Hervé Logé wrote:

> Anecdote: I visited an apiary in Guadeloupe (small
> caribean island) in February. Of course, they have
> local cane sugar production. But the beekeeper
> reported more diseases when using cane sugar syrup and
> did not use it any longer.

Depends on the point in the production process at which they used it.
Fully refined is good. Anywhere else in the process is bad. Beet sugar
is even worse anywhere else except the final sugar. Lots of information
in the literature about this, including bees having lots of problems
around sugar mills.

Also, if they fed it exclusively, that is bad. It is a supplemental feed
for overwintering and for drought, but not as a continuous feed.

We toss around the word "sugar" as if it is one thing but it is a
chemical class composed of many different compounds. It is only when we
refer to sucrose, glucose, fructose... that we pin down what we are
really talking about. If you look at my post I singled out sucrose which
is the product of sugar cane at the final refined stage.

I agree with others comments on the tone of one poster in this thread
(not you Hervé. I always appreciate you insight). Little science, a lot
of distortion of others views or practices, and a condescending
attitude. And never any humor. They take themselves much too seriously.

Gertrude Truesdell
Bath, Maine

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