BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
James Fischer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 17:59:07 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (98 lines)
>> here's a big difference - one method allows one's honey to remain
>> antibiotic-free, and thereby, allows one to remain in the business of
>> selling food fit for human consumption.  The other method does not.

> You have to be joking! Do you think that honey from hives 
> that have been treated with antibiotics is unfit for human 
> consumption?

The consumer is not joking. Tolerance for antibiotics at even trace levels
is "zero" in the mind of many consumers.

Don't shoot the analyst. My personal views on food are irrelevant. The
consumer decides what is fit for consumption, and what is not.    In many
jurisdictions mentioned in this discussion, antibiotics are already
prohibited in beehives.  I detect a trend.  

Given the quote from the CHC President, I think we need to realize that the
current crop of antibiotics are a LOT more persistent than Oxi-Tet ever was,
and the ability to screen for their presence is a lot more sensitive.

>  I heard someone say once that the amount of antibiotic 
> in honey was so small that you would have to eat a 
> semi-truckload of it to get one 250 mg dose. Which, by 
> the way, wouldn't cure anything, you have to take it for 
> at least a week.

But this is exactly the low-level exposure to antibiotics that is so
worrying to public health officials.  These low levels do nothing except
create resistant bacteria.  Yes, honey is a very tiny part of the problem,
but do we want to lose sales to someone able to truthfully say
"antibiotic-free" on their label?  

> Considering most people eat honey by the spoonful, 
> I doubt we should worry much about that. Compared 
>to the the amount we pick up from meat, dairy and 
> other foods, it is laughable.

I can assure you that we pick up zero from "dairy", something I already
explained in this discussion in some detail. Antibiotics are absolutely
prohibited in all US milk.  Artificial hormones are already undesirable, and
will be the next prohibited item in milk.  

"Antibiotic and hormone-free" meat is so desirable that prices are high and
supplies tight.  Just last week, major fast-food chain Chipotle suffered for
merely appearing to suggest that they might respond to the supply problem by
loosening their strict rules on using only "antibiotic and hormone-free"
meat.  Their stock dropped from $414 to $406 in one hour as a result, and it
still has not yet recovered, now at $402.  So a company with a $12.4 US
billion market cap lost 2.5% of total shareholder value merely because of a
little mistake about steak. Is a one-day loss of $310 million laughable?

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/08/13/211717907/chipotle-changes-antib
iotic-free-policy-oops-no-it-doesnt
or
http://tinyurl.com/nxmo68l

This is just consumers voting with their wallets; don't expect it to make
sense.  For perspective, the demographic so worried about what they feed
their kids are also highly likely to be inexplicably refusing to have their
children vaccinated, don't ask me why:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/21972375-418/why-do-rich-people-hating-vaccines
.html
or 
http://tinyurl.com/kfsle7v

> By the way, there is no evidence 
> that these substances are 
> substantially affect[ing] human health

Here's a one-acronym refutation of the above: MRSA, but even if it can be
somehow scientifically proven that honey is not a part of the problem,
people still want pesticide-free, antibiotic-free, hormone-free, free-range,
and all the other hot-button terms.  

They just want to feel good about what they feed their kids, and all they
have is labels in the supermarket to assure them that they are not buying
toxins. They have lost touch with the production of food, and feel powerless
and clueless.  These qualitative certifications are not just optional
"whitewall tires", they are ROUND tires, a basic requirement to make a sale.


"Whitewall" tires, "radial" tires... my metaphors are so old, some
beekeepers may be too young to know these were optional features on cars at
one time. But that's exactly what is happening with food.  Things that were
extra-cost options become required features over time, taken for granted,
demanded unconditionally.  

I've heard that many beekeepers now have automatic transmissions and air
conditioning in their trucks these days, so maybe even we are not immune to
this phenomenon.



             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2