanks for all your time and help.Keep up the good work. Take care JJ


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hello folks.
Thanks everyone for your input. It feels great to have some positive remarks posted on the benefits of FGMO. I think that the truth will prevail at the end. The Lord acts in mesterius ways and I am sure He keeps inspiring me. 
Brother Clint. I am going to be in the Grand Rapids area for a few days the fist week in November. I would love to visit and chat with you. Could that be possible? There would be no problem in driving out to Lansing. Please let me know.
Very best regards and God bless.
Dr. Rodriguez


----------



## clintonbemrose (Oct 23, 2001)

I would love to meet with you and would be willing to drive to Grand Rapids to meet with you. If you are lecturing there please let me know as I would like to attend. As for meeting you set the time and place and I will be there.
Clint


----------



## clintonbemrose (Oct 23, 2001)

My phone is 517 694-7575
cell phone 517 420-3971
address
Clinton Bemrose
3212 Holt Rd.
Mason, Michigan 48854
E-MAIL
[email protected]
Clint


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> The fact is that there are no huge benefits from
> FGMO research. Researchers are interested in
> working with "chemical" products that provide
> big incentives, i. e. grants.


This sort of claim is utterly false and irresponsible.
It is also insulting to the many people who work
in research. 

If not for varroa, most of these researchers
would be working on issues completely unrelated
to pests and diseases, issues that would get
no funding at all from "chemical companies".

In fact, the only studies that are funded by
chemical companies are the ones required to
get EPA approval for a specific product, and
this sort of work is considered about as exciting
as doing the dishes by most researchers. 
Yes, such funding does keep a grad student or two
employed for a few extra months, which helps 
the grad student, who would rather stay working
and earning money, but these are one-shot 
projects, not even enough to fund a single
grad student for a year.



> I tend to think that the intent and purpose of
> these reports were not for the purpose of
> demonstrating effectiveness or lack of
> effectiveness of FGMO.


Please recall that everyone would like to find 
"a solution", as this would stop beekeepers from
pressuring the research community for such a 
solution, and would allow the researchers
to go back to working on non-varroa-related 
issues, things in which the researchers are 
actualy interested, such as vision, perception,
social organization, etc.

No one is going to waste their time doing the
work and publishing results with some sort of
"agenda", as there are too many things that
would be better uses of time and money.



> In 43 years of professional work and 8 years
> of university level study...


OK, but you are a Veternarian, a DVM. The proper 
form of address should be "Pedro Rodriguez, DVM" 
rather than "Dr. Pedro Rodriguez". This may be
a minor point, and may be a non-issue in Spain,
but it likely annoys those who care about 
"credentials".



> I have yet to read research reports of any kind in which my protocol was referenced or even mentioned. Allegatins have been made that my work lacks "scientific" work procedures. I am the first one to recognize that my work could/should include missing parameters such as control colonies...


Well, why not publish this protocol in a format
that would be similar to the "discussion" section
of a typical paper, so that researchers can 
examine it, critique it, and compare/contrast 
their methodologies to the approach you used? 
If nothing else, it would remove all possible excuses.

My understanding of the basic problem is that 
FGMO-treated colonies simply do not show any 
better survival rates than controls. If you
think that the actual problem is that none of
these researchers are not using the fogger 
correctly, that's easy to fix with a digital 
camera or a video camera.


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

Good points Jim. I would like to see some controlled studies done myself.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>OK, but you are a Veternarian, a DVM. The proper 
form of address should be "Pedro Rodriguez, DVM" 
rather than "Dr. Pedro Rodriguez".

Why? Beekeepers are not looking for a medical doctor to come up with a solution for mites. As a DVM he's dealt with mites for many years on many different animals. He is a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, so what's misleading about Dr. Pedro Rodriguez? He has on many occasions pointed out that his Doctorate is in Veterinary Medicine. I certainly have not felt misled.


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hello folks.
This post is not meant to be "incendiary." I merily would like reply to Mr. (I do not know any other title to addrees you) Fisher, you seem to have a problem with etnicities. About a year ago, you insulted the citizens of New Zeland for which I suggested that you should apologize but I guess that you really meant to insult them because you ignored the suggestion blatantly. 
Now, today, you chose to insult the people of Spain, one of the most culturally rich ethnia of the world. I now also indicate that you owe an apology to the People of Spain. Ignoring this request would give you the title that people you deserve, bigot!
Now to my personal professional qualifications. If you would have taken time to learn, you would not have had to make unnecessary comments abut my professional title
because:
1. I am listed in Who is Who in America
2. Should I chose to use my veterinary title, it would be V.M.D. and not DVM. That title is utilized only by the No. 1 School of Veterinary Medicine in the United States, The University of Pennsylvania. But I guess that you did not know that so you would have made a comment about that too.
3. The reason why I use Dr. in this forum is because it is my required registered signature for posting in Beesource.com But then again, I guess that you did not know that either. 
4. I guess that you do not know or do not respect the laws of our great country, The United States of America, especially that which prohibits racial prejudice. 
5. I was born a citizen of this Country and have proudly served our Country in two full service careers, having attained the grades 
GS-13 with the Department of Agriculture and
Colonel in the United States Army. 
Are there any other qualifications that you would like to know about my professional life? I could mention a few others.
Have a wonderful day and God bless.
By the way, I will go to church to ask for absolution of a sin. I became irate when I read your post today. May The Lord forgive me.
Pedro P. Rodriguez V.M.D.


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Mike Bush:
My most heartfelt thanks to you.
Pedro


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

Pedro, I was trying to explain the likely viewpoint
of those who you slandered by "implying" with
very muddy boots that they were somehow motivated
by money, rather than the same forces that drive
you to do the work you do.

If Clarence's "answer" in his little "quiz" is
something with which you do not agree, write
Kim Flottum, and demand "equal time". You need
not be the only one to do so. Anyone who has
a good track record with FGMO may do so.
Many people have taken Clarence to task in similar
situations (most recently Sue Cobey), and Clarence
is not so stuffy or so egotisitical to not be able
to see when his overly-simplified "multiple 
choice" approach to everything ignores the fact 
that beekeeping is not an exact science, and lacks
firm answers to many questions.

I insulted no one, no country. I made comments
clearly intended to assist you in your efforts.
If you want to get defensive, I suggest you
re-read what I actually wrote, and recognize that
none of it could be read as "insulting" by any
reasonable person. 

Yeah, I poked fun at New Zealand, they deserved it.
I've also recently poked fun at Canada,
Australia, and the USofA in genuine print, aided
and abetted by editors and publishers of Bee Mags.

Is NO ONE safe?









Nope. I am a danger to myself and others.


----------



## Keith Benson (Feb 17, 2003)

Jim Wrote:

"OK, but you are a Veternarian, a DVM. The proper
form of address should be "Pedro Rodriguez, DVM"
rather than "Dr. Pedro Rodriguez". This may be
a minor point, and may be a non-issue in Spain,
but it likely annoys those who care about
"credentials".

FWIW - technically, either is appropriate. It is more specific, especially when writing, to list the degree - and that applies to PhDs, MD's DMDs, DDSs etc. Veterinarians are not uncomonly refered to as Dr. [fill in name here] verbally and in print. What I find annoying is when people list me on something as Dr. Keith Benson, DVM. Perhaps they work for the department of redundancy department. 

Pedro then wrote "Should I chose to use my veterinary title, it would be V.M.D. and not DVM. That title is utilized only by the No. 1 School of Veterinary Medicine in the United States, The University of Pennsylvania."

Only a PennWee would say such a thing. Half of the vet schools in the country has been called no. 1 by some group or another and that designation certainly shifts depending on what facet of vet med you are focusing on. 

Keith Benson DVM, AKA Dr. Keith Benson


----------



## iddee (Jun 21, 2005)

Jim, talk about others all you want, but don't ever insult us dumb ******** by calling us something like "southern gentlemen" Yo' heer!


----------



## searcher (May 26, 2005)

This post edited.

Help - or at least do no harm.


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Mr. Fisher: you are playing with words. Some people are like that. On the other hand there are othners who are dead serious about what they believe in, what they do and what their forefathers taught them. I consider mysefl in the second group. 
May The Good Lord grant all of us peace.
Pedro P. Rodriguez V.M.D.


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Mr. Fisher:
I have neglected to state that the diploma vested on me by The School of Veterinary Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania reads (in latin):
VETERINARIAE MEDICINAE DOCTORIS.
The last time that I participated in a latin class room, DOCTORIS meant doctor. I think that it still means the same.
Have a wonderful day in the company of The Lord.
Pedro P. Rodriguez V.M.D.


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hallelujah. Praise The Lord.
There are still decent people with guts in this agrieved world of ours.
Pedro P. Rodriguez V.M.D.


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> On a side note. Jim - I don't know you, but I 
> don't much respect you either 

Don't confuse being hard on the issues
with being hard on people. If we are not
willing to bang the ideas against each other
to see which breaks first, we'll never get
anywhere.

As for your personal attack, it is not your
specific opinion I respect, but I at least 
respect your right to have one.








Please grant others the same courtesy you expect
as a matter of course, myself included.

You are welcome to declare yourself a member of
the aluminum-foil hat club, and claim that some
researchers are somehow "in cahoots" with the
chemical companies or some other such nonsense,
but such slander is simply unacceptable without
strict proof, as the accusation implies overtly
criminal wrongdoing, fraud, and bribery.

I remain amazed at the rabid response to any
suggestion that Pedro's work might be merely
what he says it is - difficult to replicate.
Suggesting that he document his protocol is
NOT an attack - it is a reasonable suggestion.

Check your egos at the door along with all
aluminum-foil beanies kids, this is a game 
played with statistics, controls, and lots 
of really boring counting of this and that.

You may not like the findings of this study
or that one, and you are welcome to either
draft rebuttals, conduct your own studies, 
or help fund one. But complaining about the 
motives of those who do the work is very poor 
form.

Pedro, I assume you have a Bible handy, so
I'd suggest *Matthew 6:1-6*:
_"Beware of practicing your piety before 
men in order to be seen by them..."_


----------



## searcher (May 26, 2005)

This post edited.

Your right - this should never be a personal attack to further the study and research of the problem needing to be solved. I state FGMO works in my hives and because of its use I have saved a lot of money not using the chemical alternatives.


----------



## MIKI (Aug 15, 2003)

>My guess is that honeybees, with or without our intervention, will persist on this earth for a very long time to come. Word is they have already existed for possibly millions of years.<


Many creatures existed for a very long time on this earth until man decided to help them or himself. This reasoning or turning a blind eye to a problem will certainly insure that it goes away. Instead of attacking a man who has selflessly devoted his time, money and personal resources to solving a problem be part of the solution and not part of the problem. If you want to discredit the man invest your own time, money and personal resources and prove him wrong! But then again you cant so you wont even try instead you pick petty garbage to bicker about like a title. Who cares about a title Dr. R as I choose to call him has no need to prove himself to me, I have seen the results of his work in my own hives! Attacks like this are a waste of his time which is better spent on his work. I am a soldier and I defend your right to free speech and dont think I am signaling anyone out, as my next comment goes to everyone who disputes the validity of Dr Rs work.

JUST IN CASE READING BETWEEN THE LINES DOSENT WORK! GET OFF YOUR RECLINERS, PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS AND PROVE HIM WRONG

Joseph, I think its great that you dont need any treatments of any kind and I wish you continued luck in one of the few small places where mites mysteriously dont exist just realizes you are part of the minority and a day may come when you find yourself thankful for his work.

Jim, sometimes I value your opinion but if you did not intend to make it an issue why mention it at all! 

Dr. R, sorry if in your defense I have over stepped my bounds.


----------



## JJ (Jun 22, 2004)

Hello everyone.Well here we are in battle again. One says it works one says it dont.I still say we should be working together instead of working against each other.As to the Bible Matt 6- 1 through 6 we should all read it. But I will say I have never seen or heard of Pedro looking for any praise from man or bragging about what he has done.He has stood up for what he believes and the methods he has made as to FGMO/THYMOL.He has done no more than anyone would do if they had a product or method that they believed in.Pedro is not trying to sell something only that FGMO/THYMOL works. I could see some other reaction if people started bashing ther product. I really dont think Pedro has to prove anything, FGMO/THYMOL works. Might not be for everyone and if you use it you must stay on top of it. Oh I also want to say I not only read Matt 6, but I looked it up in the commentary and believe me this has nothing to do with Pedro. If you want to read something read Psalms. I think that will open some eyes. Pedro I know you can stand up for yourself I just felt to say what I have. Take care all JJ


----------



## JJ (Jun 22, 2004)

GARY GREAT JOB MY FRIEND. WELL SAID. GARY GOD BLESS YOU AND THANKS FOR ALL YOU AND OTHERS HAVE DONE FOR THIS COUNTRY. THANKS GARY Take care JJ


----------



## JJ (Jun 22, 2004)

I made a mistake about the above reference read Psalms but more to fit the comments above and through out this forum I met PROVERBS. Take care JJ


----------



## Keith Benson (Feb 17, 2003)

Searcher,

"Can you imagine someone writing their thesis on years of research to find that FGMO is effective."

Yes I can. If it is true.

I am not certain how you find that Viet Nam, Dow chemical or any of your other examples fit into this discussion but let me simply add this. Big agrochemical companies are not the only source of funding in this world. They do not control every dollar. I have personally be given small grants to do research that will net no one a red nickel. Much research is done simply because there is a problem for which a solution is desired, and money is not always the bottom line.

Otherwise, I am not sure how I would have gotten money to look at pharmacokinetics in iguanas, PEG tube placement in ferrets, characterizing renal portal vasculature in iguanas etc. The list goes on. There was a clinical question that needed answering, and I found some money to do the work. All it took was convincing some folks that the line of questioning was reasonable and *might* yield some valuable information.

Jim's right, don't confuse researchers not investigating a line of questioning they consider uninteresting or unlikely to be fruitful with a deep dark conspiracy. 

And Pedro, no need to defend your degree multiple times, if people don't get it, that's their problem. Just let it slide, or someone might suggest that thou dost protest too much.

Keith


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hello folks.
This has gone far beyond what it is worth. I have mentioned many times before that I did not wish to have comments made about my faith. That should be clear to any one who has read the posts on this forum. Anyone who knows me in person would readily agree how great my faith is and how active I am in my own church not only here in the great USA but also abroad. I don't have to defend that. My actions speak for themselves. The Lord is may saviour and only to Him I have to answer. In Him I believe and follow.
Gary, JJ and many others, thanks from the bottom of my heart.
Mr. Fisher as far as you are concerned I have one phrase for you: R. I. P.
May The Lord guide and enlighten us all.
Dr. Pedro Rodriguez


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

I started this thread asking if anyone knew if there was a *controlled* study to support Dr. R's work.

It quickly degraded as if it were an attack on Dr. R. *Which it was not!!* Then further degraded into name calling, and other juvinile persuits.

I have read over and over Jim's post and even as a "bed wetting liberal" I could find nothing that slandered Spain or it's peoples.

I have since gone back and edited my begining posts in jest to better fit the mind set. *No one even noticed!!* Everyone seems blinded by thoughts better left for the "Tailgater" section.

Refresh my memory but where did the phrase *"Turn the other cheek..." * come from???

I ask again, and this time I will not come back and edit it out.

*Is anyone aware of a controlled study on the effectiveness of FGMO?? Emphasis on controlled. There must other methods and no treatment hives.*


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

Call Mark at USDA Beltsville.

Dunno when he will publish, or even if he will
publish, but I know that they have done the work.


----------



## HarryVanderpool (Apr 11, 2005)

>>>Mr. Fisher as far as you are concerned I have one phrase for you: R. I. P.<<<

What an absolutly horrible thing to say to a fellow beekeeper. I am sickened.

>>>May The Lord guide and enlighten us all.<<<

Amen, brother! Some major enlightening couldn't hurt this retched choice of words.

Harry Vanderpool


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

Thanks Jim..... I'll try and track Mark down.


----------



## fat/beeman (Aug 23, 2002)

I am a commercial beekeeper in ga useing fgmo for several yrs now and belive what you want to not. I keep my losses to less then 5% due to Dr. Pedro's research on fgmo. if you like you can see my results at my web site www.geocities/fatbeeman
I only have great respect for the Dr. and there should be more like him on the board. well that's my opion=====Don


----------



## nursebee (Sep 29, 2003)

Fatbeeman link did not work for me.


----------



## iddee (Jun 21, 2005)

should be 
www.geocities.com/fatbeeman


----------



## Ronnie Elliott (Mar 24, 2004)

What a forum, you fellas need to get back to beekeeping at hand. We all need to be friends. I have learned a lot from this forum. I believe in God, Dr. Pedro, Walt Wright, and my "Lovely Wife" of 29 years, yes mam I'm comming.


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hello JR. 
Amen.
My "lovely wife" and I have been happily married for 53 years. Praise the Lord.
Pedro


----------



## iddee (Jun 21, 2005)

DR.
I was going to hit him with 38 years, but you beat me good.

Is the pretty lady still 39???


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Yes sir, and very smart as most Spanish ladies are. 
Very best and God bless.
Pedro


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

I meant to say smart looking.


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

Nice set up Don..... I have had wonderful luck with small cell so far.

Thanks for the link.


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hello Don.
Someone wrote and told me that you were ill and not working your bees any longer hence I did not order bees from you because I did not know who was in charge of your operation.
Thank The Good Lord for your recovery. So good to see you back.
Very best regards and God bless.
Pedro


----------



## Joseph Clemens (Feb 12, 2005)

> Joseph, I think its great that you dont need any treatments of any kind and I wish you continued luck in one of the few small places where mites mysteriously dont exist just realizes you are part of the minority and a day may come when you find yourself thankful for his work.


MIKI,
I believe you may misunderstand. It isn't that there is an absence of mites. But when I relocated here to Tucson, Arizona I was unaware of honeybee parasitic mites, I began keeping bees here while still unaware of the mites, I saw no PMS and had no losses. After about 4 years, I learned of the Varroa mites existence and upon my next inspection, I observed the Varroa mites on drone brood and saw mites on many worker bees. I was concerned that the mites would destroy my bees as I had read they do. I did lots of research and learned about the many treatments being used to control the mites, even FGMO information. I decided that since I had already been keeping bees for most of 40 years without the use of any chemicals, that I would see what happened if I continued my chemical-free policy. Due to the doom and gloom predictions I was reading, I honestly expected I would soon be bee-less.

Everyone's conditions are different. I wouldn't try to say that any treatments are ineffective. How would I know? All I know is that, so far, "no treatments" has worked, in my conditions, with my bees, these past 9 years.


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hello folks.
Brother Joseph:
According to all predictions (it has been established that untreated colonies die within a year or two. If what you say about seen that many mites by visual inspections is what I imagine (reaching an overwhelming mite load) you will be bee-less next Spring.
It may not have occured to you but, treating with FGMO would not be against your policy of not using chemical pesticides (if that is what you mean by non-chemical treatment. 
This is the time of year to start treatment, even in Arizona, in preparation for wintering.
Very best regards and God bless.
Dr. Rodriguez


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

I thought Joseph was using small cell foundation??? I may be wrong and perhaps Joseph will either concur or correct me. 

We can't forget that small cell foundation is "treatment". 

A treatment which is very successful by documented accounts including a controlled study recently published in the September 2005 issue of Bee Culture.

Here's a link to that thread on this board....

http://www.beesource.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=13;t=000234

Note that this 2 year study had a control group of hives which is what sparked me to start this thread. The hope I can find a like study on FGMO.

Also note that this study happened without chemical company interferance even though they will gain nothing, in fact potentially lose profits.

I know of a few beekeepers that use only small cell with fantastic results. I hope to be one of them.


----------



## fat/beeman (Aug 23, 2002)

Hello Dr.
welcome back and thank you for careing about me and my bees. been in bees too long to give up when I got sick. I am fine now and going very strong now and makeing lot of increases now for next spring.and thank god for your fgmo it works great. I can atest to that by looking at my web site you can see the results.
Don


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hello brother Don.
Good to see you are back.
Please take care of yourself and don't over do it. We'll get together about next year bees.
Have a wonderful evening and God bless.
Pedro


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

Dr R........ What type of foundation are you using on your bees???


----------



## Joseph Clemens (Feb 12, 2005)

Sundance,
Yes, I have begun using small-cell foundation with many of my hives now, these last 4 years, but for the first 4-5 years I didn't even use small-cell foundation, just Pierco foundation and a few one piece Pierco frames. I started using small-cell before experiencing any mite problems, because it sounded like the "treatment" least likely to introduce something to the hive environment that wasn't already there, and it sounded like an interesting thing to do. I find it difficult to grant small-cell, 100% credit for helping my bees tolerate mites since they have apparently always tolerated mites.

I don't know why, but today I did a fairly thorough exam of about 1/2 of my hives, making a point to look for Varroa in sealed drone brood and on adult bees. For the first time I was unable to find even one mite anywhere, usually I could always find them on drone brood if nowhere else, but today they weren't even on the drone brood I sacrificed to examine.


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hello folks.
I use standard foundation. The reason is that I started swith that type and I do not wish to intoduce a another parameter. I still have a couple of things to try out with my regular trials.
I have been ready to do "controlled" type experiments. I did in my firt two trials. Then government sponsored spraying t=for the Nile mosquito killed all my hives (53, including the equipment which was not usable any longer either). After that I have not been able to muster enough money to purchase hives to do controlled studies. I am limited by the amount of money that I can take out of my pension to "play" with my bees. 
Plain and simple.
Very best regards and God bless.
Dr. Rodriguez


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

Sorry to hear about your setback. They were probably using malithion. Nasty stuff.

Do you have insurance on your hives?? In the US it is not uncommon.

If I were rich and famous, ah heck, just rich..... I'd give it a try myself.

Good luck with your good work.


----------



## MIKI (Aug 15, 2003)

Joseph,
It occured to me to ask if there was another reason, but that question has been answered. I totaly agree with your chemicle free feelings. I attempted to practice that way last season. I went to Munich and bought 3 packages of Elgons @ 50.00 Euro a pop, all went well with my experiment untill the fall when I successfully proved Elgons were not mite resistant in my area, lost all three. I don't consider small cell a treatment It's more of a management practice. I consider FGMO a treatment a good and safe one.


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hello folks.
When we lost my FGMO test colonies (I had research partners in Norfolk, Virginia then, Linda and Mike Campbell) the area was sprayed with a very potent (new) pesticide from the air using contract Air National Guard airplanes. I am not knocking the Air National Guard. They were doing the job for which they contracted. Never the less, rules were not observed. I was told by the residents of the area that:
1). Beekeepers were not told that spraying was going to happen at the time it did.
2). Spraying was done at tree-top level.
3). Spraying was done at day time
4). A highly toxic pesticide was used (I think they said Dibron ??)
Not only were the bees lost but also the equipment because it was contaminated with the pesticides and I lost the next series of colonies that I placed in the equipment the following year. 
Do you folks understand why it is so difficult for me to muster enough money ro purchase bees and equipment to do control testing? I sincerely hope some one does.
Very best regards and God bless.
Dr. Rodriguez


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

I would consider asking the powers to be for compensation for your losses. 

If laws were broken and notification not given, you are entitled to compensation. There are at least a couple presidents in Minn and elsewhere.


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

I can live with small cell being called "a management practice", it is fairly irrelevent to me. 

I understand that labels can lend a negative conotation to some.


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> Mr. Fisher as far as you are concerned I have 
> one phrase for you: R. I. P.

I have a hard time reading this as anything
other than a death threat. If it is not,
please explain in detail why it is not.

> May The Lord guide and enlighten us all.

Extremely hypocritical, given the threat.

Clearly, offering practical suggestions
is not considered "help" by some. That's sad.


----------



## HarryVanderpool (Apr 11, 2005)

Sorry, to cross you Pedro, but a boundry has clearly been crossed here.
Mr. James Fischer is due a full apology from you for the death threat.
Short of that, your theory's credibility (regardless of where it stood before) is zero, in my opinion.
Go back through the posts and you will see differing opinions between Mr. Fischer and myself.
But you will not see Death Threats.
May God bless you and keep you.


----------



## Tim Vaughan (Jun 23, 2002)

"Joseph, I think its great that you dont need any treatments of any kind and I wish you continued luck in one of the few small places where mites mysteriously dont exist just realizes you are part of the minority and a day may come when you find yourself thankful for his work."

I don't think there is any big secret. I never once treated any hives for anything the nine years I spent in South Africa. Scuts can handle things EHBs can't.


----------



## Keith Benson (Feb 17, 2003)

Gotta agree, meant as a threat or not it a darn nasty thing to say or wish for. Jim may have a difference of opinion with you but it hardly justifies the hatred you are showing.

Once again I think you have trouble separating criticism/evaluation of your ideas with personal attacks. They are not one in the same. 

Keith


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

A poll is now available with bearing on this matter.

Vote early, vote often!

http://www.beesource.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=000527;p=1#000000


----------



## Dave W (Aug 3, 2002)

Please remove the "FGMO forum" from Beesource.

Thank you, 
Dave W


----------



## The Honey House (May 10, 2000)

No, the forum should stay as there are reports of FGMO working. 

I believe a different moderator is needed.

I believe there is a huge conflict of interest with the current moderator.


----------



## daniel G. (Feb 24, 2005)

You guys act like a bunch of two year olds. This forum is about beekeeping and what works for you and what doesn't. Quit the fighting and teach others the expertise you have found in your own bee yards. Questions are being asked every day by newbies including myself. We all want to learn the ins and outs of beekeeping.

If Dr. Pedro has found something that works for him and others have had success why not follow his protocol and try it out. So he may have mentioned a few things to make some others disagree. We are all entitled to our opinions. Holding a grudge all your life will only make you unhappy, so if that is the way you want to live so be it. I won't be around you. Life is to short for that anyway. 

Try to learn and change your ways.

Dan.


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hello folks.
You are late in making that request. I wrote Barry asking him to remove me from beesource alltogether. He is behind in complying with my request not I.
I have better things to which I can dedicate my time. 
Those who care about FGMO can still write to my personal e-mail box. 
Barry: Please comply with my request.
Dr. Rodriguez


----------



## Keith Benson (Feb 17, 2003)

Dr. Rodriguez, 

No need to leave. Having said that I think the more adult solution would be to simply say "sorry" and go back to discussing the merits of your research. 

Me thinks thou needest a thicker skin

Keith


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

Dr. R..... I would beg you to stay as your work is valuable.

But the way you handled yourself in this matter leaves me confused. As men we need to admit mistakes, apologize, and move on.

Please reconsider.


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

After some consideration over the last couple of minutes I have changed my mind.

I think FGMO section should be discontinued and any discussion can occur in Biological Beekeeping or Diaseases and Pests, much like small cell foundation discussion.

Leaving the sandbox when confronted about bad behavior is not the temper a moderator should display.

Given that it has occured on several occasions in the past I must sadly say goodbye Dr. R.


----------



## Tim Vaughan (Jun 23, 2002)

RIP a death threat? Yeah, right. An older man who is very emotional, and probably not particularly stable at this point in his long life typed those three letters, which meant in context "Go jump off a bridge". Some people had a cow. Now there's big drama. What a bunch of weenies.

Pedro, grow up and quit whining about money and prestige. Jim, there's enough drama out there so don't add to it.

Tomorrow the sun will come up, and bees will be sucking up nectar, and people will be selling honey.

Hamba Gathle, which is Zulu for either "go in peace" or "take it easy dude" depending on the situation, and in this case it's the later.


----------



## searcher (May 26, 2005)

This goes to show that anything can be interpreted in many different ways. My understanding of the R.I.P. comment is about the persons future. It's not wishing someone's immediate death. More like saying, because of your situation, view point, or religious followings. I might believe it will keep that person out of heaven. It's like praying that you escape the horrors of hell but knowing (believing) that's not going to be the case. About the same as someone stating "I will pray for your soul." They ask of you to change your ways but you continue down the wrong path. Their not wishing you personal harm, in fact in a weird way, its just the opposite. It's a casual thought, a short prayer, then I can mark it as inconsequential and not give it another thought. "NO" am not wishing anyone's ****ation. I think everyone, even me, has a hard time understanding or hearing the tones, inflections, or connotations from written words now and then. As with several posts here.

I still don't believe FGMO to be discredited by any sense of the word - which is what this post was originally about.


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Amen and may God grant you continued wisdom and trust in Christ.
Very best regards and God bless all of us.
Dr. Rodriguez


----------



## daniel G. (Feb 24, 2005)

I agree with kgbenson. Dr. Pedro. Your a man of honor and I think your research has shown much benefit to the beekeeping community. I don't want you to go. People will think what they want to think but you can keep smiling because you have found a solution that works. 

People only have to look at your data to see that your process is working. Now maybe it doesn't work for others, maybe they have not followed the protocol you have established. That is their problem. 

You have talked to many people and have found that the fgmo/thymol is working for those that have used your protocol. I think the industry will pick up on what you have been doing. I know it is working for me. Dan.


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Dear Daniel, beekeeping community and other FGMO followers world-wide.
Thanks to all of you for your support mailed to me via this forum and to my personal e-mail box. I am out of words to express my appreciation for your support. Please bear with me and read the rest of this posting.
1. I am a man of inifinite faith in Our Lord Jesus Christ. I resent any question regarding that aspect of my life. Any one who may be interested in proof of my church work please write to my personal e-mail and I'll provide it.
2. I am a humanitarian, hence I have donated my research work to beekeeping in perticular and to humanity in general from the very first. The only reason why I have mentioned MONEY in this forum is because there have been inferences in this forum that I may be benefiting ecomically from my research work with FGMO. My requests for economic assistance (from anyone) continue to be ignored and or simply not answered. This fact does not discourage my intention to continue doing my work because I truly love honey bees and the benefit that I may be providing to nature and humanity. 
3. I am a professional who has dedicated his entire life to serving our great country, The United States of America and the many communities in which I have live by performing free community service. 
4. I am a self-proclaimed 'good will ambassador' of the Unites of America through exemplary behaviour and good deeds to all the foreign countries that I visit. 
5. I firmly believe that my research with FGMO/thymol is valid and has and will provide valuable cost-effective assistance to beekeepers in an international basis for honey bee mites control.
6. I believe that there have been overt and veiled personal attacks posted on this web page to discredit my work. Needless to say, this tendency is offensive to foreign nationals, and to truthfully God loving citizens of this country and abroad. As some have stated on this forum, the actions of some of our citizens create unecessary bad feelings against our great country, The United States of America. The old saying that a rotten appple spoils the whole barrel applies here unfortunately putting blemishes on us. Utilizing a universal medium as is the internet to slur foreign nationals is harmful to our country and I do not wish to participate in any medium that promotes this type of activity.
7. For the good of beekeeping and the humanitarian benefits that are being provided through the use of mineral oil, I agree with my correspondents that I should continue my work.
8. I need to have reliable sources for publication of my work that will protect my personal privacy as well as the value of the work posted. For that reason, I have asked Mr. Barry Birkey to remove ALL my FGMO information from the Beesource.com web page. 
9. I will be posting on another web page that will guarantee all of above wishes. The owner of that web page and I will provide information to that effect as soon as it is possible.
Again, thank all o you for your support and well-meaning for my work.
My very best regards and may Almighty God have mercy on us and keep us from ****ation.
Dr. Pedro P. Rodriguez


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

My apologies. I missed a couple of "typos" while editing this post.
should read: 
item 3. "and to the many communities in which I have lived. . ."
item no. 9: "thank all of . . ."


----------



## clintonbemrose (Oct 23, 2001)

I can not believe you people all I am asking is for you to think of what good DR R and Jim Fischer have added to this board.
Dr. R. FGMO and FGMO/Thymol and the discussion there of.
Jim Fischer. adversity, total disruption of the board,chaos among others, The rules of the board don't apply to him, ads nothing worth anything and does not treet others as he would like to be treated. TTThats all FFFolks
See you in the funny papers!!!
Clint


----------



## Sundance (Sep 9, 2004)

I have gotten very valuable info from both... I was hopeing to continue to get it from both.


----------



## searcher (May 26, 2005)

Clint, you bring up a very good point. If I don't like Fords - I don't go hang out on the Ford boards to bash them. I have a tendency to search out information I find useful and to contribute where I can. I continue to wonder about certain peoples motivations. Maybe it's "Little winkie syndrome." Probably even owns a corvette or a porche. Look at me - Look at me!!!!!  (guess this makes it better)


----------



## BjornBee (Feb 7, 2003)

I think the past is a little longer than May 2005 when discussions of FGMO are concerned. Searcher started with good intentions, then degraded into the same childish claims of someone having a "little winkie syndrome". Better luck next time. And if you take the time to read the past SEVERAL years of FGMO discussions, you will see the same pattern.

Any question about the effectiveness of FGMO or better yet the in-effectiveness, is at first ignored. Any further questions are then usually met with "read my many years of research" for the answer, "for I have no time for such matters". And don't ask how many times I heard the "I'm taking my ball and going home" scenario.

This is followed by the usual banter back and forth. With no open dialog. The poster is either suppressed by a wave of chatter among the believers, such as "God bless you..., Thank you brother, and the usual blessing for good comments praising FGMO, and not even a nice reply for those with serious questions.

Questions about failure in the early years were answered by something about not following the "protocol". Any variation, even a few inches of difference in the cord length were said to cause failure. Claims changed over the years. Open dialog and sincerity were not forthcoming. And I believe this made skeptics. More than once, very conflicting comments were made, and past comments researched and posted, but for nothing. Some, as I feel, felt talked down upon. As if Dr. R wanted approval, but not the questions from the critics.

I for one do not want to see past dialog erased. Many claims, changed stories, and unanswered questions will be eliminated.

I have often said, that FGMO has its merits. And in the nicest way possible, I will also add that the messenger of the FGMO is the problem. For me you need look no further than the last post of Dr. R's. Every statement starts with "I" except #7, that took a few words, but he did fit it in. I only wish one day to be so humble as to pat myself on the back so much. I would ask one of you to pat me on the back, but you probably would stab me or push me off a cliff instead.









Others have called me some pretty lousy names. "slob" was one of my favorites. And bantering is always underway. I do not feel Dr. R was on the same level as most posters of the forum. And you could tell even the critics were respectfull for the most part. I just always felt that answering questions of his research was beneath him. That any critic was to be brushed aside. I beleive that critics, being questioned, and having non-believers of FGMO are part of the deal. I question my faith and ask questions all the time. And I hope the same God Dr. R mentions, does not have a problem with it. Too bad questions about FGMO are not as easily asked, let alone answered.

May you all R.I.P.









P.S. If you use the little yellow dude, you can almost say anything, as it changes the meaning.


----------

