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:
Olda Vancata <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:48:09 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
Dear Stefan
 
> > A UK based  academic I was talking to fairly recently told me of
> > research into contamination of propolis, and the samples were ones
> > on retail sale, which revealed alarming levels of contaminants,
> > especially lead which was present in such quantities as to be
> > downright dangerous
 
> The contamination of propolis and other bee products
> is, in part, the fault of beekeepers which use also chemical
> methods which you advocate with such a passion...
 
I always belived that lead in propolis is caused because people in
general are driving cars...
 
> Most of the actual good companies have found ways to
> take out the lead from propolis,
 
Acording to your advocating for usage of 'natural producs' and
because usage of 'chemistry' and ' chemical producs'  acording to
you is big nono I can't understand you way of thinking.
 
When you are talking about companies able to take away the lead from
propolis - what kind of artificial and industrially made product are
you talking about?
 
How is it possible that others should be banned because they use
artificially made products and suddenly you self are argumenting for
such thing? Your argumentation is not consistent and can't be taken
seriously.
 
\vov

ATOM RSS1 RSS2