C Hooper wrote:

> It said New Zealand Laboratory Services Ltd had stated two years ago there was a problem with the
> "repeatability" of results for honeys rated at UMF 20 with high anti-bacterial activity levels...

Not unusual, which is why some other honeys do as well in anti-bacterial trials. I found differences in my own 
honey from the same hive. In essence, you have a range which depend on the nectar, weather, time of year, and a 
whole bunch of other things.

Just take one- drying time of the honey. If the humidity is down and the heat up, honey will dry more quickly 
and be capped earlier. That reduces the time for enzymes to work and create high concentrations of glucose 
oxidase, a key anti-bacterial agent. So that batch of honey will exhibit less anti-bacterial agents than one 
allowed to dry longer in the same hive.

So it would not be unusual to have different result for the same honey especially since little is known about 
the formation of all the other compounds found to contribute to any honey's healing ability.

Manuka has great PR, which I think is fine, since it helps all honey by association.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

****************************************************
* General Information About BEE-L is available at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm   *
****************************************************