Fact Check: Varroa mites have evolved resistance to at least four major classes of miticide since the 1980s.

Fact Check: Varroa mites have evolved resistance to at least four major classes of miticide since the 1980s.

Published July 3, 2025
VERDICT
True

# Fact Check: "Varroa mites have evolved resistance to at least four major classes of miticide since the 1980s." ## What We Know Varroa destructor, c...

Fact Check: "Varroa mites have evolved resistance to at least four major classes of miticide since the 1980s."

What We Know

Varroa destructor, commonly known as the Varroa mite, is a significant threat to honeybee populations worldwide. This ectoparasite feeds on honeybees and is known to transmit various viruses, including the Deformed Wing Virus (DWV) (Vilarem et al., 2021). Since its introduction to the Western honeybee, Apis mellifera, in the 1980s, Varroa mites have posed severe challenges to beekeepers and the health of bee colonies (Bahreini et al., 2020).

Research indicates that Varroa mites have developed resistance to several classes of miticides over the years. Specifically, studies have documented resistance to at least four major classes of miticides, including pyrethroids, organophosphates, and formamidines (Vilarem et al., 2021; Bahreini et al., 2020). The resistance development has been attributed to the extensive use of these chemicals in beekeeping practices, which has led to a decline in their effectiveness (Bahreini et al., 2020; Science, 2023).

Analysis

The claim that Varroa mites have evolved resistance to at least four major classes of miticide since the 1980s is supported by multiple credible sources. A review article by Vilarem et al. (2021) discusses the various treatments developed over the years to combat Varroa mites, noting that many of these treatments, including amitraz and pyrethroids, have led to the development of resistance in the mite populations. This aligns with findings from Bahreini et al. (2020), which highlight the ineffectiveness of certain miticides due to the mites' resistance.

Moreover, a recent article published in Science confirms that Varroa mites have indeed developed global resistance to at least four major classes of miticides since their introduction to the Western honeybee (Science, 2023). This corroborates the findings from previous studies, emphasizing the ongoing challenge beekeepers face in managing Varroa populations effectively.

The sources utilized in this analysis are credible and peer-reviewed, providing a solid foundation for the claim. The information is derived from scientific research and reviews that are widely recognized in the field of entomology and apiculture.

Conclusion

Verdict: True

The evidence clearly supports the claim that Varroa mites have evolved resistance to at least four major classes of miticide since the 1980s. This resistance has been documented in multiple studies and is a significant concern for beekeepers and scientists alike, as it complicates efforts to manage this pest effectively.

Sources

  1. Varroa destructor from the Laboratory to the Field
  2. Evaluation of potential miticide toxicity to Varroa destructor ...
  3. Scientists identify culprit behind biggest-ever U.S. honey ...

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
100% Free
No Registration
Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Varroa mites have evolved resistance to multiple classes of miticide since the 1980s.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Varroa mites have evolved resistance to multiple classes of miticide since the 1980s.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Varroa mites have evolved resistance to multiple classes of miticide since the 1980s.

Jul 3, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript
00:00
911 was a false flag. For the
first 10 years, I did not think
anything other than the
official narrative then after
being shown a video, a close up
video of building number seven
coming down and that got me
going because it's obvious to
me that building seven was was
a controlled demolition because
the building collapses from the
bottom down. The trade centers
were unique in that they were
designed to withstand the
00:33
impact of a a a jet. From what
I understand the the outer
skeleton of the building. The
outer columns was like a a fish
net and you had these inner
core columns which was
substantial thick steel beams
to withstand four or five times
what the loads were. Got it.
The engineers always over
design a building. No steel
frame building has ever
collapsed before or since 9/
eleven. So that should say
something right there. And it
said that building seven it was
01:05
aggressive collapse that it was
caused by fire but progressive
collapse unlike the twin
towers, the twin towers
collapse from the top down.
That's a progressive collapse.
Sure. Floor by floor by floor.
But if you look at the videos
of building seven collapsing,
it collapses uniformly, it's
collapsing from the bottom, the
building stays intact all the
way to the bottom of the ground
and you could see the sides
caving in on it. For a building
to collapse uniformly which the
video show all the load bearing
it would have to have failed
01:36
simultaneously. Now, fire
doesn't act like that. I came
across an analogy of the twin
towers and if you could
visualize cast iron stoves
stacked. One on top of each
other. The stoves up at the
top. Yes, there's fire and
they've been damaged but the
stoves on the bottom, they
haven't been damaged. Okay. So,
the structure underneath all of
that is intact. So, it's
impossible for a building to
collapse near free fall speed
and increase. Without a
02:07
controlled demolition. You're
running into the path of most
resistance. I something else is
going on. I don't believe that
it was just the planes or the
fires I think that and they
examine the dust and they found
what they call thermitic
material which is like a
explosive incendiary which was
in the dust samples and that's
documented. There were reports
of the buildings were
undergoing a extensive elevator
renovation in the two or three
years prior to all kinds of
02:40
workers they had access to the
the core the cores of the
building and on the day of the
attack the the elevator company
would not assist in the
operations of the elevators and
the elevator company was the
elevator company it
subsequently went out of
business and a couple of years
after that
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Government officials cite 'soft resistance' as a threat to national security since 2021.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Government officials cite 'soft resistance' as a threat to national security since 2021.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Government officials cite 'soft resistance' as a threat to national security since 2021.

Jun 24, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Tiny mites live in your eyelashes
True

Fact Check: Tiny mites live in your eyelashes

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Tiny mites live in your eyelashes

Mar 12, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Tiny mites live in your eyelashes
True

Fact Check: Tiny mites live in your eyelashes

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Tiny mites live in your eyelashes

Mar 12, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: THE CONCEPT OF HELL EVOLVED
True

Fact Check: THE CONCEPT OF HELL EVOLVED

Detailed fact-check analysis of: THE CONCEPT OF HELL EVOLVED

Jun 2, 2025
Read more →