On Wed, 2 Jan 2002, Dick Allen wrote:


> Well today I received the January 2002 issue of the American Bee Journal.
> In it was an article entitled "Scientific Health Research as a Platform for
> a Marketing Strategy". The article was by Marcia M. Cardetti, Director of
> Scientific Affairs for the National Honey Board.

> It also mentioned a project underway at the University of Georgia to try to
> eliminate Clostridium botulinum spores from honey. Wouldn't that be grand.
> We would no longer have to tell people how *poisonous* honey is to babies!

Be careful what you wish for. Should they succeed, I can forsee such
processing becoming a requirement, regardless of what that processing does
to the quality of the honey or the cost of the processing.

I have no problem suggesting that honey should not be fed to babies.  I've
never had a customer quit buying honey because I've told them that news.
I'm careful to explain that infant digestive systems are may not be
capable of dealing with the botulinum toxin until they're about a year old
and that they should consult with the pediatricion before feeding honey.
It's not much different than feeding strained peas until the kid's gut can
handle the roughage.  Most of these people have been eating honey all
their lives without a problem.  If the explanation is accurate and
logical, they will appreciate your candor.

But if we had to cook the honey or filter, we'd lose most of our retail
customers and most of the good honey we produce would become part of a
blend in someone else's package.

---------------
Richard Yarnell, SHAMBLES WORKSHOPS | No gimmick we try, no "scientific"
Beavercreek, OR. Makers of fine     | fix we attempt, will save our planet
Wooden Canoes, The Stack(R) urban   | until we reduce the population. Let's
composter, Raw Honey                | leave our kids a decent place to live.