Slashdot Mirror


Bee Venom Has "Botox-Like Effect," Is Worth 7 Times As Much As Gold

dryriver writes "The BBC reports that cosmetic products using bee venom as an ingredient are a new 'hot seller' in the cosmetics market. Bee venom is said to have an effect on female skin similar to Botox injections, tightening the skin and making wrinkles and other signs of aging appear less pronounced than before. Unlike Botox, however, bee venom does not need to be injected, and can be absorbed through the skin naturally as an ingredient of cosmetic skin creme. Now comes the kicker: A special electrified device that causes bees to sting a synthetic membrane and release their venom can harvest about one gram of bee venom from 20 bee hives. That one gram of bee venom is worth a whopping 350 dollars. This makes bee venom almost seven times more valuable than gold, which, in comparison, is worth only about 53 dollars per gram."

248 comments

  1. Botox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then why not just use Botox?

    1. Re:Botox by kimvette · · Score: 5, Informative

      FTFS:

      Unlike Botox, however, bee venom does not need to be injected, and can be absorbed through the skin naturally as an ingredient of cosmetic skin creme.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    2. Re:Botox by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      Why not just read the summary?

      Unlike Botox, however, bee venom does not need to be injected, and can be absorbed through the skin naturally as an ingredient of cosmetic skin creme.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    3. Re:Botox by calzones · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why female skin is a more apt question.

      Does it not work for guys or is it an assumption that guys aren't interested in looking younger?

      --
      Asking people to think is like asking them to buy you a new car
    4. Re:Botox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is Slashdot. We have a proud tradition of not reading the articles, summaries, or even headlines, and then spouting inaccurate, misinformed idiocy and feeling smug about what "experts" we are.

    5. Re:Botox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Considering the price of the active ingredient i think it's fair to assume that the quantities in any anti-ageing product will be about as effective as any current venomless skin cream, maybe they feel that, since women are already very used to convincing themselves of the efficacy of some made up or at least utterly useless new wonder molecule they're also most likely to feel the effects of any bee venom branded moisturisers.

    6. Re:Botox by Cryacin · · Score: 2

      So buy up big on Beetox (tm) futures now, and reap the rewards.

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    7. Re:Botox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, men use botox, often with less than optimal results, e.g. Bruce Jenner (google)

    8. Re:Botox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was also wondering why it only works on women's skin. I didn't know our skin was that different.

    9. Re:Botox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't be surprised if Rush Limbaugh were using it (and then lying and saying he wasn't). He has used Viagra with someone else's prescription.

    10. Re:Botox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll have you know that I'm an expert on bee venom and bee venom accessories.

    11. Re:Botox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      With the right marketing guys could be a far bigger market:

      "My balls are as smooth as pearls, and you know how much women love pearls"

    12. Re:Botox by TeknoHog · · Score: 3, Funny

      "My balls are as smooth as pearls, and you know how much women love pearls"

      Not to mention their love for the necklace you can make with them.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    13. Re:Botox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pshaw! I'm an expert on experts on bee venom and bee venom accessories, and you sir, in my expert opinion, are no expert at all!

    14. Re:Botox by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2

      "My balls are as smooth as pearls, and you know how much women love pearls"

      Not to mention their love for the necklace you can make with them.

      And they'll want rather more than two of them to make a decent necklace...

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    15. Re:Botox by AxeTheMax · · Score: 1

      If it is effective on female skin, it is probably also effective on male skin. But maybe not as effective; male skin is thicker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_humans#Skin_and_hair) so it may need a stronger dose?

    16. Re:Botox by drkim · · Score: 1

      I'll have you know that I'm an expert on bee venom and bee venom accessories.

      Then per Slashdot bylaws, you are not permitted to post in this thread.

    17. Re:Botox by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      1 + 1 most certainly does not equal 3, you imbecile!

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    18. Re:Botox by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      Women are just far more likely to buy any shit that promises weight loss or younger skin.

    19. Re:Botox by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm trying really hard to figure out if you got whooshed...

    20. Re:Botox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Rush Limbaugh ... has used Viagra ...

      Thank you for sharing that delightful holiday image with us at Christmas.

    21. Re:Botox by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Female skin apparently has a slightly lower pH than male skin, although I'm not sure why. I don't know if that makes a difference on the effectiveness of the venom, but it may. Bee sting is acidic[1] and so the effect of a bee string is probably slightly strong for women than for men, as their natural skin pH won't neutralise it (conversely, a wasp sting will be milder, as wasp sting is alkaline). Of course, it may just be that they only tested it with women because that's a larger market for cosmetics.

      [1] Baking soda for a bee sting, vinegar for a vasp sting, as I recall remembering as a child.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    22. Re:Botox by AndyKron · · Score: 1

      Bee-cause it's bee venom silly! Now quit asking perfectly logical questions.

    23. Re:Botox by turkeyfeathers · · Score: 1

      Female skin apparently has a slightly lower pH than male skin, although I'm not sure why.

      Duh... it's lower because of the bee venom cream they apply every morning.

    24. Re:Botox by Snard · · Score: 1

      Actually, it does, for large values of 1 and small values of 3.

      --
      - Mike
    25. Re:Botox by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't. This is the "flavor of the year" kind of a thing, and next year people will move on. It's far too expensive for mass consumption, not easy to mass produce, and to get this to bring in big money you'd have to be able to synthesize it somehow with process that can be used to mass production.

      Which in turn would bring the price down.

      Else people will just stick to what works and is reasonably cheap, with a few ultra rich maybe using this until they find the next fad.

    26. Re:Botox by kimvette · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's far too expensive for mass consumption, not easy to mass produce, and to get this to bring in big money you'd have to be able to synthesize it somehow with process that can be used to mass production.

      I disagree. People spend money on gold facial masks:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4Tmycixsh8

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLrurC4dtUY

      and some idiots pay for silver facials and gels, which will actually result in argyria (turn your skin blue - literally) if you do it too many times:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhQgFc_bec4

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDW799FhVJ0

      Examples of argyria:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argyria

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahihGKZC5Kk

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnXdk3Kmq9s

      Now granted those are some extreme examples, but ever notice many women's earlobes have a small greyish spec at the bottom of the piercing? This is from silver compounds being absorbed into the skin. Same thing.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    27. Re:Botox by Dinghy · · Score: 1
    28. Re:Botox by Guppy · · Score: 1

      I'm trying really hard to figure out if you got whooshed...

      Not so much a whoosh, more of a splorked or splooged kind of sound effect.

    29. Re:Botox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jessica Alba uses Valtrex for her herpes.

  2. 7 times the price of gold? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think we've finally found the real reason why honey bees are disappearing.

    1. Re:7 times the price of gold? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are hiding in the powder room like women checking their make ups?

    2. Re:7 times the price of gold? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's better than hiding in their parents' basement like fat Slashdotters eating their Doritos.

    3. Re:7 times the price of gold? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The bees may sting us, but they will never take our Doritos! We'll fight to the pain if need be!

    4. Re:7 times the price of gold? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are hiding under your tinfoil hat?

    5. Re:7 times the price of gold? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, another one; bees die when they sting.

    6. Re:7 times the price of gold? by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 3, Informative

      Bees die when they sting humans at least - their sting is barbed and they can't get it out, so the injuries they receive when they rip part of their butt off are fatal. It only applies to animals with a thick skin/

      If this membrane is tough enough, they won't be able to penetrate it, and their stinger will stay on. It would also work if it's weak enough to pull the stinger loose.

    7. Re:7 times the price of gold? by weazel2006 · · Score: 1

      It doesn't say how they get the venom out of the hive. Even if they kill the bees in the process it probably mean more bees will exist than do now. Bees are becoming more rare but look at chickens and cattle. There are more chicken and cattle on the planet then there would be if we didn't eat them. The buffalo is a good example. They roamed this country in large numbers then became almost extinct until some farmers decided to raise them to eat. Now they have come back in large numbers again.

    8. Re:7 times the price of gold? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honeybees disappearing is a myth.

      In my general area, we have honeybee hives in sprinkler control boxes and inside of sign poles indicating an upcoming highway or freeway.

      The sprinkler control boxes are in the ground. Despite having covers for the boxes, many of the openings are wide enough for bees to enter and exit, so they make a hive there.

      The freeway sign poles have holes in the poles near the top and the bottom. These holes are more than large enough for bees to enter and exit, so they make a hive there. The freeway sign pole hives have existed for years, they even survive the near 100 degrees F summer heat and the near 32 degrees F winter overnight cold. Bees easily enter and exit the top holes of the freeway sign poles from about 6am to around 7pm each day.

      Unless someone goes around filling all those sprinkler control boxes and freeway sign poles with Sevin dust or Drione dust--trust me, there are plenty of hybrid European/Africanized bee hives in existence.

  3. Sudden Colony Collapse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hmmmm....bees go missing, venom worth more than gold...

    What's the connection I'm not seeing???

    1. Re:Sudden Colony Collapse by jkiller · · Score: 0

      hmmmm....bees go missing, venom worth more than gold...

      What's the connection I'm not seeing???

      [Oblig]... "No noise..." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEcDk7MIQZw

  4. bee venom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    slow day, eh?

  5. Does it kill the bees??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It would be a real downer if you electrified and killed your entire hive. If not, I can see a new industry of steeling other people's bee sting toxin and an ancillary industry of armed bee hive guards.

    1. Re:Does it kill the bees??? by IonOtter · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, the bees just get really pissed off by the current, and it encourages them to sting the glass.

      Per the video, you can "harvest" every two weeks.

      --
      [End Of Line]
    2. Re:Does it kill the bees??? by bwcbwc · · Score: 3, Informative

      Hmmm, I was going to say that bees die when they sting. But that's because normally the stinger gets hooked in the victim and the bee's abdomen ruptures when the stinger is pulled off. If they're stinging glass, I suppose it's possible they could survive the experience because the stinger wouldn't get stuck.

      --
      We are the 198 proof..
    3. Re:Does it kill the bees??? by drkim · · Score: 0

      No, the bees just get really pissed off by the current, and it encourages them to sting the glass.

      I can't help picturing the angry bees buzzing around saying, "Schieß dem Fenster! Schieß dem Fenster!"

    4. Re:Does it kill the bees??? by Dr+Fro · · Score: 1

      Queen bees don't have barbs in their stingers - when a new queen is needed, several are laid at once and the first strong one out stings the rest.

      --
      ********************
      I object to Intellect without Discipline.
    5. Re:Does it kill the bees??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the bees just get really pissed off by the current, and it encourages them to sting the glass.

      I can't help picturing the angry bees buzzing around saying, "SchieÃY dem Fenster! SchieÃY dem Fenster!"

      Now it's Christmas.

  6. Re:Can't we just 3D print it? by QuesarVII · · Score: 2

    I mean just look at what nanotechnology has brought us so far! Um, oh wait...

    You mean something like a handheld computer that can make phone calls, surf the internet, play games, and all weighs less than a pound? Oh, and is so ubiquitous that even your grandma might have one?

    If only that had happened we could say nanotechnology was a success :(

  7. Not for long by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Instead of producing it from bees for $350/g, you could put the appropriate genes into some E. coli and have them produce it for 20% of that price or less. But of course then you wouldn't be able to sell it for $350/g.

    1. Re:Not for long by Sulphur · · Score: 3, Funny

      Instead of producing it from bees for $350/g, you could put the appropriate genes into some E. coli and have them produce it for 20% of that price or less. But of course then you wouldn't be able to sell it for $350/g.

      I thought getting shitfaced meant something else.

    2. Re:Not for long by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh, just mix it with some bee-venom and let marketing work on the wording a bit to give the impression that all of it was bee-venom.

    3. Re:Not for long by Alopex · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind this is a venom. What makes you think that constitutively expressing a venom in a foreign species will not kill it immediately, even if you can put the correct machinery in place?

  8. Correct me if I'm wrong by theIsovist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Bee's die after stinging, which means that you're losing twenty hives of bees for only $350. That sounds like a huge loss to any bee keeper. That also seems like a hell of a lose of bees that are already suffering from sudden colony collapse... Am I wrong here?

    1. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I believe they only die if their stinger breaks off. One would assume that the membrane is designed to leave the stinger intact.

    2. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Zomalaja · · Score: 5, Informative

      http://www.abeeco.co.nz/shop/Bee+Venom+Products.html
      "To extract the Bee Venom a pane of glass is placed along side the hive and a small electrical current is run through it, which encourages the bees to sting the surface. The bees are not harmed in the process."

    3. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by inamorty · · Score: 0
      They die after stinging human flesh. From wikipedia:

      When a honey bee stings a person, it cannot pull the barbed stinger back out. It leaves behind not only the stinger, but also part of its abdomen and digestive tract, plus muscles and nerves. This massive abdominal rupture is what kills the honey bee. Honey bees are the only species of bees to die after stinging.

      Unless they use Joan Rivers to collect the venom, I'm sure they've figured out how to not kill the bees during the process.

    4. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're assuming that this particular type of bee has any other economical benefit. TFS doesn't specify. Different bees are used for different tasks, but these ones may not be useful for anything more than their venom.

    5. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by theIsovist · · Score: 0

      Well played, good sir

    6. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My thoughts exactly. Last I heard (my father's a beekeeper), nuc' colonies were going for $80+. For those not in the know, that's a small wooden box with a few frames, a queen and supporting bees - essentially a boxed swarm. The contents of the nuc would have to be transferred to and grow into a hive that's something in the range of 4-10 times larger than the originating nuc. If you could somehow extract a gram of venom from ONE hive, it would still be a money-losing proposition, let alone twenty.
      The only way I could see venom extraction being practical is if the process could somehow single out the oldest bees that are about to die anyway (they work themselves to death). That way the death of the individual bees has minimal impact on the colony.

      Perhaps this system could provide a secondary income stream for individuals or businesses already engaged in the extermination of africanized (killer) bee colonies.

    7. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by TheEffigy · · Score: 1

      Actually the bee only dies because the stinger is barbed and it rips it's guts out when it pulls away.

    8. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason bees die after stinging is that the sting gets hooked to the victims' skin and gets embedded there thus getting torn off the bees' face. Probably stinging the glass just delivers the venom without the sting getting detached from the bee.

    9. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Cochonou · · Score: 1

      Almost all bees (except parasitic bees ?) are important contributors to pollination, though. This would mean they have an indirect economical benefit to the society as a whole... which may or may not be taken into account by the bee venom farmers.

    10. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention it's cruel towards the individual bee.

    11. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) Analyze
      2) Synthesize
      3) PROFIT!!

    12. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder how evolutionists would explain why honey bees never evolved out of this self-destructive behaviour.

    13. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      I wonder how the creationists would explain this suicidal behavior. I remember hearing God hates suicide.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    14. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Preying mantis sex should be enough to convince those hard core creationist losers that it's not only bad science but also bad theology. If you go looking for God in every tiny thing you instead find the Devil in the details.

    15. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only the non-reproducing female workers have stings, so there is selection against that.

    16. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that should be NO selection against that.

    17. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most honey bees that you will ever encounter (the ones doing the harvesting of pollen and nectar) only have a couple of days left to live anyway, but most importantly, are physically incapable of having offspring. Their genetic self-interest is in defending the hive.

      A bear or other animal attacking the hive would of course encounter younger bees, but it may be that killing defenders after damage to the hive is a good thing with respect to hive survival (since there may be significantly less food to feed the hive after the attack).

      Queen bees (who can reproduce) do not have barbed stingers. Evolutionarily, they are the only ones that matter, so maybe it has already been selected out, and selected *for* in the case of the worker bees if my earlier hypothesis is correct.

      "The larger drone bees, the males, do not have stingers. The female worker bees are the only ones that can sting, and their stinger is a modified ovipositor. The queen bee has a smooth stinger and can, if need be, sting skin-bearing creatures multiple times, but the queen does not leave the hive under normal conditions."

    18. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ""To extract the Bee Venom a pane of glass is placed along side the hive and a small electrical current is run through it, which encourages the bees to sting the surface. The bees are not [APPARENTLY] harmed in the process.""

      There, I fixed that for them. I'd love to see their apiary records - I bet they get a lot of 'mysterious' colony loss.

    19. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Cochonou · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It seems that preying mantis cannibalism during sex happens much less frequently in the wild than in captivity.

    20. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by drkim · · Score: 2

      I wonder how evolutionists would explain why honey bees never evolved out of this self-destructive behaviour.

      The worker bees are the ones with the stingers, but they have no part in fertilizing the queens. So, their sacrifice is more like an animal chewing off it's leg to escape a trap (in an evolutionary sense.) They support the hive - but don't contribute to the hive genetics.

      It is the drones, not the workers, who do the fertilization of the queens, and therefore play a primary role in evolutionary progress.

    21. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by SuricouRaven · · Score: 0

      A bee colony functions as a superorganism. Natural selection happens at the level of colonies, not individual bees.

    22. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The bees are not harmed, just temporarily electrocuted plenty of times to get their venom...

    23. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Threni · · Score: 1

      If anything they would simply have evolved to not attack humans.

    24. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are wrong.

      The stinger of a bee is mostly designed for stinging other animals in its size-class. Which means insects, which means chitin plating, which means the stinger makes a hole through which it can leave again. No harm to the bee but poison delivered.

      If a bee stings something with a soft skin, the skin closes in over the stinger, which means the bee rips its stinger-apparatus out when it leaves. Thus it dies. But bees do not have their stinger to "annnoy" large mammals.

    25. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by loufoque · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's the Big Brother effect.
      Women go crazy when on camera.

    26. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      You might also hypothesise that the barbed sting delivers a larger dose to the thicker skinned larger animal which needs a bigger deterrent, because it stays stuck in their hide, which is advantageous to the colony because they learn not to attack the hive.

    27. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by jittles · · Score: 1

      Bees die when they sting humans and other animals that have elastic skin. The stinger penetrates the skin, which closes around the stinger. The bee tries to extract the stinger and it rips off, often leaving the venom pouch inside the victim. If you think about it, it makes sense that one bee would sacrifice itself in this manner, as it would allow more venom to be pumped into a larger enemy. If you see a bee sting another insect, you can see it sting multiple times without any damage.

    28. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Maybe evolution will fix this problem and future bees will have a stringer (or stronger guts) that does not jam the inside the mammal skin.

    29. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      I believe this part was beyond hypothesis and well into theory. The bee stinger is a largely self reliant organ that can continue to function for a while producing venom after being ripped out of the bee, as a result being far more threatening then a simple sting when it remains stuck in the victim.

    30. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by folti__1978 · · Score: 0

      The venom pouch stays at the end of the stinger, outside of the victim, but it pumps it's content into it continuously. Or if the victim too clumsy when they try to remove it, they can squeeze it's content into themselves more faster ...

    31. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by vandelais · · Score: 1

      I blame Zorak.

      --
      Game: Player 'Donald J Trump' now has AI skill level 'experimental'.
    32. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      altruism a few drones die you don't kill the rest of the hive

    33. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why I make sure all the women I date are free range.

    34. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by quantaman · · Score: 1

      The bee's die if the stinger gets stuck and torn out when they leave (leaving behind some of their insides), that's generally just a problem when it's stinging bigger animals like us with thicker skin, when stinging other insects (or maybe even small animals, though I'm not sure) they're generally fairly safe. Also it's really only the honey bee that has this problem (though I'm sure that's what most bee keepers keep) but I'm sure they designed this system to leave the bees intact.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    35. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A christian explained to me that animals don't have souls, so God thinks all animals are scum. That is why they don't have animals in heaven. Animals can commit suicide, rape, burglary, murder, anything goes.

      Oh Happy Birthday Jesus !!!

    36. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy - the ones doing the stinging are non-reproductive females, and stinging helps protect the hive. Having a barbed stinger makes the sting more effective, allowing fewer bees to have the same effect, but makes extraction a bit tricky, but since the bees are, again, non-reproductive, it has no effect on the evolutionary process one way or the other. Except, of course, in that protecting the hive protects the queen and drones, so hives that have more effective defenses survive longer.

      I'm not even an evolutionary biologist, either.

    37. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 2

      Due to my moderation threshold missing the comment you were replying to, I had assumed that you were one of those fundie-athiests bringing up religion out of nowhere just to let everyone know how stupid you thought religion was.

      But then I read the comment you were replying to and then yours made total sense.

      Carry on.

      --
      Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
  9. i apologize in advance by alienzed · · Score: 3, Funny

    leave them bee!

    --
    Never say never. Ah!! I did it again!
  10. The next Tulip Mania? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've gotta stock up on bee venom quick! Before we fall over the fiscal cliff!

  11. This has been tried before by Fyzzler · · Score: 3, Interesting
    --
    I have one question. If the Japanese Ministry of Agriculture is not in charge of Gundam, then who is?
  12. Buyer Beware the Far East knockoffs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Some of them will make claims that sound superficially similar, but which will really produce the "Buttocks like effect" rather "Botox like effect".

  13. price comparison by swell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "This makes Bee Venom almost seven times more valuable than Gold, which, in comparison, is worth only about 53 Dollars per 1 gram."

    So it costs the same as ink for my printer, data for my cellphone, gas for my car (soon), and clean drinking water (later).

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:price comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How do you measure cellphone data by the gram?

    2. Re:price comparison by Eyeball97 · · Score: 2

      Simple, you measure the cost of your data bundle in libraries of congress, then divide by the weight of a library of congress...

    3. Re:price comparison by jamesh · · Score: 1

      How do you measure cellphone data by the gram?

      It's difficult, because 1's weigh more than 0's.

    4. Re:price comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This makes Bee Venom almost seven times more valuable than Gold, which, in comparison, is worth only about 53 Dollars per 1 gram."

      So it costs the same as ink for my printer, data for my cellphone, gas for my car (soon), and clean drinking water (later).

      $350 per gram, and therefore approximately $350/ml? Ink, gas and yes, even water, will never cost $350,000/L. Not in 2012 inflation-adjusted dollars, and certainly never in your lifetime. Unless, of course, you believe the US is destined for a period of hyper-inflation.

    5. Re:price comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still costs less than Starbucks

    6. Re:price comparison by Rich0 · · Score: 2

      Interestingly enough, you can. Information can be converted to energy, at a rate of kTln2 per bit. Energy can of course be converted to mass. Of course, boltzmann's constant is small.

      So, one bit at room temperature works out to about 4 × 10-21 joules. That works out to be about 4 x 10-28 kg per bit.

  14. Re:Can't we just 3D print it? by Osgeld · · Score: 2

    your celphone is not nanotech

  15. another use... APK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    I asked my "doctor" to inject BOTOX into my sphincter to remove the wrinkles but he refused. Hopefully I can use this => http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/12/24/0056235/bee-venom-has-botox-like-effect-is-worth-7-times-as-much-as-gold to improve the appearance of my puckered asshole.

    APK

    P.S. => I already wax and bleach my asshole and encourage everyone else to do the same.

    ...apk

    1. Re:another use... APK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Is the bleach to kill germs and bacteria or does it do something for looks? Doesn't that burn?

    2. Re:another use... APK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're getting better at these APK posts. You still need more practice, though. It's too coherent, too rational, and not nearly hysterical enough. Imagine that you've gotten no sleep for several days and you just got high. Now that you're starting to get into character, you need to remember that every APK post needs to mention HOSTS files, Drinkypoo, and gmhowell.

      Also, for the proper kook factor, you need to randomly capitalize, italicize, and bold at least one word in every single sentence. You also need to post a shitload of random URLs. They can all go to goatse. It's not really important. Finally, remember to proclaim yourself to have pwned everyone on Slashdot.

      For maximum amusement factor, reply to yourself a few times, arguing back and forth about who the real APK is.

    3. Re:another use... APK by drkim · · Score: 1

      P.S. => I already wax and bleach my asshole and encourage everyone else to do the same.

      OK... but don't expect all of us to wax and bleach your asshole for free.

    4. Re:another use... APK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hahahahahahah

    5. Re:another use... APK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not to mention the complete lack of mixing italics, bold, capslock, and blockquote at

      RANDOM

  16. And still cheaper than ink for my printer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Man, I wonder how much and what animal venom they use in my ink jet printer cartridges...

  17. And more importantly by Andy+Prough · · Score: 2

    does it work on neckbeards??

    1. Re:And more importantly by taxman_10m · · Score: 5, Funny

      No. The beard gets in the way of the neck.

  18. Re:Can't we just 3D print it? by QuesarVII · · Score: 0

    Processors with traces measured in nanometers ftw. That's what enables small technology, and very high performance tech too.

  19. My Semen has the same effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I promise. And pretty girls can have it for free. Just pump the dispenser.

    1. Re:My Semen has the same effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I'd prefer they applied electric current to you.

  20. For the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm tired of seeing paralysed faces in the persuit of looking beautiful. Considering people are willing to inject BOTULISM into their faces to look better, a replacement was direly needed.

    1. Re:For the best by Hsien-Ko · · Score: 1

      and then we exhaust all the bees in the world for this new oil, suddenly our ecosystem is missing part of its cycle (pollination). A world in ruins, all for artificial, emotionless yet pretty, faces.

    2. Re: For the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, but you won't be able to see the surprise on our young, wrinkle-free faces ;-)

    3. Re:For the best by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      yes, those people need to be replaced.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  21. That's nice by onyxruby · · Score: 1

    I'm glad bee venom is worth something, perhaps it will inspire people to try stave off the great bee die off. However I don't give a damn what wasp, hornet, or yellow jacket venom is worth, if I see one in the wrong place it's going to die a horrible death. Dammit

  22. Killer bee use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finally, a use for those african killer bees.

  23. Its price is likely temporary by mysidia · · Score: 1

    Perhaps due to limited / patent-restricted availability of the extraction method.

    The price will likely decrease, when owners of large bee colonies start figuring out ways of capitalizing on this.

    Or when biotech folks come up with a way of producing "synthetic" bee venom, grown by bacteria infused with genes extracted from the bees.

    1. Re:Its price is likely temporary by DarkTempes · · Score: 1

      Maybe...I know beekeepers are having population issues due to mites/disease/colony collapse disorder.

    2. Re:Its price is likely temporary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps due to limited / patent-restricted availability of the extraction method.

      Not sure that applies. I knew close family friends who were involved with bee venom harvesting all the way back in the eighties. The pharmaceutical industry has been using bee venom for a long time - long before the current hype. The equipment involved was not that expensive, even for a country in Eastern Europe under communism. Don't think patents come into play on this one. But a hell of a lot of effort, time and bee hives for one single gram does - so that's the more likely explanation.

  24. What does gold have to do with this? by Demonantis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There are a ton of products more valuable than gold. I don't understand why that is a big deal. Hopefully this makes honey cheaper with the extra source of income.

    1. Re:What does gold have to do with this? by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      If this produced more honey, I could see prices reducing. Otherwise, I don't tell my boss to pay me less just because my stocks do well.

    2. Re:What does gold have to do with this? by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Yup, especially when you're talking about things like biological products.

      Order a plasmid in the mail from a supply house. You'll probably get about a microgram of DNA for $75 or something. That is WAY more expensive than gold. However, you need next to nothing to use it - if you can get a single molecule to be taken up by a bacteria you can generate as much more as you want.

    3. Re:What does gold have to do with this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are a ton of products more valuable than gold. I don't understand why that is a big deal. Hopefully this makes honey cheaper with the extra source of income.

      I'm afraid this is unlikely to make honey cheaper. At least last I knew, bee hives involved with producing venom are not also used for honey production. Producing venom places enough strain on the bees and the bee hive as a whole - it is not really recommended to also use them for honey production at the same time. It also tends to increase the aggression level of the bees during the venom harvesting season - not exactly ideal for spending more time around the hives harvesting honey!

  25. Wasabi by Required+Snark · · Score: 1, Informative

    I just saw fresh whole (not ground) wasabi root for sale in a Japanese market in Los Angeles for $149 a pound. A one inch diameter piece 3/4 inch long was around $9. The second most expensive food I found was Spanish Blue Fin tuna for $55 a pound.

    --
    Why is Snark Required?
    1. Re:Wasabi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just saw fresh whole (not ground) wasabi root for sale in a Japanese market in Los Angeles for $149 a pound. A one inch diameter piece 3/4 inch long was around $9. The second most expensive food I found was Spanish Blue Fin tuna for $55 a pound.

      Perhaps you should look at the price of saffron. Even when it's wholesale it's still damnedable expensive.

    2. Re:Wasabi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone wanted wasabi so much then why don't they grow it themselves or just use English mustard, its tastes exactly the same, makes your eyes water the same stimulates that overwhelming feeling in the arch of your nose the same (in fact most foods sold as wasabi flavoured are just mustard)

    3. Re:Wasabi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Do yoo realize that a pound is equal to about 450 grams?

    4. Re:Wasabi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pfft. How about $1000/pound for saffron?

      Other wildly expensive foods http://kitchengeekery.com/articles/food/the-worlds-most-expensive-foods

  26. Re:Can't we just 3D print it? by LoverOfJoy · · Score: 5, Funny

    And you thought bee venom was expensive? Just wait until you see the prices of HP 3D Printer Bee Venom Cartridges.

  27. The HORROR... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, this will certainly aggravate the Vegans, who believe that honey is not "vegan" because we are enslaving the bee.

    http://www.vegetus.org/honey/honey.htm

    Though I'm sure they happily eat fruits and vegetables that are pollinated with domesticated bees that farmers have "enslaved"...

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:The HORROR... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Honey is an animal product, as it is made by bees. Vegans don't eat animal products (chicken, beef, honey, milk) and that is why they don't eat honey. Though, a vegan can also feel that it is a bad practice to harvest honey, but that depends on each specific person.

    2. Re:The HORROR... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In that case, wheat flour is an animal product too, as it is made by humans.

    3. Re:The HORROR... by polyp2000 · · Score: 1

      Not eating Honey is probably detrimental to he decline of the Bee population so Vegans might have a moral dilemma on their hands.

      --
      Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
    4. Re:The HORROR... by turkeyfeathers · · Score: 1

      No they don't... if an idea is not packaged and marketed to them properly, vegans don't it exists.

    5. Re:The HORROR... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do humans vomit wheat into the fields? I think the only comparable human product would be that fermented saliva some South Americans drink.

    6. Re:The HORROR... by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      So you think honey isn't an animal product?

    7. Re:The HORROR... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      detrimental to the *decline* ?

      contributing to the decline?
      detrimental to the population?

    8. Re:The HORROR... by maestroX · · Score: 1

      Well, this will certainly aggravate the Vegans, who believe that honey is not "vegan" because we are enslaving the bee.

      Meanwhile, not very far away, other people believe milking bees will reverse the age process.

  28. Price comparison chart by jkrise · · Score: 1

    I don't understand this gold thing against which the commercial value of this bee sting is being compared. Please express this in terms of:

    1. Bags of potato fries (for fitness conscious folks)
    2. The average software patent (for nerds like us)
    3. Members of the senate (who care so much for us)
    4. iPhones (everyone seems to want one)
    5. Windows 8 licenses (see above)
    6. First posts on /. (I wish this one was)

    --
    If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
    1. Re:Price comparison chart by IHC+Navistar · · Score: 3, Funny

      I need clarification on your proposed measurement #3.

      By 'Members of the Senate", do you mean:

      a) The value of their lives (What the rest of us would be losing if they were to magically disappear in a Harry Potter-esque manner),
      b) Their value to the rest of us (What we gain from them per capita versus what they take from us),
      -or-
      c) What it costs to buy one (What needs explaining?!)

      --
      Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
    2. Re:Price comparison chart by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      I don't understand this gold thing against which the commercial value of this bee sting is being compared.

      Me neither. I mean, I have the most unique piece of naval lint in the Universe right here -- an infinity of each of your six metrics could not compensate the rarity of this naval lint, my DNA on it is unique and once discovered I vowed to never let any accumulate again, so It's one of a kind -- and yet, no one values it; However, theres multitudes of bees, diamonds, gold, and other resources and they're seen as more valuable. It seems the value allocation system is arbitrary and corrupt.

      As in all things: I blame Big Media. They've got women hiding proof of their hard earned life experiences with poisons; Not even the permanent smile lines caused by decades of great joy are sacred! I can only hope to harness this desire to look perpetually beautiful. If they'll rub venom in their eyes today, they'll adopt cybernetic bodies in the future. Humans in their current form are too fragile and thus too expensive to survive sustainable long term space colonization. Some day we'll proudly engineer our coverings to emulate the imperfections we now feel shame over. In the meanwhile we must bait them slowly with small advances in beauty along the way. If the path to the stars and to a necessarily more durable race be driven by the desire to maintain skin-deep beauty, then so bee it.

    3. Re:Price comparison chart by stewbee · · Score: 1

      and you can't forget number 7, which is size related to football fields.

    4. Re:Price comparison chart by OneAhead · · Score: 1

      d) the fertilizer value of their corpses (which often seems to exceed a) and c))

  29. Inkjet Printer Ink by jomegat · · Score: 2

    That must be what they use to make inkjet printer ink.

    --

    In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice, they're not.

    1. Re:Inkjet Printer Ink by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you must have the wrong printer then...

      hp 940xl black (for officejet 8000 series) rated for 2200 pages: $30-35 for 'genuine' oem, $10-12 for remanufactured... way cheaper than laser.

  30. Lolwut by Psicopatico · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Bee's venom can kill by inducing shock in allergic subjects.
    It looks like it has a very nasty property of being a potential allergenic (I hope I got the correct term. If not, sorry) meaning: once you get stinged, you may become allergic to venom even if before you weren't. This in sufficently predisposed subjects.

    And now it is going to be the golden ingredient for some cosmetic? I hope it is going to be subjected to some form of medical control, to say the least.

    But I'm no chemist nor biologist so I may be completely wrong.

    --
    Mastering the English language is fucking easy: all you have to do is to put an f* word in every fucking sentence.
    1. Re:Lolwut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct - My father used to keep bees until he developed an allergy to the stings. Every time he was stung it was worse than the last time. The final time his face swelled up and he looked like he had been in the ring with Tyson...

    2. Re:Lolwut by samson13 · · Score: 1

      I know a few ex bee keepers who had kept bees for years/decades with hundreds of stings and then slowly became more allergic. I don't know if they recovered their immunity after giving it up.

      One guy (friend of my parents so I didn't know him that well) was advised to carry an epi pen since his last sting was so serious.

      I suspect the cosmetic stuff would be slow acting so you could wash it off and seek medical help before it got out of hand but I could imagine that people could become dangerously allergic to bee stings that wouldn't have otherwise.

    3. Re:Lolwut by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't worry about it. Given how expensive the venom is, any skin creme that uses it is going to be diluting to homeopathic levels anyway.

    4. Re:Lolwut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's no good, let's continue injecting the most effective posion in the world instead!

  31. funny story by asmkm22 · · Score: 1

    This reminds me of an urban legend (or maybe I just watched it on Fox) about some guys basically stinging their penis with bee's to make it swell up.

    1. Re:funny story by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

      some guys basically stinging their penis with bee's to make it swell up.

      I've discovered that beavers can have the same effect.

    2. Re:funny story by samson13 · · Score: 2

      This reminds me of an urban legend (or maybe I just watched it on Fox) about some guys basically stinging their penis with bee's to make it swell up.

      I don't think it works this way.

      The story starts with a backyard apiarist doing a quick check of my hives in the middle of January. It was stinking hot. Since I was not planning on taking any real time or doing any real work I was wearing lite shoes that didn't tuck into my suit very well. Combine this with the bad choice of boxer shorts, a little bee leakage led to at least one bee in a very dangerous place.

      Lifting the second box back on I lent against it leading to the worst sting I've ever experienced. I couldn't scrape the sting out in a hurry so it had lots of time to inject lots of venom (don't take your pants off while standing next to an open hive).

      There was not much swelling other than a small blister. Lots of pain for days (I was reasonably immune so normally would expect no symptoms after a couple of hours at the most). It was sort of itchy but not in a way that could be scratched and any contact was uncomfortable. I've still got a scars from the sting (If chicks dig scars then try and explaining that one).

  32. & times as much as gold? by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 1

    Wow! That makes it worth almost 1 percent its weight in inkjet printer ink.

    --
    This space available.
  33. Wow. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's FAD-tastic. I'm sure that'll be around a while.

  34. Bee sting allergy? by riverat1 · · Score: 1

    I imagine that people with serious bee sting allergies are best advised to avoid this treatment.

  35. Gender-specific venom action ? by vikingpower · · Score: 3, Insightful

    to have an effect on female skin

    Male skin is not affected, thusly.

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:Gender-specific venom action ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Queen bee syndrome strikes again!

    2. Re:Gender-specific venom action ? by maestroX · · Score: 1

      Male skin is not affected, thusly.

      Doh, no real excitement about a female bee flashing her prick.

    3. Re:Gender-specific venom action ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That statement doesn't exclude male skin, it only includes female skin.

    4. Re:Gender-specific venom action ? by vikingpower · · Score: 1

      That depends whether or not you adhere to the open-world axiom. If you do, you have a point. If you don't, you are in contradiction with yourself.

      --
      Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
  36. Sherlock Holmes and Bee venom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was a fascinating Sherlock Holmes based science fiction story, that Holmes retired to study beekeeping and discovered an elixir of life.The side effects were complex, and did not suggest that it as a popular treatment.

  37. Tomorrow's News: Bee Thieves Apprehended by skaag · · Score: 1

    Now we know who's been stealing all those bees that have been "Disappearing" around the world ;-)

    --

    All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain... time... to... die...

  38. Re:Can't we just 3D print it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, comparing things that can send coded photons to something that is supposed to make matter makes perfect sense.

  39. So just grow really big car sized bees by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

    You, know, just monkey around with their DNA a bit, to produce bees that pump out a gallon or four liters of venom per sting?

    This is done in bad science fiction films all the time. Start doing underground nuclear tests again with beehives. Or zap them with Gamma Rays.

    But be careful not to get them too angry.

    And tell chicks that want better skin to just go stick their heads in a beehive.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:So just grow really big car sized bees by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      If the vvenom is a nice simple single gene, you could probably stick it in some bacteria. Worked for insulin.

      If you need to get a whole chemical pathway copied, it's not so easy,

    2. Re:So just grow really big car sized bees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Freaking brilliant ! You are a genius !! You shouldn't be on slashdot or even the internet.

  40. Pssst...... by rts008 · · Score: 3, Funny

    *whispers*: Platypus venom.

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
  41. A small correction by jandersen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Botox injections, tightening the skin and making wrinkles and other signs of aging appear less pronounced...

    Botulinum toxin does not tighten the skin - it paralyses muscles, and since many wrinkles are aggravated by muscles in the skin, paralysing them can make the wrinkles less pronounced. This paralysis is very evident on the faces of many aging celebrities - they simply struggle with producing facial expressions.

    It's a strange thing, isn't it? Instead of accepting their age, people mistreat themselves so they look 'younger', at least when you're not too close. I think it is deeply sad; and it only makes you look less attractive.

    1. Re:A small correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ditto! Having a "stone face", either means mistreatment from doctors, or misusing drugs. Either way, it's NOT attractive (although it does make bad guys in movies appear even more MEAN).

  42. Old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Wasp Woman: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0054462/

  43. speak to the devil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    speak to the devil. this is what I was telling my co workers and I wonder if they saw this is Unlock Blackberry 9800

  44. Re:Can't we just 3D print it? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Nevertheless you parent is right, it is not nanotech ;D

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  45. It's not just Drexler now by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Everything and it's dog is nanotech since the definition shifted. Sunscreen gets called nanotech just because it has sub-micron particles suspended in it. So while it may not fit your definition or mine, it's shorthand for anything small for some people now (even if the sizes are in the hundreds of microns).

  46. Do not get people started on this FAD... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Jesus Tits - STOP - Our bee numbers are already fucked up as it is. When you extract venom from a BEE, it KILLS the BEE, right now we NEED bees for other things like growing FOOD to EAT, not to be sacrificed instead to your clueless, moral-less ego and vanity! I don't really give a fuck if you CAN do it, you SHOULDN'T because it's WRONG!

  47. The natural way by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

    Some people may want to harvest the bee venom themselves... but provided that most of people confuse bees and wasps, that may be dangerous (yes, Maya the bee is actually a wasp).

    --
    Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  48. Would that be considered cruel ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I can't say I know how the bees feel when electricity is applied to them so that they can produce the venom, but I can tell you that it wouldn't be pleasant.

    In China and in Vietnam people "harvest" bear gall bladder juice by tying up live bears and inserting a tube into the bears - and that practice is deemed "cruelty to animal".

    Should electrocuting bees be considered as cruel, as well?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by ComaVN · · Score: 2

      bees are not cute and cuddly, so no.

      --
      Be wary of any facts that confirm your opinion.
    2. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    3. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by samoanbiscuit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not only this, but being arthropods with considerably more primitive nervous systems than mammals, it's yet to be determined if they (insects) even feel pain the same way we do. The reason why mammals such as bears and dolphins seem "cuddly" is because our close evolutionary heritage show characteristics in common between species that elicit a protective and nurturing instinct even between species. Naturalists have filled pages and pages full of anecdotes of mammalian predators who have spared and even gone on to raise young mammals of their prey species; the nurturing instinct is strong and not very discriminating.

    4. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Does it matter? It's wrong anyway, and especially so since it's not even necessary. Doing this kind of thing should be illegal if it's for cosmetic purposes and/or to make people look/feel better.

    5. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by wgoodman · · Score: 2

      Why post a valid (unpopular) opinion as AC? Put your purse down.

    6. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by kimvette · · Score: 2

      Do insects even feel pain as we understand it? The brains are very primitive - little more than ganglia.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    7. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by Luckyo · · Score: 2

      I can. They do not feel a thing. Insects lack a central nervous system, which is needed to have ability to feel what is happening to remote parts of your body.

    8. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by smooth+wombat · · Score: 3, Informative

      They do not feel a thing. Insects lack a central nervous system, which is needed to have ability to feel what is happening to remote parts of your body.

      Not so fast. You might want to reconsider that thought, especially when the dance of bees were studied and how it relates to their central nervous system.

      Then there is the anatomy of a bee which shows its nervous system.

      Obviously bees feel pain. The question is to what extent compared to mammals.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    9. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      bees are not cute and cuddly, so no.

      Neither are bears. They're godless killing machines.

    10. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      It does because bees do not have one. Let me emphasize this point: they do not have any kind of centralized nervous system.

      They also do not have blood circulation either. All of the organs essentially float in blood-like solution.

      As a result, they do have very complex and fine motor control systems that enable them to react to stimuli. But they do not feel pain, as pain is a specific reaction to a stimulus carried and processed by central nervous system. You need centralization of your nerve systems to be able to sense pain as we do.

      Insects simply do not have this.

    11. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does it matter if he wishes to post as AC or not?

    12. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by xyourfacekillerx · · Score: 1

      Took your intro to ethics course and think you know it all, don't you?

    13. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by Kwyj1b0 · · Score: 1

      Neither are bears. They're godless killing machines.

      Seriously. I think it is high time that we started proselytizing bears. It is the disappearance of God from those pagan woodland surroundings (what's left of them) that is responsible for atrocities by bears.

      And while we are on the topic, there are no laws prohibiting a bear from buying an automatic gun! They don't even have a mandatory background checks. Won't someone think of the children?

    14. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by SomePgmr · · Score: 1

      The first and third don't seem to offer much on this, but I think the second probably called out the thing worth debating here, unless there's been more on the subject since:

      Nociception vs. Pain

              From Jane A. Smith's "A Question of Pain in Invertebrates":

                      Invertebrates, it seems, exhibit nociceptive responses analogous to those shown by vertebrates. They can detect and respond to noxious stimuli, and in some cases, these responses can be modified by opioid substances. However, in humans, at least, there is a distinction to be made between the "registering" of a noxious stimulus and the "experience" of pain. In humans, pain "may be seen as the response of the whole awake conscious organism to noxious stimuli, seated.., at the highest levels in the central nervous system, involving emotional and other psychological components" (Iggo, 1984). Experiments on decorticate mammals have shown that complex, though stereotyped, motor responses to noxious stimuli may occur in the absence of consciousness and, therefore, of pain (Iggo, 1984). Thus, it is possible that invertebrates' responses to noxious stimuli (and modifications of these responses) could be simple reflexes, occurring without the animals being aware of experiencing something unpleasant, that is, without "suffering" something akin to what humans call pain.

                      [...] What evidence might help in distinguishing between nociceptive "responsiveness" and the perception of pain? [...]

                      In mammals, responses to painful stimuli often persist beyond a simple reflex withdrawal, so that, for example, the animals may become immobile, limp or "guard" the affected part, show aggression when approached, reduce or stop feeding and drinking, and show decreased sexual activity (Morton and Griffiths, 1985). The animals may also learn in the future to avoid situations similar to the one in which the pain occurred. Such responses, while not proof that the animals have experienced pain, can indicate that something more than a simple nociceptive reflex is involved. Together, they may help the animal to recover from damage caused by the painful event and avoid being harmed in the future.

    15. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by SomePgmr · · Score: 1

      This is one of those times I wish there were an 'edit' feature.

      So it looks like there's been plenty of study on honey bees and other invertebrates demonstrating that they'll continue to perform a wide variety of their usual mechanical behaviors when decapitated. I'd be interested in knowing if something like the heat probe test works on a honey bee that doesn't have it's "brain". I imagine that would at least tell us if these noxious heat reactions are autonomic.

      Of course that wouldn't tell us if there is a pain component, but it'd tell us if nociception tests are at-all useful in determining if whole invertebrates feel pain. From there I imagine you'd have to move on to observed behavior, looking for corollaries between how vertebrates react to pain, in a way you can differentiate from autonomic responses.

      As a disclaimer, I'm way beyond my pay grade on this as a lowly tech geek, but I'd be interested to see if anyone has gotten that far (I wouldn't be surprised). Sources, anyone?

    16. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by rockout · · Score: 1

      Because his post had some value and seemed to show signs of intelligence. You, however, should keep posting as AC.

      --
      I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
    17. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I sometimes raise praying mantises and I can tell you that if one gets injured it damn well knows it. They get very defensive when injured.

      For example, most of the time mantises don't mind too much if you pick them up or otherwise handle them if done slowly and carefully but if one gets injured (say a crack in its exoskeleton) then it won't let you even come near it and still strike/bite at your hands. They do seem to know when something is wrong with themselves.

    18. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by OneAhead · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I used to think like you when I was a kid. Then I discovered reality is more nuanced and the science on this is surprisingly soft.

      Nervous system morphology: yes, arthropods' nervous systems surely looks different from ours, with one large ganglion in the head and multiple somewhat smaller ganglia controlling motoric and digestive functions. But to conclude from this that they can't possibly feel pain is a huge leap of logic. An insect brain is organized much like a crustacean's brain, and a crustacean's brain is capable of complex behaviour. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=clever-crustaceans

      Nervous system organization: suppose you want to argue that our nervous system not only look different, but is organized differently, with everything centralized, as opposed to different ganglia taking care of different functions. Well, the differences are not that huge. Have you ever seen a freshly beheaded chicken? I can tell you, some of them run like hell - a sight so spooky that you won't easily forget it. This is because the act of running originates from the spinal cord, which is still there when you cut off the head. Similarly, it is speculated that the human spinal cord plays an important role in coordinating monotomous tasks such as walking. And the number of neurons associated with coordinating our digestive tract is larger then the number of neurons in a rat, and comes surprisingly close to the number of neurons in the cerebral cortex of a dog.
      http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=gut-second-brain
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_by_number_of_neurons#Cerebral_cortex

      That bring us to Nervous system size. The above shows that a large structure of neurons is no guarantee for intelligence. On the other hand, there are many studies showing that corvids like crows and magpies show surprisingly intelligent behaviour on a smaller budget of neurons than our digestive system or a dog...

      My point of all this is that neither brain size nor morphology or organization necessarily equates to complexity of function.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pain_in_invertebrates#Central_nervous_system
      What does, then? We do not know! And we know even less whether bees can feel pain; nobody ever became a bee and wrote a book about it. The thought of not knowing this might feel threatening to your ethical preconceptions, but it's the hard truth! To make matters worse, the more we learn, the more it looks like some if not most invertebrates are able to experience pain at some level. Funny that we were just talking about administering electric shocks to honeybees: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pain_in_invertebrates#Conditioned_suppression

      Now the interesting question is: how to build a system of ethics on this (lack of) knowledge. This I cannot answer for you, but the solution I use for myself is attributing gradual weights to the torture of different animals, with molluscs falling into the lowest tier, small insects a bit higher, large crustaceans a bit higher, birds and small mammals a bit higher and "intelligent" mammals even higher. The most important element of my system of ethics is that even the lowest tiers have a nonzero weight and torturing them for no good reason should be avoided.

      Regardless of all the above soft ethics, there's a hard reason why "bee-tox" is a horrible idea. There already is a shortage of honeybees to the extent that fruit farmers start worrying about pollination:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co

    19. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 2

      Perhaps he just prefers to post anonymously. Perhaps he has or may have future employers that might take objections to this statement. Perhaps he didn't feel it was worth logging in for. Perhaps he just likes pissing off people who don't like people posting as AC.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    20. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      There are many decentralized ways of understanding damage sustained by the whole. Many of these ways are, for example, used in internet routing.

      Insects utilize many of these. But they do not have any ability to have their brain receive pain impulses from damaged leg for example.

    21. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Have you ever seen a freshly beheaded chicken? I can tell you, some of them run like hell - a sight so spooky that you won't easily forget it.

      Some even fly, a pretty good distance actually.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    22. Re:Would that be considered cruel ? by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't you be concerned that the bee dies when it delivers the sting, than the fact it's electrically stimulated?
      I mean if you're gonna be concerned about the welfare of the insect (that numbers in the many millions of individuals), at least be logical and go the distance.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  49. Great Research!!! (Cosmetics vs Fertilizer: Fight) by Tim12s · · Score: 1

    With this cosmetics discovery we are finally going to see some real progress towards research and policy changes to protect against bee colony collapse.

  50. Re:Can't we just 3D print it? by neokushan · · Score: 2

    It's made of components that are assembled at the nanotech level, so why isn't it? (asking the question genuinely as I suspect there's some definition for nanotechnology that we obviously don't know).

    --
    +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
  51. $350 per gram is nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try buying Tritium. It's 85x the cost per gram of the Bee venom.

  52. Most men arn't so vain and insecure... by Viol8 · · Score: 2

    ... that they'd have a potent toxin injected in them just to make them look a few years younger. Female vanity apparently has no bounds. Or at least we haven't found them yet.

    1. Re:Most men arn't so vain and insecure... by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      To be fair, women do have much higher pressures to be good-looking. A man can have some rough edges.

    2. Re:Most men arn't so vain and insecure... by jamesh · · Score: 1

      Most men arn't so vain and insecure... that they'd have a potent toxin injected in them just to make them look a few years younger. Female vanity apparently has no bounds. Or at least we haven't found them yet.

      Today's man is apparently a little more concerned with his looks than back when I was in my 20's. I can't help but think today's idea of a good looking man is an effeminate looking man, but I guess that's what the women of today are going for (unless i'm wrong in my assumption that such men are out to impress women...)

    3. Re:Most men arn't so vain and insecure... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most men arn't so vain and insecure

      [citati'n neded]

    4. Re:Most men arn't so vain and insecure... by mellon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, men are vain and insecure in completely different ways, because they have spent their lives being judged for things other than their beauty.

    5. Re:Most men arn't so vain and insecure... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, men are vain and insecure in completely different ways, because they have spent their lives being judged for things other than their beauty.

      Insert penis joke here. Giggity

    6. Re:Most men arn't so vain and insecure... by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      "but I guess that's what the women of today are going for"

      No , its what the gay men running the fashion industry are going for. Most women I know would run a mile from the sort of metrosexual ponces who are parading in the press and on TV as some sort of ideal male "look".

    7. Re:Most men arn't so vain and insecure... by OneAhead · · Score: 1

      Yeah, to name just a few, there are the city/suburbia-dwellers driving large trucks, the people who collect guns because it gives them a (largely false) sense of security, and the rabid homophobes. (It has always puzzled me what exactly this last category is afraid of. Outside of prisons, I haven't heard a lot about gay men raping non-gay men, and even in the hypothetical case that that was an issue, one would think allowing them to marry would decrease the problem. Or could it be they are afraid of being "turned gay" or outed themselves?)

    8. Re:Most men arn't so vain and insecure... by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      I've read an article on the matter that seemed to shine some light on the subject. Men were shown a series of women's faces and asked to rank them, and women were shown a series of men's faces and asked to rank them. Men went very consistently for those with very feminine traits, basically trended towards the end of the scale. Women, on the other hand, tended towards men with a mix of masculine and feminine traits. I believe the stated reasons were concerns that hypermasculine men weren't intelligent, reliable, or faithful, and there's also the evolutionary incentive of picking a male that will produce good offspring. If a woman has a daughter by a man that has few feminine traits, the daughter will be closer to the middle, and thus less desirable than the daughter she could have by a man with a good mix of feminine traits.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  53. Bee venom can cause deadly anaphylactic shock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if this could affect people with bee venom allergies.
    My girlfriend has this type of allergy. In fact I had to rush her to a hospital last summer because she got stung.
    If you add up the cost for an EpiPen, this is a very expensive cosemtic substance.

  54. Praise be by Swampash · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Colony collapse disorder? Failure of crop pollenation worldwide? The possible end of agriculture and mass starvations and food riots worldwide? None of that was important enough to save the bees.

    But now, shit, the bees might be able to keep aging Baby Boomers looking young! Nothing can compete with that, the bees are SAVED!

  55. Not quite as simple by DrYak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    First you have to know which compound of the venom are the active ingredient (a venom is not a single molecule, it's a big mix of lots of substances).

    Maybe the important part are just small peptide (works also for small nucleic acid strands). In this case, yes: just slap the gene inside a bacteria or yeast and just harvest the thing in a huge brewery tank. This will cost a tiny fraction of the current method. (as in "a few bucks for a dozen of kilograms"). Washing industry thrives on this kind of process and has already made it fucking incredibly cheap (do you really think that the digestive enzyme in your washing powder where harvested from actual animals ?)

    But maybe not. Maybe it can be a complex protein that requires some post processing (chaperone helping to fold it into an unusual shape, enzyme modifying some parts) - (but very unlikely. If the venom can cross the skin without injection, it needs to be something small). Or maybe it can be a small chemical molecule that is produced by a long and complex chain of chemical reaction necessitating a big collection of enzymes (very likely, given that it can easily cross the skin).
    In this case you need to identify the candidate, understand the process that produce it (not impossible but it takes time), and then either put the whole machinery inside yeast (bacteria post-process a lot less their proteins) and go for the brewery-tank method, or replicate the synthesis in another way (produce the protein in bacteria and then do the modification in a lab. Or find a way to synthetise the small chemical compound by using a sequence of chemical reactions in a lab) and scale it up to industrial scale.
    This *WILL* end up being incredibly cheap in the long term, but requires much more research and development.

    There's a whole branch of science to study that, called "Venomics".

    Until then, you're stuck at putting bee on a micro electric chair until they are so pissed of that they start stinging the glass.

    (And I'm betting that perhaps, all the benefit come from the few traces of adrenalin-like substance that the bee end-up secreting after going through such predicament and of which a small part might end up in the venom itself).

    But the fact that they extract only a gram from a whole hive, means that they are probably concentrating/extracting the product already, so they know already a few tips in which direction to look to find the interresting part.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:Not quite as simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      First you have to know which compound of the venom are the active ingredient

      The advertising.

    2. Re:Not quite as simple by OneAhead · · Score: 1

      You, sir, owe me a new keyboard. +1 touché

  56. Re:Can't we just 3D print it? by eggstasy · · Score: 2

    Nanotechnology, as I understand it, is about building entire machines out of atoms, on a nanoscale. This would allow us to interact with the world in a completely different way, for instance, physically ripping bacteria apart instead of trying to kill them with chemicals. So a cell phone doesn't fit the description: even though transistors can be measured in nanometers, the whole CPU, let alone the cell phone, is far beyond the nanoscale.

    I'm not an expert. You could just read about it on wikipedia.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanotechnology

  57. Re:Can't we just 3D print it? by loufoque · · Score: 1

    The SoC is.

  58. Tritium is a little bit more expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tritium commercial price of a gram of tritium is 30,000 USD.
    Can someone top that?

  59. Ingrained by mkdx · · Score: 2

    Younger looking females are in more advantageous position in the mating process. On the other hand, older males are seen as more stable and more likely to have the means to support.

  60. Share and Enjoy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    go stick their heads in a beehive

    You mean the bit that previously read "pig" in the local language sunk even further into the ground and changed its meaning *again*?

  61. Only 350 per Gram? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kinda cool but cheap compared to somethings that are out there: ie monoclonal antibodies that I used a few years back for some research US$700 per 100ug.

  62. 350/gram? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A quick search for bee venom brings up many suppliers offering it from 50$/g

  63. Re:Can't we just 3D print it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    even though transistors can be measured in nanometers, the whole CPU, let alone the cell phone, is far beyond the nanoscale.

    And the photomasks used to make the aforementioned transistors are far, far larger than the end product.

  64. Studies on bees suggests Roundup is to blame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Roundup doesn't kill the bees outright, but creates enough disabilities for entire hives to die off starvation.

    Neonicotinoid pesticides tied to crashing bee populations, 2 studies find
    http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/03/29/10921493-neonicotinoid-pesticides-tied-to-crashing-bee-populations-2-studies-find

    Beekeepers to EPA: We're running out of time
    http://grist.org/food/beekeepers-to-epa-were-running-out-of-time/

  65. I helped raise 25 beehives as a boy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's probably great, until you develop a tolerance (and yes, you can... I did). I was stung SO much & so badly as a boy, so many times (10x in 1 leg once & 100's of times in a few summers):

    After awhile, you don't "swell up" as much or as badly... thank the merciful Lord.

    See here (tons of it on the web) -> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=d&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=%22bee+sting%22+and+%22tolerance%22&btnG=Submit&gbv=1&sei=RHvYUOWdB8q80AHCjoDACw

    * My family's done bees since my grandparents & before that in Poland - for generations (my sis is into it now as a 'side job' afaik too, currently)...

    2 things you NEVER do, which I will warn ANYONE on here:

    NEVER wear cologne (or any STRONG scents) & never, EVER 'swat' at them first. They interpret that as an attack.

    APK

    P.S.=> You're OK as long as you "smoke the bees out" 1st, since they won't be able to get scent signals from the queen to "attack", which believe you me: THEY WILL once you mess with their nests!

    (My grandpa used to load a 'bellows' with apple leaves & let it smoulder to do this), but IF you do the DUMB MISTAKE I did once (wearing strong cologne & not realizing it)? You're ASKING to get bit...

    ... apk

  66. Gob had the right idea all along by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We'll see who brings in more honey!"

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5J2kc4oZTVU

  67. Hairline by phorm · · Score: 1

    Well, as a man I know that I do find the recession of my hairline somewhat disturbing, moreso than a few wrinkles etc.
    The extra bulges in various parts is also somewhat of a concern.

    I doubt I'm the only man with such concerns. Hair-loss is an especially-sensitive topic for many men.

  68. Oh really? by Viol8 · · Score: 1

    I think you're speaking for yourself there pal.

    1. Re:Oh really? by swillden · · Score: 1

      I think you're speaking for yourself there pal.

      So you are vain and insecure about the smoothness of your skin?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    2. Re:Oh really? by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      Your reading comprehension needs some work my friend.

    3. Re:Oh really? by swillden · · Score: 1

      Your reading comprehension needs some work my friend.

      Nope. But you really should stop deluding yourself.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  69. Confessions of a bee-keeper by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

    The electricity is in fact used for halogen lights, and on the other side of the glass are some Queen bees in lurid poses. Not one of my proudest moments, having to clean the glass and collect the 'venom'.

    Just goes to show, women will put anything on their skin to look younger.

  70. A useful GMO application by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    Here is a useful GMO usage. Take the bee gene that produce the venom, implant it in some yeast or bacterial, and produce cheap bee venom from an incubator.

    But here comes the dark side of GMO (well, one of them): either big pharma will patent the gene, or it will not happen

  71. Not that expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can get it from this company for $150 for 10 grams. That is considerably less than the post.

    http://beevenomsupply.com/get-samples

    Although, you could buy 10 for $150, and then sell it for $3500 to vain girls, which is a considerable gain.