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:
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 29 Aug 2000 16:22:06 +1200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (45 lines)
The Australia and New Zealand Foods Standards Authority (ANZFA) have
just released their inquiry into the labelling of bee products.

In short, faced with overwhelming scientific evidence and risk analyses,
they have been forced to to retract their draconian warning labels on
bee the bee products. They have accepted the NZ Ministerial Scientific
Reviews recommendations and are proposing the following:

Royal Jelly: Royal Jelly may cause very serious allergic reactions.
Asthma suffers are most at risk.

The key changes here are removal of the word "fatalities" and targeting
the warning to a sub-group (asthmatics) rather than the general
population.

Bee pollen: Ingredient listing only.

Propolis: Ingredient listing only.


In their discussions they include reference to false science used to
impugn royal jelly. This is an issue that will be followed up as
industry has been able to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that
published resaerch included false, falsified and duplicated data. Expert
evidence has also been proven wildly false. ANZFA now refer to 'at least
one death.' Whilst this is a welcome admission that there were not three
deaths as has been claimed, they should in fact be referring to 'at most
one disputed death.'

This is an excellent example of the use of evidence-based risk
assessment to determine risk and to derive evidence based and equitable
risk management options.

It is also encouragement that the system can be successfully challenged.

There are still some outstanding issues such as the removal of
fraudulent research from official (Australian) government adverse
reaction reports.

If anyone wants a copy of the 91 page report please email.

Regards

Ron Law

ATOM RSS1 RSS2