Randy said:
> There were big differences between HFCS's.  In pH,  in complex sugars, and
> in bee survival.  They were not able to pin down exactly why some were 
> worse
> for the bees.

I think the above about sums up the issue. Hard to figure out if your loss 
was caused by an off spec load. I will add another point and that is almost 
all sugar & HFCS plants are under the *impression* the beekeeper is the 
place to "dump" off spec syrup ( and they do to the beeks waiting eagerly 
for the syrup for free).

Actually the sugar plants *should be paying* the beekeepers to haul off. 
Then the beekeeper could afford his own testing before feeding. For the most 
part most beekeepers are not very successful businessmen and although have 
listened to my opinion are afraid another beekeeper will take their scrap 
account away by not charging.

Syrup has to be less than 2% HFCS before run into the drains I believe so 
you can easily see what a problem (and expense) a load of off spec can be to 
a HFCS plant.

Proper testing can be expensive but the only way to protect against an off 
spec load.

NO SUCH PROBLEM WITH SUCROSE

The ONLY problem I had with the work of Dr. Pamela Gregory (Weslaco Bee Lab) 
when I did the ABF article on HFCS / sucrose was she did not have lab 
analysis on the HFCS used in her caged bee testing.

Although I believe she was able to get the same results in several attempts 
she used the same HFCS I believe.

On road in an hour and away from computer as I am sure Randy will comment on 
a few of my posts.
Comment when I can.

bob

             ***********************************************
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

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm