BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Bill Truesdell <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 17 Apr 2003 15:55:06 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
allen dick wrote:

> I'd be interested in the mean and the variation, and the probability
> that -- somewhere in the massive amounts of product shipped -- there
> might be harmful levels.

I thought the same. But it really does not matter if the level is
harmless or greater than what was found. It is a banned antibiotic and
is being used somewhere in the beekeeping business in China.

We are not dealing with science and any rational decision here. Look at
the current scare over arsenic in drinking water. It also is in the
ppm/ppb ranges but that is not the issue. It is arsenic and arsenic
kills. The levels being discussed have little science but lots of
emotion. Recent info says that in small doses it is beneficial, but that
does not matter.

I would hate to be a commercial distributor of honey and find that
Chinese honey was deemed OK because the levels of a banned antibiotic
were only trace levels. Antibiotics are not supposed to be in honey no
matter if ppm or ppb.

No one would buy any honey. Remember Alar?

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ATOM RSS1 RSS2