Brian, Thank you.
This information is in line with what Maryanne Frazier out of Penn State has found. In her samples tested, both fluvilanate and coumophos was found in every sample. But not one main chemical thought to be a CCD contributor (neonicotinoids, etc.), was found in more than 30% of the samples.
My testing that I just recently had done, and what I was looking for, was to find out IF those same beekeeper induced chemicals would be found in pollen from hives with commercial foundation. The idea was that all the CCD hives were found with fluvilanate and coumophos, with suggestions of some type carry over from contaminated foundation.
My hives had commercial foundation. My pollen, even though having three foreign chemicals, no doubt brought in from down the street, showed NOT ONE chemical from a beekeeper applied source. So I question suggestions that chemicals such as fluvilanate and coumophos could be found in ALL hives by contaminated foundation alone.
The second part of the test was centered around a foreign supply of commercial pollen that was recalled by the FDA, to which I refused to give back. They said it was a "labeling" error. The pollen had already been flagged or processed for "bee consumption" only, as was explained to me when I purchased it. What made it only good for bees and not for human consumption makes me wonder. After testing, I was surprised to find out high levels of fluvilanate and DDT in the samples. This is the same pollen brought over in large amounts and no doubt was used in pollen patties within the industry. I do not have all the dots connected, but I'm working on it.
I think that MUCH more emphasis needs to be placed on comb rotation within the industry. You can not stop the chemicals from entering the hives. The bees will find it. But stopping those chemicals from building up, is the key.