Not sure if anyone is reading into my previous comments about it being a moot point in the differences between absorption rates. But let me add to this so, I can clarify what I was commenting.
Knowing the absorption rates between a bee, human skin, and a turtle, only lets you set the level for these individual items being tested. You can not make assumptions on how a turtle shell obsorbs something and then some how relate that to a bee. The same for the effects or ability to maintain a level within the items tested, as each tested item may have unique qualities effecting the levels retained or lost.
What I'm saying is, if you want to know the absorption rate of a bee, you test the bee. Not the turtle or human. You want to test the bee for how a chemical reacts, effects, changes, or impacts egg production or overall health for a bee, you test the bee. Not a turtle. A turtle may very well be able to flush out chemicals that a bee can not. Or vice-versa. I can not speak for a turtle, but I know humans can withstand much more than a bee can handle, and we even have the ability for chemicals to be flushed from our systems, depending what they are. We do not die at 4 parts per billions, but bees have been proven to do so with some chemicals. The bees are much more sensitive to chemicals in the environment than we are.
I think a test along the lines of painting 20 queens, and having 20 queens not painted, all from the same graft, and from the same apiary, tested at some interval such as 6 months or a year. You can monitor supercedure rates, egg production, and anything else you would want to test. After the year, you do a chemical analysis to see how much of the known chemicals in the paint are still in the queens after the paint spot has been removed. You could also test the offspring if any chemicals are being passed along in eggs, etc.
We may find nothing, or we may find something. But with all the problems in the industry, I find it ironic that no testing that I know of has ever occurred. And the stuff we pull off the shelf of the hobby store shelf to paint queens with are questionable in my mind.
And if you think the stuff is completely harmless after the fumes burn off, then I dare you to paint one underarm with a enamel paint, and the other arm with hobby cement. Let it dry if you think its best. Then post a picture of both underarms each day. You can not wash it, you can not clean it. The paint and cement must remain for 30 days. If it flakes off, more would be applied. Best part, is that if you do not make it for the 30 days, you lose nothing. I only ask for your honest participation. I think it will be interesting to see how long one can handle it once the irritation and rash starts. (irritation and rash would likely suggest far less than an inert substance) Anyone interested? I may be willing to pay a hundred dollars for the right experiment and participation. Not that proving me wrong would not be worth it already... :shock: (that's a double dare :-D ) And you may get your picture in an article in one of the bee mags as a bonus. You can PM if you wish. I thought about one of the kids taking part but my wife said I'm nuts and does not think it's as safe as others suggest this stuff is. She's smart like that. :roll:
Someone can be part of a beekeeping experiment that would be long remembered. Come on....have some fun.
Cindi....don't hold your breathe..... :-D