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:
James Fischer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 20 Aug 2013 08:10:09 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (42 lines)
I think it is slightly disingenuous to attempt to discredit the removal of
antibiotics from the beehives by linking the practice to outbreaks of
foodborn illness.  

Yes, there are many things that need to be "cleaned up" in the food supply,
both residues and pathogens.

But it is not an "either/or" choice.

And it is a false equivalency to attempt to compare removal of antibiotics
from the beehives to lax testing schemes and controls in the production of
other commodities.  

The "Pure Food and Drug Act" of 1906 has been around for more than a
century, but even it was not prompted by producers clamoring to add value by
certifying their compliance with more ethical standards, it was instead a
reaction to the "investigative journalism" Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle", a
book exposing the horrible conditions in meat processing of the time.

We beekeepers have a choice - we can self-regulate, or we can be regulated.
The difference between the two is that we are spared the whole "expose on
tainted honey" stage if we self-regulate.  Those who want to argue against
self-regulation put us all at risk of unjustified sensational journalism,
well-known to be far more influential in the mind of the consumer than even
the best science.

Remember the Alar scare, and never forget that it was an orchestrated
project of a public relations firm hired by the NRDC to "put the NRDC on the
map", one that "60 Minutes" unquestioningly sensationalized as "the most
potent cancer-causing agent in the food supply today".  Also remember that
the phrase "Alar Scare" was the result of another PR firm's efforts to do
damage control.  Note that the only "science" done in all of this was a
"review article" where a set of prior studies were summarized and compared
to draw the conclusion that the chemical was a probable carcinogen.

Its marketing.

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2