BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Peter Dillon <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Wed, 30 Jul 2003 01:12:14 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (49 lines)
Bob,
As you indicate - there appears to be alot of redirected honey somewhere!

I am not competent in suggesting what should be done about the collection of potential tariff taxes
.
But have thoughts on the labels.

Packers have problems indicating specific proportions of honeys AND the source country in batch
mixes. This is the argument given: impractical to demand such specific information on a label.
But, maybe my thoughts are outdated, and with high tech. printing processes, the variations could be
dealt with.

I presume that the information is on official record, and should be available to authorities if
asked for.

So, where has the honey gone?
A proportion has been indicated as being present in potted honey.
The rest - How about Breakfast cereals??? - a test for residual antibiotics in that direction!
Or would Chinese honey have been too expensive a commodity to include in such  products?

When the cereal manufacturers use honey - which theoretically I applaud with great enthusiasm -
which grade honey is used?

I suggest (and would relish to be corrected) that it is what is considered and graded here in EU as
"Bakers Honey".
Look up the definition. (Interesting to see differences between Codex. a. and EU honey standards)
Then, think about Ultra filtration (et al.) and why it was so strongly fought for!
Then, remembering the definition of Bakers Honey - look at the manner in which the honey content of
the cereal is advertised - not the content info, but the happy bee etc. carrying the scrummy honey.
Maybe that is another reason why the source/ type of honey is not mentioned in the final product.
Brings to mind the "Sous produits d'origine animale" label as found in dog food.
Sure it's legal to use - but surely not wrapped up as if the original material was "top grade".
Please correct me if I am incorrect!!!!!!

I suggest that the present grading by colour is one of the biggest hindrances to good use of honey
and acceptance by the public. A TRUE Sweet Chestnut honey is for example a prime product, but one
falling foul of the colour discrimination regime. There are many more. A good steak is a good steak,
whatever the cattle type - and should command the proper price reflecting this fact.
Label up the honey - Origin, Type, Processing treatment and nutrition info. (and for those wishing
for it, whether it contains GM material, even if it is below 1%)

As you say, Bill - what do the list think!
Regards,
Peter

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2