I've found the discussion thus far interesting.  A few thoughts:

1.  The limits of the testing techniques seem to be a "moving target".  There are lots of techniques being employed at various price points and levels of accuracy and detection...and they are always being improved.
  
2.  I hate to see any kind of "unenforceable standard" because the testing methods available aren't sensitive enough (this seems to be the case in Florida if my reading of their new honey standard is accurate).

3.  From my perspective, I think we need to separate beekeeping practices from label claims.  By this I mean that if a beekeeper feeds in such a way that feed gets into the honey in some amount, then should the label _really_ read pure honey?  ...at .0005%? .5%?  5%?  10%?  30%?  50%?  Obviously there should be a number at which it is no longer considered "pure honey".

4.  I know of at least one case where someone with a corn allergy has reacted to baked goods made with honey (and no corn products).  The honey supplier claimed that honey only had to be 60% pure to be labeled as pure (I'm sure this isn't the case, but it's part of the story we were told)...they changed suppliers :)

5.  Food products that _may_ contain other impurities (especially potential allergens like nuts) due to the production processes are generally labeled as "may contain traces of nuts" or somesuch.  I doubt that these adulterants are appearing in very high percentages when they are present....less than .5%?

6.  Do we expect "pure orange juice" to be 95% orange juice?  Do we want to know what the other 5% is? before we buy it?  What do our customers expect if a bottle is labeled "pure honey"?

7.  Many honey customers are buying honey because _it isn't_ HFCS...especially if they walk into a health food store and pay premium prices.  To these customers, .5% is probably an issue.

In any case, I will try to catch up on a few discussions in the next couple of days.  We've been in Philadelphia for the Honey Festival and the dedication of a historical marker at the place of Langstroth's birth.  It's been a great couple of days, and I'll try to report on some of the specifics.

One fact of note:  After the ceremony, we were invited to the American Philosophical Society to see some of their Langstroth and beekeeping holdings (there were also Lewis and Clark original journals/maps on display, and we met in the room where Ben Franklin's Library is housed).  We got a look at (and i made some crude photographs of) the original approved patent application (with the patent office seal).

The handwriting (including the signature) is really beautiful...but I've seen Langstroth's penmanship, and it's really hard to read.  Matt Redmon (a Langstroth historian who also gave some talks and was present) said it was his wife's handwriting (including the signature).  

I have something in common with Langstroth (my handwriting is atrocious and I am lucky to have a wife who can do the handwriting if it actually needs to be read by someone).

deknow

____________________________________________________________
EXPOSED: Make $99/hr Online
BREAKING NEWS: People are beating the recession by working at home.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4c8da947a050cb40147st02duc

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