At 08:34 AM 5/21/02 -0400, you wrote:
>Garrett M Martin wrote:
>
>>  Since we know that wax absorbs chemicals.
>Bill Truesdall wrote>Not an absolute, in fact far from it. Depends on the
chemical.
.... and
>Honey is more likely to have chemicals than wax.

This last statement is an oversimplification, and for the most part, its
simply untrue.

Honey and wax have very different properties in terms of contact with,
contamination by, and residual times.  Chemist talk about partitioning
coefficients, and in this case, its comparing apples and oranges.

Both can become contaminated with miticides, pesticides, industrial
chemicals, military unique chemicals, and so on.  There may be more honey,
but it normally only shows the chemicals that can be taken up systemically
from the soil, with some direct contamination from dusts and possibly air.
The good news is that in general, levels of contamination of honey/nectar
are low compared to other components of the hive -- wax, pollen, the bees
themselves.  There are exceptions, such as radioactive materials in honey
nectar in samples collected from Europe -- incredibly low levels, but
measurable.  On military sites, tritium may show up in the honey.  Some
organophosphate insecticides may get into the honey.

Now, whereas honey is a liquid, carbohydrate mixture, wax is considered to
be lipophilic.  And here's the rub, certain chemicals partition into the
wax because it is a "lipophilic sink" -- takes it right up and holds onto it.

Also, wax can be many years old.  So although there may be more honey than
wax, anything ever stored in the cells are possible points of contaminant
exchange with the wax -- nectar and honey, pollen, even bits of propolis
used in lining brood cells.  These materials may reside for long periods in
the wax, and new sources of potential contaminants occur every year and
from different sources, especially is the colonies are moved around.

Overall, wax contamination levels tend to be higher in the spring.  As bee
clean out cells and rebuild, the contaminant levels may go down -- the bees
are chewing out some of the old wax, putting in some new.  They aren't so
much cleaning out the contaminants, but rather the contaminants are being
diluted by the addition of new wax.

As per tests - $35/sample for metals like lead, $200-1000 for organics,
depending on how many categories of organics need to be looked at.  No one
analysis procedure can do more than a related group of chemicals - that may
be as few as individual chemicals like fluvalinate or imidacloprid, groups
such as chlorinated pesticides (few dozen at the most, with maybe 1-6
showing up in measurable amounts, to a couple of hundred volatile chemicals.

As per the color test - yes, some simple test could be developed, at a high
cost, with little chance of enough sales to beekeepers to recoup the
investment.  Only hope might be a creative, retired chemist, who could work
in her/his garage, donating their time, with little overhead -- that might
get the test packet.  Chemical industry and university groups have to pay
salaries, overhead, etc.  That adds up fast, and there's not much of a
market out there.

Even if every beekeeper ran tests, the sales would still be small compared
to a pesticide for use in a garden.

Cheers

Jerry