Looking to buy treatment free honey

[cerezha]

Healthy competition does not hurt. If someone wants "treatment-free" honey and beekeeper could prove it, than - it is great! Healthy competition with "non-treatment-free" folks! I think this is how capitalism works, right? Sergey

[Haraga]

How does one prove that a hive is treatment free?

[cerezha]

How does one prove that a hive is treatment free?

I do not know, but I assume that BareHoney people who wants to sell "treatment-free honey" should have some mechanism to prove that this IS "treatment-free" honey... ask them.
It should not be really difficult if they would use the analogy with FDA definition of "organic" - it is simply something, which grows on the land, which did not see chemicals for 10 consecutive years (or 15, I forgot). As far as I know, FDA actually do not check quality of "organic" product - they assume that it is good if grows on "treatment-free" land. Similar rules may be established for honey. For instance, if beekeeper could prove that the hives did not see any chemicals for let say 5 years and comb was not rotated (accumulation of pesticides), than it may be considered "treatment-free". Sergey

[sqkcrk]

they list sweet white clover honey: $7 for 4 oz.
do the math

I see. I did the math on the 3Lb container and you came at it froim the other angle. But what are they paying for honay. That's the important number to know.

[sqkcrk]

Healthy competition does not hurt. If someone wants "treatment-free" honey and beekeeper could prove it, than - it is great!

You don't have to prove it, you just have to get people to believe it.

[sqkcrk]

As far as I know, FDA actually do not check quality of "organic" product - they assume that it is good if grows on "treatment-free" land. Sergey

Well, actually someone did check the quality of organic produce and found no nutritional difference. I'm sorry, I can't point to a limk of the study.

[cerezha]

You don't have to prove it, you just have to get people to believe it.

Unfortunately - yes! Sergey

[sqkcrk]

Also, if you have to prove something you have already lost.

[cerezha]

Well, actually someone did check the quality of organic produce and found no nutritional difference.

If I understand correctly, FDA does not require analysis. It is somebody, who decided to compare. This comparison is not "official". As far as "organic" go - I am not great believer in it. I know that half-life of DDT is 50 years. So, if DDT got into the soil in 1960, in 2010 it would be 50% of initial amount of DTT. 10 or 15 years of not adding new chemicals did not change this situation - DDT is here as well as other nasty stuff. In general, I am cynical regarding FDA - it works hard to satisfy requests from big monopolies and do nothing to protect citizens. For instance, all world regulated nitrites in the vegetables and produce but FDA. Nitrites caused brain defects in children. Sergey

[jim lyon]

My suggestion to Barehoney if he truly wants to sell an absolutely pure product is to decide what chemicals he wants to test for and have any producers he wishes to purchase honey from share the testing cost. A clean pure product is an admirable goal and one that should bring a premium price. Forget all these attempts at trying to define what is and what is not treatment free, let the lab decide. Expensive? Perhaps yes at this scale but it's a cost ultimately borne by the consumer who is demanding it. Want a sample? PM me and I will gladly send one your way.

[sqkcrk]

Yes, I believe you are correct. FDA doesn't require analysis of what is produced, they set standars, I believe. Standards of what qualifys as organic.

No nutritional difference. I said nothing about all the other things you mentioned.

I heard this reported on National Public Radio sometime in the last week, could have been Saturday morning. I really am sorry about not having a link. It would better illustrate what I am saying. Maybe someone better at computer manipulations than I am could find the article.

Okay, here's what you do. Search npr and look for the article "Why Organic Food May Not Be Healthier For You" by Allison Aubrey and Dan Charles.

Back to my statement about getting people to believe something instead of proving something, that's what Organics have done. People assume that organic this or that is better for you when it might not be any more nutritious.

Just like people think that Local is better. But is it necassarily so. It isn't even necassarily more beneficial to the environment.

[The Honey Householder]

How do you know your a 100% treatment free???

PRODUCE WHAT YOU SELL!!! That way you know what you have. OH YA I'm sold out for this year too.

[cerezha]

Maybe someone better at computer manipulations than I am could find the article.

Okay, here's what you do. Search npr and look for the article "Why Organic Food May Not Be Healthier For You" by Allison Aubrey and Dan Charles.

Mark, this is your link:
http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPl...59&m=160526718

I have a mixed feeling about this report. From one hand, I already expressed my scepticizm regarding "organic" anything (see above). From another hand the way how scientific data was interpreted is controversial for couple of reasons:
- all good nutrients in organic or non-organic food should be the same - it is obvious - organic carrot contains exactly the same carotene as non-organic. Thus, "nutrient value" must be the same, no surprise here.
- standard "nutrient" tests cover only very small portion of what is in the food. For instance, they measure amount of carbohydrates - sure, it would be very similar in organic and non-organic. Non-organic could be even more sweet!
- BUT: there are million other elements in the food, which may be beneficial to us or not, which were not measured for some reason. This is what makes a difference between my tomato from my garden and ANY other tomatoes! This part was completely missed in the study and authors confirm that.
Simple example: technically, the major composition of honey is very similar to high-fructose corn syrup. So, following the logic of the study, there is no nutritional difference between these two. But we all know that honey is way different from the corn syrup, right? So, unfortunately, I have to admit that even Standford sometime produces very shallow science - they checked only big things and ignored small things, which actually do a difference.

The problem is that FDA set very "wide" limits and if you are within these limits - everything is the same. I would not be surprised if they measure the nutritional value of toilet paper and will find that it is withing the limits, AND very dietic - zero calories and a lot of beneficial fibers - go ahead, eat toilet paper instead cucumber (cucumber is just water and fibers).

If somebody interested, there is more balanced presentation of the story:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1870952.html

Keep in mind, that they are talking only about "nutrition value", which is the same as expected. The presence of antibiotics and pesticides and other stuff was not included in their conclusion. They also did not perform their own research - they just use published data... Totally useless work. I am shocked by such low quality of research under Stanford name.
Sergey

[sqkcrk]

Where is the Original Poster? It seems as though BareHoney does not want to participate. I guess they got what they wanted from us.

[MichaBees]

I had a chance to visit apiaries in Oaxaca Mexico’s diverse regions.
Some are situated where there is no agriculture or any other kind of intensive human intervention. The farming is mostly primitive and gathering of products from the jungles are a food resort for the beekeepers. These places are remote and hard to get to, some are rain forests, jungles, mountains where lots of Europeans and Americans seek mushrooms, and where the beekeepers produce a little- maybe for lack of marketing or interest on their products, or maybe, because they had found a way to deal with adjusting with what they have . There is no intensive farming, or massive beekeeping; most hives are Africanized and treatment free. When a hive is infested, they just let it die for treating hives is expensive and rebuilding from the survivors is what they do. I do not think they do it to keep the survivors but because getting medications or forms to diagnose is just out of reach. I am not saying this is right or wrong, but that’s what it is. I may be moving to the city of Oaxaca with the intention of building an orphanage there but, I also may be forming some kind of a co-op to help this primitive farmers a chance to market their wonderful products. I have asked different governments agencies to allow me to build the orphanage and allow me to help the beekeepers by helping them expose their products outside their limited boundaries. The respond has been positive but painfully slow. Some – just a few- of this honeys already reach the European markets, my understanding is that some were certified by the European Union and Mexico as organic, and those go mostly to Germany. The goal is to expose the growers and their products, with their own labels and short stories as a way to help them earn their way out of poverty.
So, I do believe that there are honeys that can and are produced free of pesticides, treatments or contaminants.
Aurelio Paez

[jmgi]

Organic is just a marketing term used to keep the wool over our eyes a bit longer, it satisfies a population who is tired of being poisoned to death, and wants an alternative. Yes, they do require you meet certain conditions to be able to label your product as organic, but in the end its just another joke. Oh yes, and the free trade products that you see on the grocery shelves that cost twice what a regular product does, including honey, that's another joke that the large corporations are pulling on us. John

[DonShackelford]

Organic is just a marketing term John

I would disagree on one point; Comb honey made with foundation has a thick center wall with thin sidewalls. "Natural Comb Honey" has all thin cell walls. The center wall is the same thickness as the sides. There is a difference when the two are compared one bite from each. The thin-walled comb has a more delicate taste.

Rather than telling people my honey is organic, I just state that the bees made the comb naturally and that I have put no chemicals in the hive.

[Beregondo]

beregondo why do you put pesticides on your hives?

I don't.
Many do.
Acaraicides (miticides) are pesticides that are used for mite control.

[kincade]

Mark, this is your link:
http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPl...59&m=160526718


If somebody interested, there is more balanced presentation of the story:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1870952.html

Here is another:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robyn-...b_1857802.html

sqkcrk

Re: Looking to buy treatment free honey
Where is the Original Poster? It seems as though BareHoney does not want to participate. I guess they got what they wanted from us.

He's probably looking at his thread wondering why he's getting attacked for wanting something (whether or not it is valid) and in awe that a moderator hasn't either moved the thread to a more appropriate forum or kept this as a wanted/for sale thread. Personally I'm shocked it's been allowed to go this far.

[sqkcrk]

Rather than telling people my honey is organic, I just state that the bees made the comb naturally and that I have put no chemicals in the hive.

Why would you bring up chemicals at all? Why wouldn't you just say the bees made the comb and the honey.

You do know that just because you didn't put any chemicals in the hive that doesn't mean there are none present. The bees bring them in from the environment.