Bob & Liz wrote:

> Honey on supermarket shelves done as above can not be told from my =
> health food grade on hot biscuits or pancakes.  Most consumers simply do =
> not care to pay the extra price for health food grade , put up with the =
> constant crystallizing of health food grade and many consumers are =
> simply uninformed as to health benefits   of honey.  =20

I hated to cut even a part of Bob's exceptional post. He addresses the
issue perfectly and practically.

There are those who are willing to pay a premium, not for the product
but the process. The problem is that they are few, usually less than 20%
of the market. They believe that the process makes a difference in the
product, even if facts show otherwise, so they are a sustainable market,
as long as prosperity reigns.

Everyone else, including most of the world, shops on price. Sometimes it
is informed, but usually not. I care about pesticides, genetic
modification, cheap labor, etc., but since none of the food comes with
that kind of label and I have some assurance that someone is checking to
make sure it is safe, then cheap is good.

The area that a product can move beyond that 20% barrier is if it can be
shown to have health benefits that the public has a desire to attain. If
it cures (fill in the blank), reduces weight even if you eat a carload,
or makes you live to 120, all will increase sales. But there is little
evidence that raw or organic honey does any of that. (Even though I have
many people who want my raw honey to cure allergies and swear by it. I
have my doubts, since I still react to something in the air during
summer.)

For most of the general public, honey is honey and broccoli is broccoli,
regardless of the process. And I tend to agree with them, especially if
you are just looking for something to sweeten your pancakes (using honey
not broccoli).

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Me