Comments on: BASF’s bed bug prevention pitch

By: sam bryks

sam bryks — Tue, 01 Jun 2010 17:13:46 +0000

regarding the “gallons” comment i made..
if a firm does a detailed crack and crevice using straw tips on a B & G or a crack and crevice system like Whitmire, then i would agree that “gallons” is not the case, but it is not atypical for spray treatment to be broadcase and in that case, if this were done as a preventive quarterly treatment, YES, they would likely be using GALLONS… The difference between ideal treatment and the reality where the rubber meets the road is the difference between limited amounts and gallons.
The idea of spraying units on a periodic basis as a preventive approach is really not a good approach.. it is reverting back to “spray jockey” techniques. ‘
the classic gallons of spray to kill the occasional intruder..
more focus on staff training and early detection is a far better approach in my view.

By: hamadryas

hamadryas — Tue, 01 Jun 2010 17:05:01 +0000

What sort of resistance to chlorfenapyr have been observed?
Also, Phantom PI seems to act very differently than Phantom SC – the difference in formulation seems to make a big difference where speed of kill is concerned. And it seems to make sense that both Phantom PI and Alpine Dust would applied in small quantities in very specific locations for the preventative treatment – nowhere does it say to do any sort of surface or even spot treatment, only crack & crevice (or void for the dust). ‘GALLONS’ may kind of be an exaggeration, even in a large commercial account like a hotel.

By: More tales of CIN-1: PBO and deltamethrin — New York vs Bed Bugs

More tales of CIN-1: PBO and deltamethrin — New York vs Bed Bugs — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 07:51:45 +0000

[...] knock them out within 24 hours. And while we catalogue these CIN-1 features, let me remind you that there are reportedly two tested pyrethroid-resistant strains that can be killed by a 4-month-old dry… (which we already know they do not avoid). CIN-1, surely, no? Otherwise it wouldn’t really be [...]

By: DE vs chlorfenapyr — New York vs Bed Bugs

DE vs chlorfenapyr — New York vs Bed Bugs — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:26:32 +0000

[...] Note: for a recent discussion of chlorfenapyr, see this: BASF’s bed bug prevention pitch. [...]

By: sam bryks

sam bryks — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 20:30:33 +0000

I don’t agree with the notion that repetitive spraying for non-existent pests on the off chance that they might appear sometime is a “philosophical” objection, unless of course we use the term “philosophical” to mean a thoughtful process based on logic and reason, I am always for philosophical considerations on that basis.
The fact is that bed bugs CAN be controlled and eliminated if the right measures are taken and the allocation of resources is made.
The safety of products goes through many evolutions – I have said it here at another time,- when i was a boy, the local shoe store had an x-ray machine to show good fit of shoes and we could watch our bones as we wiggled our toes. A few years later, it was realized that this posed an unacceptable risk for a frivolous purpose. Diazinon and Dursban used to be the mainstay of residual insecticides, but studies have shown that the risks – especially to children – are unacceptable.
Clive Boase told me that he had the experience in a major hotel with hundreds of rooms occupied by many thousands of guests, that in a period of six months, after getting an unresolved infestation under control, there was only ONE new infestation. By the preventive approach i presume that every one of those rooms would have been sprayed at least twice during that same period. so you can only imnagine the GALLONS of pesticide used NEEDLESSLY to control ONE NEW INFESTATION..
That is not mere philosophy.. that is FACTUAL, and it speaks to the way that these pests can succeed.. in the main due to unresolved infestations because there was no concerted effort to DO THE RIGHT THING..
yes, this is societal, and in a Dylanesque tone of lyric, “It ain’t easy” and as another Dylan song laments “It’s hard”..
I say. let’s do it right.. do it smart.. Let’s not get into spray jockey moving back into the middle ages of “spray till it drips off the walls”:… I have see that done in the past in roach control and guess what? IT DIDN’T WORK VERY WELL..
Treating every hotel room three times a year may sound as if it were common sense from a risk management investment perspective, but it doesn’t make much common sense from the notion of effective pest management. I would rather spend the money on education, on good inspections by staff and on a detection dog service and get a better result, FOR LESS MONEY…
that’s my practical philosophical outlook on this..

By: Renee Corea

Renee Corea — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:25:43 +0000

Thank you, gentlemen, for your comments.

I think I personally want to stay away from DDT comparisons. I don’t think that is warranted at this stage, though I understand your concern, jc.

There will be a lot of disagreement, though philosophical objections to preventive uses are less useful than discussions of practical matters of effectiveness and resistance management.

This is a real crisis we are in and the societal responses that have been suggested as solutions are well near impossible. They’re not going to happen, not in NYC at any rate. Maybe in Toronto and Ohio, well, obviously, things are different there.

By: Sam Bryks

Sam Bryks — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 02:33:58 +0000

Renee,, forgot to say that your posts are always insightful and most useful in addition to the actual links you share…
I am very glad you are still there doing this…
Sam

By: Sam Bryks

Sam Bryks — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 02:32:35 +0000

thanks for the links Renee.. The video presentations are a welcome new approach to getting information to people.
I had a look at the action of this group of insecticides (Pyrolle group), which as noted above, acts on the energy source of the cell in the mitochondria. The LC 50 for aersolized Chlorfenapyr as an aerosol is fairly low.. so caution for users is important, but BASF rather strong hint at preventive spray treatment (i.e. as a precautionary treatment) … more than a hint.. a recommendation… is really against common sense. It suggests that every hotel room should be sprayed on a periodic basis every few months based on the residual life of the product. Back to the old spray jockey routine for non existent pests. Oh, I have no doubt it would work for a time,, but when one looks at some reports of frequencies of infestation.. such as Clive Boase personal communication about a major hotel not having any infestation for six months after a full building treatment due to initial lack of awareness of existing infestations really suggests that this notion of spraying every unit every 3 or 4 months to be a huge unnecessary application of pesticide.
If I were a hotelier, I would invest in either good early warning through staff training and passive monitors, or get a dog and have a staffperson be the handler .. For smaller sites, they might partner and share the services of a dog .. I find the idea of preventive spraying to be a backward step.. I am sure that firms would sell this as a cheap service but the idea is rather repugnant to me..
having said that, if the product works well, then it would be a most welcome addition to the arsenal of treatment with focus on education and preventive measures in an IPM approach.
I wouild hate to see a backward step to spray jockey approaches as were the standard for roach control… that would be sad… and who knows what long term effects??

By: johnycakes

johnycakes — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:34:16 +0000

here is the link to the study i am referencing:
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/10/male-bed-bug-fear/

By: Rich Kozlovich

Rich Kozlovich — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:19:44 +0000

I believe that he is talking about Gentrol, which is an Insect Growth Regulator which disrupts their breeding cycle. A male bedbug’s phallus is like a sword which they drive directly into the female bedbug’s body anywhere they can. If enough males do this they can actually kill the female. As they reach maturity Gentrol turns this sword into a club. As a result they cannot penetrate the female’s bodies and fertilization does not occur. Presumable…and this can take some time….the population crashes. I don’t see this occurring without effective pesticides. It is just another component that must be used to get control.

As for Phantom; it is a different chemical classification, has low mammalian toxicity, and does not attack the nervous system. It attacks the cells directly depriving the cells of energy. As a result you would expect to see it do better than pyrethroids. Having said that…..it appears that resistance to Phantom is already developing. I don’t see it as the answer. I have heard of Alpiine Dust, but I haven’t used it yet and I don’t know anyone who has….I will try it though