Are 8 frame hives, foundationless frames etc. experimental?

[Michael Bush]

This came up in another thread and seems to come up from time to time:

>IDEE:
>And that's a good thing. Although Micheal is a VERY knowledgeable beek, IMHO, he is a very radical beek. Try anything at any time just to see if it will work. That, as far as I see, is not the best fit for a new beek. First year beeks can, in no way, expect their outcome to be the same as Mike's. He is drawing from many years of experience and will make instant changes in a hive when needed. A new beek cannot do these things.

This seems to indicate that a beginner should not try the system I'm using.  Yet I get thousands of emails a year from people who have changed to that system are thrilled to be doing that instead and wish they had started out that way.  If you want boxes you can lift and you want natural cell size, converting is a huge undertaking while starting off that way is not.  I've had one negative email during the times I've been on the forums and that was from someone who just thought they were bad ideas and had never tried them.  Any negative comments on the forums, you have all been able to read for yourselves.  And again are usually from people who have not tried them.

But back to the "experimental" aspects.  There is nothing I'm suggesting or doing that hasn't been around for more than 100 years.  Yes, more than a century.  Often significantly more than that.  I think some of the reasons that some of these did not catch on as the mainstream (although they have all been around continuously during that time) is they aren't a product you can sell.  Not using foundation is not something you advertise and make money on.

Some of these did not catch on because people were stronger.  Back when I was a kid all the steel drums were 55 gallons and all the feed bags were 100#s.  Now all the feed bags are 50#s and the drums are mostly 35 gallons. Why?  Because, first we don't work as hard as we used to (many of us sit at a desk all day) and second, we discovered  that that kind of overstraining, even if you could do it, was damaging people.  For some reason beekeeping has not caught up with these adjustments until recently but then most of these changes (50# feed bags etc.) are fairly recent (at least in my lifetime).

But lets look at some of them historically:
Foundationless:
    "HOW TO SECURE STRAIGHT COMBS. "The full advantages of the movable comb principle is only secured by getting all the combs built true within the frames. Upon the first introduction of movable frames, bee-keepers frequently failed in this although much care and attention were given. Mr. Langstroth, for a time, used for guides strips of comb attached to the under side of the top bar of the frame. This is a very good practice when the comb can be had, as it usually secures the object besides giving the bees a start with worker comb. Next followed the triangular comb guide consisting of a triangular piece of wood tacked to the under side of the top bar, leaving a sharp corner projecting downwards. This is a valuable aid and is now universally adopted." --FACTS IN BEE KEEPING by N.H. and H.A. King 1864, pg. 97

    "If some of the full frames are moved, and empty ones placed between them, as soon as the bees begin to build powerfully, there need be no guide combs on the empty frames, and still the work will be executed with the most beautiful regularity." --The Hive and the Honeybee by Rev. L.L. Langstroth 1853, pg. 227

    "Improved Comb Bar.--Mr. Woodbury says that this little contrivance has proved very effectual in securing straight combs when guide combs are not obtainable. The lower angles are rounded off whilst a central rib is added of about 1/8 of an inch in breadth and depth. This central rib extends to within 1/2 an inch of each end, where it is removed in order to admit of the bar fitting into the usual notch. All that is necessary to insure the regular formation of combs is, to coat the underneath surface of the central rib with melted wax. Mr. Woodbury further says, "my practice is to use plain bars, whenever guide-combs are attainable, as these can be attached with much greater facility to a plain than to a ribbed bar; but whenever I put in a bar without comb, I always use one of the improved ones. By this method , crooked and irregular combs are altogether unknown in my apiary." Most of our bars are made with the ridge; but should any of our customers prefer the flat ones, we keep a few to supply their requirements"--Alfred Neighbour, The apiary, or, Bees, bee hives, and bee culture pg 39

    "Top bars have been made by some hive manufacturers from one-fourth-inch to three-eights-inch strips, strengthened somewhat by a very thin strip placed edgewise on the underside as a comb guide; but such bars are much too light and will sag when filled with honey or with brood and honey..."--Frank Benton, The honey bee: a manual of instruction in apiculture pg 42

    "Comb Guide.--Generally a wooden edge, or a strip of comb or fdn., in the top of a frame or box, on which comb is to be built...As the comb guide is 9-16, and the cut in the end bar 3/4, we have 3-16 left for whole wood in the top bar, as at A, and the table should be set, as to leave just this amount of wood uncut. Even if the fdn. is fastened in the frames with melted wax as many do, I would have such a comb guide, because it adds so much to the strength of the frame, and obviates the necessity of having a very heavy top bar. The bees will, in time, build their combs right over such a comb guide, and use the cells above the brood for honey."-- A.I. Root, ABC of Bee Culture 1879 edition pg 251

    "A comb guide proper is a sharp edge or corner in the frame, from which the comb is to depend, the bees usually choosing to follow this edge, rather than diverge to an even surface; portions of comb are sometimes used for the same purpose."--J.S. Harbison, The bee-keeper's directory, footnote at the bottom of page 280 and 281

One size frame:
"Whatever style (hive) may be adopted, let it by all means be one with movable frames, and have but one sized frame in the apiary."--A.B. Mason, Mysteries of Bee-keeping explained

Leaving honey for winter stores:
"It is well known that improper diet makes one susceptible to disease. Now is it not reasonable to believe that extensive feeding of sugar to bees makes them more susceptible to American Foul Brood and other bee disease? It is known that American Foul Brood is more prevalent in the north than in the south. Why? Is it not because more sugar is fed to bees in the north while here in the south the bees can gather nectar most of the year which makes feeding sugar syrup unnecessary?"--Better Queens, Jay Smith

    "Q. When is the best time to feed the bees?
    "A. The best thing is never to feed them, but let them gather their own stores. But if the season is a failure, as it is some years in most places, then you must feed. The best time for that is just as soon as you know they will need feeding for winter; say in August or September. October does very well, however, and even if you haven't fed until December, better feed then than to let the bees starve."  --C.C. Miller, A Thousand Answers to Beekeeping Questions, 1917

Narrow Frames:
    "...are placed the usual distance, so that the frames are 1 9/20 inch from centre to centre; but if it is desired to prevent the production of drone brood, the ends of every other frame are slipped back as shown at B, and the distance of 1 1/4 inch from centre to centre may be maintained."--T.W. Cowan, British bee-keeper's Guide Book pg 44

    "On measuring the combs in a hive that were regularly made, I found the following result, viz; five worker-combs occupied a space of five and a half inches, the space between each being three-eights of an inch, and allowing for the same width on each outer side, equals six and a quarter inches, as the proper diameter of a box in which five worker-combs could be build...The diameter of worker-combs averaged four-fifths of an inch; and that of drone-combs, one and one-eight of an inch."--T.B. Miner, The American bee keeper's manual, pg 325

If you take off the extra 3/8" on the last one this is 5 7/8" for five combs divided by five is 1.175" or 1 3/16" on center for each comb.

    "Frame.--As before mentioned, each stock hive has ten of these frames, each 13 inches long by 7 1/4 inches high, with a 5/8 inch projection either back or front. The width both of the bar and frame is 7/8 of an inch; this is less by 1/4 of an inch than the bar recommended by the older apiarians. Mr.Woodbury,--whose authority on the modern plans for keeping bees is of great weight,--finds the 7/8 of an inch bar an improvement, because with them the combs are closer together, and require fewer bees to cover the brood. Then too, in the same space that eight old fashioned bars occupied the narrower frames admit of an additional bar, so that, by using these, increased accommodation is afforded for breeding and storing of honey."-- Alfred Neighbour, The Apiary, or, Bees, Bee Hives, and Bee Culture...

    "I have found it to be just that conclusion in theory that experiment proves a fact in practice, viz: with frames 7/8 of an inch wide, spaced just a bee-space apart, the bees will fill all the cells from top to bottom with brood, provided deeper cells or wider spacing, is used in the storage chamber. This is not guess-work or theory. In experiments covering a term of years. I have found the same results, without variation, in every instance. Such being the fact, what follows? In answer, I will say that the brood is invariably reared in the brood-chamber -- the surplus is stored, and at once, where it should be, and no brace-combs are built; and not only this, but the rearing of drones is kept well in hand, excess of swarming is easily prevented, and, in fact, the whole matter of bee-keeping work is reduced to a minimum, all that is required being to start with sheets of comb just 7/8 of an inch thick, and so spaced that they cannot be built any deeper. I trust that I have made myself understood; I know that if the plan indicated is followed, beekeeping will not only be found an easier pursuit, but speedy progress will be made from now on."--"Which are Better, the Wide or Narrow Frames?" by J.E. Pond, American Bee Journal: Volume 26, Number 9 March 1, 1890 No. 9. Page 141

Note: 7/8" plus 3/8" (max beespace) makes 1 1/4".
7/8" plus 1/4" (min beespace) makes 1 1/8".

    "But those who have given special attention to the matter, trying both spacing, agree almost uniformly that the right distance is 1 3/8, or, if anything, a trifle scant, and some use quite successfully 1 1/4 inch spacing." --ABC and XYZ of Bee Culture by Ernest Rob Root Copyright 1917, Pg 669

8 Frame boxes:
These have been around 150 years or so.  C.C. Miller actually scrapped his entire operation to convert over to 8 frames from 10 frames.

"The T supers I use are 12-1/8 wide inside, just right for
8-frame hives."--C.C. Miller, fifty years among the bees

[BjornBee]

Yes....all the above items are experimental MB. To iddee, they are experimental. He has that right to his opinion. You could substitute 'experimental" with "stupid" or any other descriptive word, and probably ones you would not agree with, and they would all be correct.

Not sure if you are asking if iddee thoughts are valid by suggestion his opinion is wrong, or your selling your way of beekeeping, being defensive, and somehow needing to justify what you do. Iddee is justified in what he says, what his opinion is, and how he keeps bees. Even if you drag out comments from dead guys from eons ago.

But you have that same right. Just remember if your going to question what iddee's opinions are, you should also expect others to question you.

[BjornBee]

For the record....I love 8 frame equipment and foundationless systems.

Although there has been many items over the years that have allowed my opinion to butt heads with yours. And some still do!  ;)

[iddee]

""We need new beeks, intermediate beeks, old time beeks, hobbyist beeks, sideliners, and commercial beeks.

We need ultra radical beeks, mid road beeks, and ultra conservative beeks. That's the only way a newbee can get a well rounded education in beekeeping.""
This is the punchline of my post. Can no one see it?

No, radical doesn't mean stupid. Just the opposite. Stupid people learn one way and stay with it forever. Radical people try different ways to do things because they are smart enough to know there may be a better way. Radical, to me, only means "not conforming to the norm". It is in no way derogatory.

If every beek did the exact same way with all hives, the hobby would become quite boring. Many things would never have been discovered, and there would be no changing of routine when a new pest or disease came around. The bees would soon be gone. I was ONLY saying we need all types on the forum, so newbees could learn from a wide variety of different routines.

Maybe I should go to journalist school and learn to write. I don't seem to have the ability to get my thoughts across correctly.

[windfall]

I understood you just fine.

I suppose Michael is demonstrating that his techniques are neither new or untried and have historical use by respected beeks of the past, but I don't think that was what you were implying....just outside of the norm or majority.

I like this forum because it has a diverse group of experienced folks. I spent the better part of a year lurking here before we got bees this spring. It helps to see just how many different systems there are, and how they work for different people in different climates with different goals and priorities.

I do also get michael's point about conversion being more difficult after start up. But really the only way you find what works for you is to see and try something hands on. If you are lucky enough o spend sometime with/around experienced keepers I suppose that would be best before starting yourself. But many of us just have to dive in and be ready to try a few things untill we find a comfort zone....which may require retooling and conversion down the road.

For what it's worth I too have been primarily using 8's and foundationless and enjoying it...but I might find something I like better as time goes by and I give other options a try.

[FRAMEshift]

Any technique is "experimental" for the person who hasn't done it before.  But if what you mean is "new and untried", you can't say that about any of MB's methods.  Most of them have a longer history than the 10-frames deep Lanstroth hive with foundation.

We use long hives without foundation.  There has been nothing difficult or "experimental" about it.  The information we needed was not as widely disseminated as information on Langstroth and foundation, and MB was gracious enough to provide us the experience and knowledge we needed.

Thankyou Michael for the leadership you have provided to so many of us.  Now we are returning the favor and showing new generations of young beekeepers that there is another way.

[bulldog]

i suppose that putting bees in a box was experimental/radical at one point in our history.  :-D

[D Semple]

This is my first year and I have chosen to follow Michael's advice almost exclusively for four reasons:

First, things go better for me working a plan
Second, I like his beekeeping philosophy
Third, I don't want to mix and match methods yet, I'm not knowledgeable enough
Forth, he has the patience of Jobe and is willing to answer every cotton pickin, dumbass, stupid question I come up with.  

So far I've got no complaints, 17 nice strong hives and growing

Don

[ziffabeek]

I also read "radical" as "outside the establishment" and to me that's not a bad thing.  If it helps, Iddee and Michael are my go to people in threads and when I have a question, specifically because they have different techniques in beekeeping.  I can read, consider and choose what I want to do.  That's why I love beekeeping, because there is no one "right" way, it is through experimenting, trying and watching that you learn how your bees do best.

And for the record, I think that Iddee and Michael (both of them actually) have a pretty similar basic paradigm for beekeeping - respect the bee, know the environment, let them do what they do and manage them with minimal interference.  I least that is what I read when I pour over the posts.  They just have different techniques for doing so.  

Just mho.  Maybe rather than "experimental",  we should try "non-traditional"?

love you ALL and ALL your ideas.

ziffa

[BjornBee]

Any technique is "experimental" for the person who hasn't done it before.  But if what you mean is "new and untried", you can't say that about any of MB's methods.  Most of them have a longer history than the 10-frames deep Lanstroth hive with foundation.

Oh really?

Who are you? The thought and correctness patrol?

One of the points in these discussions over the past few days has been respecting other persons opinions. To state what you deem as correct, and not correct, and take the stance that you can, and cannot, make any comment you dang well feel please, within the confines of what the forum dictates, is absurd.


One of my points was that if iddee, or anyone else feels something is experimental (or even untried), that is their opinion and they are entitled to it. They are not making demands of your opinion. So why are you demanding of others?

Opinions are either correct or not. You base your comments on backing one position or another. based on your experiences. But we don't tell folks that they can or connot state what they think.

If you think the world is flat...your wrong. But we don't string up folks that think the world is flat. And we don't rip their tongues trying to silence them.

If I wanted to have my, or see everyone Else's comments pre-approved, I would of joined a forum that does that.

Each person has the right to call anything they deem fit as experimental, and yes even "untried". And I question anyone who takes the stance on any forum the position that posters can not express their opinion, whether you deem them as right or wrong.

[yockey5]

Started out (38 years ago) with 8 frame hives, went to 10 frame hives, now I am back to 8 frame hives. I see the 8 frame hive as the better of the two. Never fooled with a TBH and probably never will.

[caticind]

Any technique is "experimental" for the person who hasn't done it before.  But if what you mean is "new and untried", you can't say that about any of MB's methods.  Most of them have a longer history than the 10-frames deep Lanstroth hive with foundation.

Oh really?

Who are you? The thought and correctness patrol?

One of the points in these discussions over the past few days has been respecting other persons opinions. To state what you deem as correct, and not correct, and take the stance that you can, and cannot, make any comment you dang well feel please, within the confines of what the forum dictates, is absurd.


One of my points was that if iddee, or anyone else feels something is experimental (or even untried), that is their opinion and they are entitled to it. They are not making demands of your opinion. So why are you demanding of others?

Opinions are either correct or not. You base your comments on backing one position or another. based on your experiences. But we don't tell folks that they can or connot state what they think.

If you think the world is flat...your wrong. But we don't string up folks that think the world is flat. And we don't rip their tongues trying to silence them.

....

Bjorn, please breathe for a moment.  The mind police are not here.  Here is a quote from your ramblings page which you often link new beeks to (and which I find very helpful):

"And you can't expect much from others when beekeepers and bee associations are doing some questionable "saving the bees" programs themselves."

This structure is the same as the one in Frameshift's post.  Are you informing people that you will not allow readers to have expectations of beekeepers that you find unrealistic?  That you will start tongue-ripping? Of course not, any more than the above post is telling anyone what to post or not post.  Pre-approved comments, besides stifling real debate, would also rob us of the heated arguments that keep this forum from freezing over in the winter.

[caticind]

Returning to topic: 

I think 8-frames, foundationless, horizontal hives, etc, often appear deliberately complicated, odd, experimental, or radical to those who have been brought up in the main line of beekeeping that have not tried it.  One can read books and frequent clubs for years without ever encountering those ideas.  It's only online that they are so prominently discussed, in my experience.  Most beeks continue to do things as their mentors taught them.

But I don't think that a lack of common knowledge about how to apply those ideas (such as there is for 10-frame foundation-ed Langs) should stop newbeeks from experimenting or stop us from encouraging them to try these things in moderation.  Sure, they will often mistake the simplest, most common bee issues for huge disasters (omg my thb just drew a frame of crazy comb what do i do should i perform a cutout right now and requeen too???!).  But they do the same in Lang equipment, too (omg water dripping out i mustof melted my bees!), just because they are newbeeks and everything seems big and confusing when you're getting started. 

Isn't that one of the reasons we're here?  Cause every week I see people posting on situations from the earnest to the frightening to the stubborn to the profoundly stupid (i can work bees with no smoke and no veil during the dearth because i know kung fu!)  And the more experienced folks here provide great advice again and again, with only minimal sighing bout how no one ever uses the search function.  And the rather less experienced practice their diagnostic skills and incorporate their own experience and give well-meaning advice that is sometimes misleading or actually wrong.  And get corrected.  And the newbeeks learn from this and usually don't kill all their bees.

As the knowledge base about less mainstream practices grows (thanks in no small part to MB's tireless sharing), we can better provide the same help to newbeeks struggling with 8-frame mediums, THBs, Warres, Long Hives, foundationless, etc.  Learning to keep bees in a box is a long tough process with occasional crushing setbacks.  What kind of box you put them doesn't make it that much more difficult for the rank beginner, especially if you have good guidance.

As a relative newcomer to the practice, I started with a standard Lang, but read everything about alternate methods that I could get my hands on.  The problems that bothered me most the standard setup were exactly those that MBs style of beekeeping best addresses (lifting weight, incompatible frames, burr comb, inflexible space).  I switched as soon as I could to building my own long hives, which I could do because I had this community to ask questions of and MB's site to refer to, even if I sometimes went a different way (like not having top entrances or bottom boards).  If I'd had a local mentor who did things this way, I'd gladly have never used a Lang, and I don't think I would have lost anything by it.  Now I have a mini-mentee, and I tell her how how I do it and how folks do it with Langs.  And when asked I explain what I think are the advantages of my way.

This doesn't mean that I've stopped experimenting and found the ONE TRUE WAY...I'm working on plans next year to try turning one of my long hives into a two-queen system with a honey tower in the center (thus getting some use out of my old Lang supers after all).  Far from being confusing or frustrating, I think broad experimentation and exposure to contradictory ideas is good for new beeks.  Just like I think we'd turn out better science students in this country if we pushed more hands on and experimentation much earlier (no intro physics or engineering class is complete without a pumpkin throwing trebuchet, imo! give the middle schoolers the medieval designs and challenge them to make it better.  and have the nurse on hand just in case.  :-D)

[FRAMEshift]

Each person has the right to call anything they deem fit as experimental, and yes even "untried". And I question anyone who takes the stance on any forum the position that posters can not express their opinion, whether you deem them as right or wrong.

Bjorn, the phrase "you can't say that"  is an idiom in the English language.  It does not mean that you literally can't utter the words because your throat has closed up or your tongue has been ripped out.  It does not mean that you are legally or morally prohibited from saying the words.  It means that it would be incorrect to make that claim.  And that is my opinion. 

But you already knew that.   :-D   You've been bored and angry ever since Irene knocked out your power and messed with your hives.  I understand that you are not happy and I sympathize with your situation.  And you can't say that I don't.   :-D

[BjornBee]

Any technique is "experimental" for the person who hasn't done it before.  But if what you mean is "new and untried", you can't say that about any of MB's methods.  Most of them have a longer history than the 10-frames deep Lanstroth hive with foundation.

Oh really?

Who are you? The thought and correctness patrol?

One of the points in these discussions over the past few days has been respecting other persons opinions. To state what you deem as correct, and not correct, and take the stance that you can, and cannot, make any comment you dang well feel please, within the confines of what the forum dictates, is absurd.


One of my points was that if iddee, or anyone else feels something is experimental (or even untried), that is their opinion and they are entitled to it. They are not making demands of your opinion. So why are you demanding of others?

Opinions are either correct or not. You base your comments on backing one position or another. based on your experiences. But we don't tell folks that they can or connot state what they think.

If you think the world is flat...your wrong. But we don't string up folks that think the world is flat. And we don't rip their tongues trying to silence them.

....

Bjorn, please breathe for a moment.  The mind police are not here.  Here is a quote from your ramblings page which you often link new beeks to (and which I find very helpful):

"And you can't expect much from others when beekeepers and bee associations are doing some questionable "saving the bees" programs themselves."

This structure is the same as the one in Frameshift's post.  Are you informing people that you will not allow readers to have expectations of beekeepers that you find unrealistic?  That you will start tongue-ripping? Of course not, any more than the above post is telling anyone what to post or not post.  Pre-approved comments, besides stifling real debate, would also rob us of the heated arguments that keep this forum from freezing over in the winter.

Ah....your suggesting I can or can not post what I want on my own website, (and a page by some called  a blog) without comparing the same latitude in matters of a forum. Interesting. I am pretty sure I can do whatever I want on my own website, and that this same leeway does not apply here. I can suggest that doing something is quite stupid on the website, when advice is given in a manner that it goes out to a random reader and may or may not apply.

Start getting on this site and suggesting someone is stupid for his way of beekeeping, and I bet much more will happen than on my site.

Same is true with a blog. You can stammer all you want and make statements like "You can't do that!". But I think those same words aimed directly at members of a forum and in response to their own opinions, and I think it crosses the line.

Sorry you picked such a sorry example to defend telling folks what they can and cannot do. Instead of agreeing with me, you took the position that it is acceptable to come here and rebut opinions and tell others what they can and can not do. So sad!

A website, a blog, and a forum, is very different in their approach, expectations, and design.

[BjornBee]

Bjorn, the phrase "you can't say that"  is an idiom in the English language.  It does not mean that you literally can't utter the words because your throat has closed up or your tongue has been ripped out.  It does not mean that you are legally or morally prohibited from saying the words.  It means that it would be incorrect to make that claim.  And that is my opinion. 

But you already knew that.   :-D   You've been bored and angry ever since Irene knocked out your power and messed with your hives.  I understand that you are not happy and I sympathize with your situation.  And you can't say that I don't.   :-D

Hmmm choices...

1) Continue this dialog

2) Say "hey! I'm just having fun."

3) Ignore completely

4) wait for someone other than frameshift to get involved.

5) Pick on iddee some more

6) get a wig and see how good I might look also!

And it's raining outside again....

[iddee]

#5... I can take it. Just remember, I can dish it,. too.  :D :D

[Adam Foster Collins]

Solid post, Mike. And interesting. I imagine that in almost any pursuit that has been around a long time, there is at least as much "good" information being lost to history as there is new stuff being discovered. But "new" is a relative term. And I think that's the key message in your post.

You've taken the time to really explore the written work of beekeepers over the last century or more, and you have given their work equal consideration to the work of your contemporaries, and come up with an approach that works for you. And to your credit, you've shared it as they did. So they work for a lot of people that find them through you.

I guess in some ways, you're "radically old-fashioned"...

Adam

[tillie]

Michael,  I tell people all the time if they want to have concrete basic explanation of simple beekeeping, to go to your website. 

I am one of those who so wish I had started with 8 frame equipment and that I had begun with foundationless frames.  I knew I wanted to be as close to natural as possible so even the first year I used all surplus wax foundation except for the plastic on which my nuc bees were living when I purchased them (and that has long ago been put in the trashcan).  I have gradually traded away or gotten rid of my 10 frame boxes.  But I don't have wood working skills to cut them down. So I really wish I had never bought them and had started on 8 frames.

I deeply appreciate your contribution to this forum along with all the other varying opinions expressed here.  I learned what I want to know more here and especially from you, Michael, than from my local club or any book. 

I feel a little like a pioneer in Metro Atlanta.  When I started most people used plastic foundation, extractors, and poisons in their hive.  My friend Julia and I demonstrate foundationless frames, the simplicity of all medium 8 frame equipment, crush and strain harvest  on our club hive inspections, and now I am not the only one in my club doing these things.  Many people are using foundationless frames, some have moved to 8 frame equipment and many crush and strain their harvest.

I am forever grateful to all I have learned from you, Michael, both on this forum and on your website.  I do hope I get to meet you in person someday.

Linda T in Atlanta

[Michael Bush]

Thanks for the kudos and support. 

My point is I don't think "radical" is a good word to describe techniques that have been in constant usage for the last one and a half centuries.  And I recommend them to beginners to help them avoid decisions they will regret later.