>From:  [log in to unmask] (wilhelm e kaosse)
In a message dated 95-10-31 20:25:32 EST, you write:
 
>Inquiring minds wonder what things made honey toxic in the 1700's?(besides
>heather, of course)
>
>Stuart Grant
>Point Roberts, Wa.(49 degrees north...123 degrees west)
>One hive and expanding.
 
Honey from mountain laurel, rhododendrons and azeleas is toxic.  In the area
between the Caspian and Black Seas there are a lot of rhododendrons.  I have
read that beekeepers there raise bees for the beeswax and discard the honey.
 Dr. Rick Fell, of  Virginia Tech(?), gave a great talk about two years ago
at an MSBA meeting about a recent toxic honey poisoning that he investigated.
 The article also describes an event that happened somewhere in the South
during the Civil War.  So toxic honey is not just in the past or overseas.
 
The article goes on to attribute occurances of toxic honey to extracting
uncapped honey from early spring nectar flows when any toxic honey has not
been diluted.  It also indicated that evaporation may lessen the toxic
effects, but I'm no chemist or toxicologist so I can't comment.  In defense
of beekeepers and honey in general that the public purchases, the article
went on to indicate that since beekeepers extract capped honey, and it is
blended in vast quantities, and the amount of potentially toxic honey is
miniscule; the public doesn't have to worry about it.
 
You really don't need to worry about it either (unless your back yard is a
mountain of solid rhododendrons) ... but if your tongue tingles when you take
that first spoon of honey, better watch it!
 
For the rest of the story you will just have to read the magazine, or ask Dr.
Fell to speak  at your meeting.
 
(Hey, Dr. Fell, how about I get %10 of your speaking fees as your agent! )
 
Cheers,
David Morris