Keith Malone wrote:
> Hi Keith & All,
>
>
>>Honey, with its variable coposition will never be accepted by
>
> maintstream medicine.  It will be stidued, and the active
> ingredients/formulation will simply be repackaged in such a was as to
> ensure consistancy.  Or it will be dropped depending on how efficaceous
> it turns out to be.


> Ode to the Money Machine. Why not to just plain old honey?


I treated my hand after a major operation with honey and under a
Doctor's supervision. I posted the results on this list.

Honey works, but I see little future in its use other than in a hospital
setting. Even then, there are other medications that are as effective
and less messy. Plus, modern and less- modern medicine has been using a
much cheaper alternative which is a saturated sugar solution. The
literature on that goes way back. There are some countries (maybe only
one- China) which use honey in treating burn victims. But those
countries are not ones I would go to for treatment, including the common
cold.

I could use honey on my wound because I did not mind changing my
dressings much more often than I would have using modern drugs. I would
guarantee that most other patients would either reject honey because it
is not easy to use, or not use it properly and end up worse than if they
used a modern, easy to use drug.

Honey does work, but modern medicine has not rejected it because of
money. There are cheaper and as (or more) effective alternatives.

Including sugar syrup.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

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