> The term "sugar sensitive" or "sugar allergy" has been
> (mis)used to describe nothing more than a (claimed)
> addiction to sugar, and carbohydrates in general.

Possibly, in some cases, however, I do know that my mother travels with a
woman who is sensitive to refined sugar.  She is not deathly sensitive, but
has some sort of problems when she consumes much of it.  I didn't ask.

I'm sensitive to some foods myself, and find that although I can eat them
sometimes, the effects can be very unpredictable -- from no discernable
effect, to considerable discomfort.  Sadly, some of them are favourites
:(  Like pizza sauce, some pepper, and some wines.  As I say, though, the
reaction is very unpredictable, but one thing is very obvious: the reaction
does get worse with amount consumed over a timeframe of a week, and goes
away after a week or more of abstention.

As far as I know, I was not born sensitive to these foods.  These reactions
crept up on me over time, and I am told that they may disappear again in
time.  I hope so.  Immune reactions have been poorly understood in the past,
and are still somewhat mysterious.  What we do know is that immune reactions
can be extremely sensitive.  That is why I brought up this point.

I only mentioned it because, if I know of someone who is sensitive to
refined sugar, there must be many more, and probably some with greater
sensitivity, and some with less.

Such people, a tiny few, may have a legitimate and unexpected  interest in
what is in the 'honey' they buy, even if the 'secret ingredient' is a common
food item.  After all, if we use peanut oil to grease our home extractor,
some people would like to know.  It could save them a lot of discomfort,
since some with peanut senstivity can react to almost unimaginably small
traces of peanut.  Could this same thinking apply to refined sugar in the
honey?  I don't know.  It seems plausible to me.

I realise that by mentioning homeopathy, I could attract some abuse from
those so inclined, but I try to listen to, and find some reason in
everything I hear.  One of the interesting ideas in homeopathy is the idea
of the differing effects of various dilutions of substances.  We are
discussing small amounts of adulterants here and the possibility that
some -- maybe a very small few -- people may have an interest, in the matter
of what we do with our honey, that is not mainstream.  I personally think
that keeping an open mind, and not dismissing everything that we do not know
much about, can lead to better understanding.

As I intimated, although I have been involved in various sugar feeding
practices in the past and continue to unpenitently feed my bees, if I am to
maintain intellectual honesty, I cannot dismiss the ideas I do not like or
which do not put money in my pocket, or, especially those that threaten to
take money out of my pocket.

We learn best by listening respectfully to those who disgree with us, and
there are many who disagree with us about things we do, from feeding sugar,
to using antibiotics, to how we regard and handle our bees.  Whether these
people be 'food nuts', homeopaths, kosher, animal health advocates, or other
'fringe' thinkers, we can usually take something worthwhile away.

Many of the ideas that are currently mainstream in beekeepeing, from using
foundation, antiibiotics, pesticides, to hive design, and more, are again
subject to scrutiny in a constantly changing world, and we have had some
surprises.  If we keep our minds open, we may discover more, and be on the
front line of new ideas, rather than the last to get the news.

I really appreciate this topic and Robin's refusal to give it up.  Whatever
comes of it, we will be more conscious of the potential effects of our
actions on others, and the arguments that can be used against us.

allen
http://www.honeybeeworld.com

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