First an apology before I get to the matter at hand:
 
I had never intended to send the RAW.TXT file to BEE-L.  That's why I
carefully set it up to be retrieved by request only.
 
But sometimes (often?) I outsmart myself.  This is the **second** time I
have had the 'brilliant' idea of testing the retrieval process by sending
a message from the separate email account that is used to post to Best of
Bee.  What I forgot (both times) is that the 'Reply-to' on that account is
to BEE-L so that subscribers responding will automatically send to BEE-L .
(We have seen some other problems with this since feature some private
Best of Bee matters have come onto BEE-L lately -- sorry again).
 
So, anyhow,l  when I sent the request to allend, expecting to get back a
sample, the sample instead went to BEE-L   :(    You'll notice I changed
the subject line, since I don't want to trigger another round of posting
the file to BEE-L. Of course the LISTSERVr will now (hopefully) reject it
(Thank heavens), since it would be a repeat.
 
Maybe the accidental post was a good thing after all, 'cause it got Andy
going.  I am not really sure what his point is, but in the process of
addressing it -- or attempting to -- he managed to take a swipe at a few
other good topics.  And I hope we get some discussion on them.  My
comments, interspersed with Andy's go right to the bottom of this post.
 
> >Pasteurized, Unpasteurized, Not Pasteurized, Natural, or Raw?
> >What's the difference?
 
> That's the question, what's the difference?
> In the good old USA many jurisdictions have differing views on so called
> "Natural" labeling of HONEY. For an example one label CAN NOT indicate by
> its wording that it contains something that the other does not. All honey
> is Natural and RAW honey (You don't wash it the packer did it for you.)
> and may not be allowed under federal and state law so these terms may or
> may not be in use. (Local beekeepers and regional local packer may be
> getting away with it but that does not change the fact that the label can
> not be used to show an advantage when there is none.
 
My point is that when you process honey, it changes and there *is* a
difference in constituents.  P-O has a great graph on one of his pages
that shows exactly what happpens to three bellwether  indicators (to get a
copy, see the end of this post), but there are many more constituents
that we do not measure and often cannot know.  *Anything* we do to honey
degrades it.
 
Andy is right that extracting adds pollen and air at the very least and
often more.  However, any attempt to remove these things requires heat,
and after twenty-five years of practical experiment and study, I can state
categorically that there is no way to get them out without affecting the
other characteristics.  This includes flash heating and filtering,
although this method is probably better than all others.  Unfortunately
very little honey is done by this process, and many are done by batch
heating.
 
Batch heating is AFAIK the only method widely used to melt drums of honey
and the amount of time it takes to melt a drum and get the honey clear
enough to pump is the reason that -- even if flash methods are used from
there on -- the honey is *always* damaged.
 
What I am saying is that you get one crack at handling honey naturally,
and that is when it is liquid after production.  After it is granulated,
most plants cannot process it without considerable heat and time damage.
 
A major plant in which I am a shareholder darkens the honey to twice the
original colour as it passes through.  Since the honey is originally water
white, this is not a marketing problem.  Nonetheless, this darkening is
an indication of damage from time and temperature. The honey that leaves
that plant is not as good as the honey that I send them.
 
And what I am saying also is that as beekeepers, we are trusted with the
honey while it is in its best state -- in spite of the matter introduced
in extracting -- and we are the only ones able to package the product with
minimal handling, assuming it is of a granulating type such as clover,
alfalfa, or canola.
 
This is a real marketing advantage.
 
Allen
 
To get a copy of P-O's graph in GIF form, send email to
 
[log in to unmask] with the subject line
 
GET HMF.GIF
 
(Do not put this phrase inside the message)