Residues of veterinary drugs and other (environmental)
contaminants in apicultural products have in
Europe over the past few years been systematically
monitored and reported through the RASFF. It
appears from these reports that residues are still an
issue in honey (and in many other food products for
that matter), particularly, when imported into the EU
from Asia (notably China). Also indigenously produced
honey still contains these, albeit in markedly
fewer samples (European Commission 2009b).

Annually an approximate 50 notifications of antibiotics
residues are reported for honey, and significantly
more of pesticides (e.g. 180 notifications in 2007)
(RASFF 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007). The most recent
report (RASFF 2008) indicates that nitrofurane
(metabolites) still represent the most notified hazard,
that sulphonamide residues are found less than before,
and that other substances (notably erythromycin) are
on the rise.

Giovanni Formato & Frans J.M. Smulders (2011): Risk management in primary apicultural production.
Part 1: bee health and disease prevention and associated best practices, Veterinary Quarterly, 31:1, 29-47

Most beekeepers in Asia, the USA, South America
and Canada rely on the use of substances with
antimicrobial activity, such as tetracycline antibiotics,
sulpha drugs, chloramphenicol and tylosine (Edder
et al. 2002, Reybroeck 2003; Ortelli et al. 2004; Lopez
et al. 2008, Formato and Smulders 2011). 

The European apicultural sector [as represented by
the COPA-COGECA Honey Working Party and the
European Federation of Honey Packers and
Distributors (FEEDM)] is against the registration of
any antimicrobial substance for bees so as to protect
the consumers’ image of honey as being a ‘natural’ and
‘healthy’ product, and proposes establishing reference
points of action for imported honey, that should only
take into account environmental contamination, and
decidedly not residues of antibiotics used to combat
bee diseases (Bruneau et al. 2009; FEEDM/COPACOGECA
2009). As combating bacterial (American or
European foulbrood) or fungal diseases (nosemosis)
without being able to rely on antibiotics is more
difficult, less responsible European beekeepers still rely
on their illicit use.

Giovanni Formato & Frans J.M. Smulders (2011):Risk management in primary apicultural production. 
Part 2: a Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point approach to assuring the safety of unprocessed honey
Veterinary Quarterly Vol. 31, No. 2, June 2011, 87–97

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

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm