Varroa Alert

[pargyle]

No doubt. But more often it is either a coincidental improvement in the condition that would have happened anyway, or the placebo effect (which has been scientifically proven to work well).

I fully accept that in humans there could be a placebo effect ... but it works in animals ? How do you explain the almost instantaneous and visible relief seen from acupuncture ... and the fact that homeopathy also can be seen and witnessed to work ... it cannot ALL be coincidental improvement. I've witnessed enough to put some credence in both acupuncture and homeopathy ... I'm fine that others may consider it smoke and mirrors or snake oil. Their loss ...

 

[GuyNir]

Years ago, I had a really bad toothache and was unable to get to a dentist right away. My father in law stuck needles in my face at different places and the pain was gone in minutes. He said they used to do Acupuncture in Russia quite regularly. I have no doubt it works.

 

[Boston Bees]

I fully accept that in humans there could be a placebo effect ... but it works in animals ? How do you explain the almost instantaneous and visible relief seen from acupuncture ... and the fact that homeopathy also can be seen and witnessed to work ... it cannot ALL be coincidental improvement. I've witnessed enough to put some credence in both acupuncture and homeopathy ... I'm fine that others may consider it smoke and mirrors or snake oil. Their loss ...

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/2016...ally that uncommon to use placebos in animals.

But listen - I wasn't really talking about acupuncture, which I view as being a bit different to homeopathy, or taking honey for hayfever. Acupuncture is an invasive physical intervention with a lot of needles! Some studies actually HAVE found that it does something for pain, though no-one knows quite why (then again, if I squeeze my leg it distracts me from the pain of an injection, so maybe it's just that).

As for homeopathy itself, if it works it is definitely because of the placebo effect, because there is literally zero active ingredient in most homeopathy remedies. For example, if you buy a tub of "30c" (the highest "strength", according to homeopaths) arnica pills, there will be no arnica whatsoever in them.

But then, the placebo effect DOES work, very well indeed. So in a sense homeopathy does work. Just not because of anything actually in the pills. Funny old world.

 

[pargyle]

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/2016...ally that uncommon to use placebos in animals.

As for homeopathy, if it works it is definitely because of the placebo effect, because there is literally zero active ingredient in most homeopathy remedies

Yes ... I've heard all the arguments from the nay-sayers and sceptics ... perhaps it is a placebo effect - who knows .. but, if it works - and I've seen both homeopathy and acupuncture work - who cares ?

When we took our arthritic dog to Chris Day he was at pains to point out that he could not cure the arthritis that had re-developed (He, like all Homeopathic vets is a conventionally qualified Vet) all the acupuncture could do was cover the symptoms and relieve the pain - it did. It also wore off in time and we used to go for repeat treaments about every 8 weeks when we noticed the dog was showing signs of returning pain. Every time the acupuncture relieved the pain ..it kept him an active dog for over 18 months after the orrhopaedic vet who (successfully) operated on him originally had written him off and suggested euthanasia. He finally succumbed to the increasing onset of the arthritis .. we had x-rays done at our local vet which showed the arthritic growth was seriously impacting on his spinal chord and leading to rear end paralysis - a condition and conclusion that Chris had told us would eventually occur .. the local vets marvelled at the fact that the dog was still active until the last few days of his life.

 

[user 819]

I didn't convince anyone but my mentioning of the use and the improvement made them rethink the possible logic behind the idea. Unlike humans animals don't speak to us and have notions/ideas that something is good for them or not. The fact that a treatment works on an animal who can't convey thoughts to us has some basis behind it and shouldn't be looked at with a closed mind.

 

[ChrisS]

As well as researching best frequency of treatments (eg 3x5; 3x7), I’ve also tried to find out if any work has been done on multiple sublimation rounds and it’s effects on colony health (not withstanding that many if you report no ill effects). The only piece I could find is the link below. The research abstract concludes no negative effects of 2 treatments but 2 weeks apart. Also demonstrates increased efficacy, though again like the LASI research colonies were Broodless.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00218839.2018.1454035

Very interesting abstract - is the full report available anywhere online?

 

[elainemary]

Very interesting abstract - is the full report available anywhere online?

Hi unfortunately not. Have to pay for the individual report or subscribe. Usually the abstract gives sufficient ‘sound bites’ to help understanding, but agree sometimes would be good to see the detail.

 

[elainemary]

Very interesting abstract - is the full report available anywhere online?

Hi I've managed to find a copy of the researcher's PhD, at University of Sussex (Dr Hasan Al Toufailia). You can find it on the University of Sussex website under that particular researcher's details, but see Chapter 6 pages 54-59 for the twice treatment by sublimation experiments, results and discussion. Some other v interesting research on varroa resistance etc featured in his doctorate. May be of interest to @Plastics & @pargyle too.

The key paragraphs not included in the extract, I've copied below. They highlight a twice treatment to a brood less colony in winter is effective as an annual treatment.

Happy Bedtime reading!
Elaine

http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/62056/1/Al Toufailia, Hasan.pdf
Extract from key paragraphs below:

"Although the second treatment of OA was less effective than the first the benefits to beekeepers of double OA treatment probably outweigh the costs given that OA is cheap and quick to apply via sublimation and causes no harm to the bees or the colony (this study; Al Toufailia et al, 2016). The main advantage of double treatment is that it will reduce the varroa population to such a low level that it should take at least one year to build up to harmful levels. As a result, annual double treatment with OA in broodless hives may be sufficient to provide full varroa control. The second OA treatment, which gave only 87.2% mortality, will still result in the varroa population requiring approximately 3 additional doublings to reach its original level, and 8 population doublings for both treatments combined. Previous research has shown that a single winter treatment of broodless hives with oxalic acid via sublimation is insufficient to prevent many non-hygienic colonies from showing overt symptoms of deformed wing virus, a pathogen that is vectored by varroa (Al Toufailia et al, 2014). A further advantage of double OA application is that it could act as insurance in the event that a single application is inadvertently made incorrectly and so kills many fewer varroa than expected"

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Still doesn't answer the question of treating once every five days, three times whilst brood is present. This just further demonstrates their unwillingness to think outside the box

 

[Finman]

Essential oils aren’t produced naturally !
Just an observation from the brain dead . To the snake oil salesmen

Look the list of essential oils from google.
.

 

[mdotb]

Still doesn't answer the question of treating once every five days, three times whilst brood is present. This just further demonstrates their unwillingness to think outside the box

I’d suggest rather that it highlights the differing goals of their academic experiments and practical beekeeping. They write that they specifically selected a period which was longer than the proven window after which sublimation of oxalic acid no longer has any measurable effect on varroa population (7 days in prior work they cite) so that they could measure mortality rate of second treatment independently of any continuing effect from the initial treatment. They removed brood from the few colonies showing any to ensure any mites present were exposed to the treatment. (14 days was reportedly chosen as longer would have brought them back into potential brood rearing conditions).

In practical beekeeping, particularly in the presence of brood, keeping a continual lethal level of OA in the hive throughout a brood cycle would seem far more beneficial, or as in the compromise of 5 days, unlikely that emerging mites post lethal concentration dispersal will have reentered a cell by subsequent treatment date. I for one do not want to go in killing all brood just to enhance varroicide efficacy.

Similarly their conclusion that treatment will remain sufficient for a whole year is founded on the assumption that no significant reinfestation will occur from sources outside the hive; a useful premise for an academic exercise, but demonstrably false in the real world, since sufficient migration of mites between colonies exists for damaging levels of varroa to establish in pretty much every colony on the mainland.

It is a part of academic research that the hypothesis under investigation is isolated as far as possible from other factors, meaning that controls and assumptions will often make the method itself impractical in the real world. It is still useful in demonstrating that a second treatment is able to cause further mortality in that proportion of a mite population which survives the initial treatment. I would argue that it advocates further for 3x5 or similar regimes by demonstrating that it is not only “emerging” mites that are susceptible to the treatment at 5 days, but also survivors, by showing such mites do not have “immunity” (even if the reasons for their survival are not well understood).

Could they investigate things that would be more immediately practical to beekeepers? Sure. Have they had the direction to look at 3x5 by whoever funds them? Clearly not.

 

[elainemary]

I’d suggest rather that it highlights the differing goals of their academic experiments and practical beekeeping. They write that they specifically selected a period which was longer than the proven window after which sublimation of oxalic acid no longer has any measurable effect on varroa population (7 days in prior work they cite) so that they could measure mortality rate of second treatment independently of any continuing effect from the initial treatment. They removed brood from the few colonies showing any to ensure any mites present were exposed to the treatment. (14 days was reportedly chosen as longer would have brought them back into potential brood rearing conditions).

In practical beekeeping, particularly in the presence of brood, keeping a continual lethal level of OA in the hive throughout a brood cycle would seem far more beneficial, or as in the compromise of 5 days, unlikely that emerging mites post lethal concentration dispersal will have reentered a cell by subsequent treatment date. I for one do not want to go in killing all brood just to enhance varroicide efficacy.

Similarly their conclusion that treatment will remain sufficient for a whole year is founded on the assumption that no significant reinfestation will occur from sources outside the hive; a useful premise for an academic exercise, but demonstrably false in the real world, since sufficient migration of mites between colonies exists for damaging levels of varroa to establish in pretty much every colony on the mainland.

It is a part of academic research that the hypothesis under investigation is isolated as far as possible from other factors, meaning that controls and assumptions will often make the method itself impractical in the real world. It is still useful in demonstrating that a second treatment is able to cause further mortality in that proportion of a mite population which survives the initial treatment. I would argue that it advocates further for 3x5 or similar regimes by demonstrating that it is not only “emerging” mites that are susceptible to the treatment at 5 days, but also survivors, by showing such mites do not have “immunity” (even if the reasons for their survival are not well understood).

Could they investigate things that would be more immediately practical to beekeepers? Sure. Have they had the direction to look at 3x5 by whoever funds them? Clearly not.

Really good points . If ok with you, I will send the researcher the key points you’ve made and invite a response? Know others have said they’ve equally challenged, so may be ignored, but no harm in pointing out again, perhaps will become a future research project...
In the meantime both scenarios (twice if broodless) and 3 times 5 days apart (if brood) are good options, depending on certainty of brood being present, time of year and how urgent the beekeeper needs to take action. Regular monitoring of drop to help inform too.

 

[ChrisS]

Hasan Al Toufailia was going to give a talk at our local association a couple of years ago, but this didn't happen as he had to return to Syria for family reasons. I'm told, by someone who saw him previously, that it would have been very interesting.

I don't fret about the number of days between winter OA vapings. I *assume* they are broodless - I'm certainly not going to start opening them up to find out! I treat in mid-December when there's a mild day and they aren't clustered too tightly, then repeat about a week or 10 days later if I get a big drop (say more than 100 mites).

This year I treated on 15th Dec and got about 150 mites from some of my hives. So they all got another vape on 26th, and I'll check the drop in a few days' time. They were flying a couple of days ago but I doubt we'll see any for the rest of this week...

 

[polymath]

Hi I've managed to find a copy of the researcher's PhD, at University of Sussex (Dr Hasan Al Toufailia). You can find it on the University of Sussex website under that particular researcher's details, but see Chapter 6 pages 54-59 for the twice treatment by sublimation experiments, results and discussion. Some other v interesting research on varroa resistance etc featured in his doctorate. May be of interest to @Plastics & @pargyle too.

The key paragraphs not included in the extract, I've copied below. They highlight a twice treatment to a brood less colony in winter is effective as an annual treatment.

Happy Bedtime reading!
Elaine

http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/62056/1/Al Toufailia, Hasan.pdf
Extract from key paragraphs below:

"Although the second treatment of OA was less effective than the first the benefits to beekeepers of double OA treatment probably outweigh the costs given that OA is cheap and quick to apply via sublimation and causes no harm to the bees or the colony (this study; Al Toufailia et al, 2016). The main advantage of double treatment is that it will reduce the varroa population to such a low level that it should take at least one year to build up to harmful levels. As a result, annual double treatment with OA in broodless hives may be sufficient to provide full varroa control. The second OA treatment, which gave only 87.2% mortality, will still result in the varroa population requiring approximately 3 additional doublings to reach its original level, and 8 population doublings for both treatments combined. Previous research has shown that a single winter treatment of broodless hives with oxalic acid via sublimation is insufficient to prevent many non-hygienic colonies from showing overt symptoms of deformed wing virus, a pathogen that is vectored by varroa (Al Toufailia et al, 2014). A further advantage of double OA application is that it could act as insurance in the event that a single application is inadvertently made incorrectly and so kills many fewer varroa than expected"

Here is a private email from Ratnieks to me on it:

Dear David

We have done research to show that single and double applications of oxalic acid, 2.25g, by sublimation in brood less hives cause no harm to bees or colonies. The research we do and the advice we give is not for any one country but general, and beekeepers can adapt this to their own situation. It is a pity that the regs for VMD in UK only permit a single application per year by sublimation, when two applications can be done with no harm to the colony and increases the varroa kill to 99.6%, and suggests that the regs could usefully be changed, in light of the scientific evidence, to permit two or multiple applications. I will leave that for the powers that be to sort out.

best regards, Francis

On a seperate email he said it should be 7 - 10 days apart.

 

[Erichalfbee]

Here is a private email from Ratnieks to me on it:

Dear David

We have done research to show that single and double applications of oxalic acid, 2.25g, by sublimation in brood less .................
On a seperate email he said it should be 7 - 10 days apart.

Yes because there is no brood.

 

[elainemary]

Here is a private email from Ratnieks to me on it:

Dear David

We have done research to show that single and double applications of oxalic acid, 2.25g, by sublimation in brood less hives cause no harm to bees or colonies. The research we do and the advice we give is not for any one country but general, and beekeepers can adapt this to their own situation. It is a pity that the regs for VMD in UK only permit a single application per year by sublimation, when two applications can be done with no harm to the colony and increases the varroa kill to 99.6%, and suggests that the regs could usefully be changed, in light of the scientific evidence, to permit two or multiple applications. I will leave that for the powers that be to sort out.

best regards, Francis

On a seperate email he said it should be 7 - 10 days apart.

Thanks for sharing that. Makes good point re VMD.

 

[elainemary]

Hasan Al Toufailia was going to give a talk at our local association a couple of years ago, but this didn't happen as he had to return to Syria for family reasons. I'm told, by someone who saw him previously, that it would have been very interesting.

I don't fret about the number of days between winter OA vapings. I *assume* they are broodless - I'm certainly not going to start opening them up to find out! I treat in mid-December when there's a mild day and they aren't clustered too tightly, then repeat about a week or 10 days later if I get a big drop (say more than 100 mites).

This year I treated on 15th Dec and got about 150 mites from some of my hives. So they all got another vape on 26th, and I'll check the drop in a few days' time. They were flying a couple of days ago but I doubt we'll see any for the rest of this week...

Think you're right esp if time with day length and weather. Whilst mine have had v low drops since their winter vap early Dec, one hive has dropped another 5 mites, since their initial drop. I was going to leave until I read the research, this forum & realised even just 5 mites could be over 1000 by Sept. So plan to vap this hive again soon.

 

[Erichalfbee]

Think you're right esp if time with day length and weather. Whilst mine have had v low drops since their winter vap early Dec, one hive has dropped another 5 mites, since their initial drop. I was going to leave until I read the research, this forum & realised even just 5 mites could be over 1000 by Sept. So plan to vap this hive again soon.

Remember you will probably be splitting them before September

 

[elainemary]

Remember you will probably be splitting them before September

Yes that helps too with a brood break doesn't it. Though I thought I'd try a few on double brood this year to see if that works as a way of reducing the likelihood of swarming.

 

[Erichalfbee]

Yes that helps too with a brood break doesn't it. Though I thought I'd try a few on double brood this year to see if that works as a way of reducing the likelihood of swarming.

Try a rolling Demaree for that.