From James Fischer 
> European Court of Justice... found that [pollen from] > biotech plants contained in honey should be considered  as food ingredients.>

>>This is a mere political finding, as it does not name a specific tangible
difference between pollen from GMO plants and pollen from non-GMO plants.<<

Actually, they found that ALL pollen should be considered as food ingredients.

>>The punchline to this joke is that the Chinese "ultra-filtered" honey, with
no pollen, and with not even the PROTEINS filtered out, would meet or exceed
the requirements of the EU court, as it would contain no pollen at all, not
even the traces of the sub-50 micron pollen grains of wind-borne pollen!
So, the processes used to disguise criminally re-drirected "false-flag
honey" is the only known process that beekeepers can use to comply!<<


This is quite untrue. Annexe II of the Honey Directive states:    
 (6) No pollen or other individual ingredient of honey is to be removed, unless that is inevitable when organic and inorganic foreign materials are removed. That process may be carried out by filtering. Where such filtering leads to the removal of a significant quantity of pollen, the consumer must be correctly informed to that effect by means of an appropriate indication on the label.
(7) Honey the name of which includes indications concerning floral, vegetable, regional, territorial or topographical origin or specific quality criteria may not have filtered honey added to it. 
So that the transparency of the market may be improved, the labelling of filtered honeys and baker's honeys must be mandatory for every transaction on the bulk market.

Filtered honey is basically only fit for the processed food industry. 

Bil, France

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