Tests Show Most Store Honey Isn’t Honey

[Roland]

Boris - Did I miss your lab results?

I am very interested in what jurisdiction you will say that Beemaid's product is not honey. Your opinion does not matter. This is a legal mater of definitions, and i anxiously await your proof that Ian's honey has failed to meet any legal requirement for honey anywhere.

Crazy Roland

[deknow]

I figure it isn't honey until you've grated a few onions into it.

Deknow

[sqkcrk]

Ian,

Once again.

Please look into the BeeMaid's MOTTO: “Hive to Home” This is the FALSE statement!
Why a packer as the main component is missing?

After processing is not ethical to call/label a final product as HONEY - it's PROCESSED HONEY - forever liquid substance!

Boris Romanov

I think you are taking things too far here Boris. On purpose.

How can a person eat honey w/out processing it in some manner. Unless you cut the comb out of the hive yourself and eat it comb and all.

People call me a troll. What's the opposite of a troll? Someone who Posts Threads and Posts to illicite reactions.

[sqkcrk]

Huh. An extractor is certainly a machine. Boris, apparently you are of the belief that once honey is extracted from the comb, it is no longer honey.

By your definition, even honey that is extracted but never heated, and never filtered is no longer honey.

This is very much true. The centrifical force throws all of the heavier parts of the honey against the wall of the extractor which damages the honey. Didn't you know that? sheesh

[red]

My bees took a cleansing flight today. After sampling the brown specs on the hives I finally discovered what adulterated honey is.

[jim lyon]

Do not worry - I will try to show my definition of HONEY. I hope I will post it tomorrow.

This may well be the most anticipated event on Beesource since Barry agreed to reveal some of his beer brewing secrets.

[cerezha]

... For example, I got to thinking about water as a parallel to this discussion. I turn on the tap in my house, run liquid into a glass, and drink it. I refer to that liquid as "water." Now, I realize fully that it isn't pure water. It has other things in it. But it also has had things removed and added by human intervention. Call it "processing," I guess. It's pulled by machinery out of the ground, filtered, treated with chemicals to kill some organisms, and delivered by machinery through pipes to my tap. Does the process make it something other than water? I don't define it that way. I know some folks separate "tap water" from "bottled water," but, in my experience, I tend to refer to both as simply "water."

Indeed, interesting exercise! I think, this discussion drifted away from original post. Water and honey are opposite - "water" is a chemical term for H2O. H2O contains only H2O. If it contaminated by something, from chemical point of view, it is not water anymore. Thus, pure water is more "water" than water with "additional" content. Honey from another hand is not chemically defined and it is a "composite" - something, which contains many components. Each component, which is chemically defined may be treated as water above (pure water is more water). But, does "composite" remain the same if some component removed or destroyed or changed? The answer for this, one could ask school-level chemistry teacher. I suspect, the answer would be that removing or destroying or changing one component of the "composite" will affect the integrity of the whole. In another words the "composite" before and after modification is not the same. It is sort of obvious to me as a scientist - if my technician will grab anything from the shelve in my lab and heat it to +70oC - do you really think I will use it in my research after heating? No, that "something" will go in the chemical waste immediately. It is very simple - ALL chemicals must be stored at room temperature or below, so any drugs. Did anybody tried to heat DayQuil to +70oC and after that use it as a medicine?

[Rader Sidetrack]

if my technician will grab anything from the shelve in my lab and heat it to +70oC - do you really think I will use it in my research after heating? No, that "something" will go in the chemical waste immediately.

So if you have a bottle of distilled H2O on your shelf in the lab, then heat it to 70 degrees C, it will be no longer be distilled water? Is it now processed water? What will it be when it cools?

[Kieck]

OK, from a strict chemical standpoint, I agree. But what do you call that liquid that flows from the faucet?

What criteria does "honey" have to meet to qualify as such to you? Is it possible to have a naturally-produced, bee-collected-and-stored sweet substance entirely from floral sources that does not meet the criteria simply because it's missing something naturally? Seems to me that "honey" varies in constituency from location to location and even between and within seasons. It is subject to fluctuations in temperatures within the hive even (is honey that is frozen less changed by that than honey that exceeds 45C?).

For the love of Pete, it's almost as bad as trying to pin down what qualifies as "organic."

[cerezha]

So if you have a bottle of distilled H2O on your shelf in the lab, then heat it to 70 degrees C, it will be no longer be distilled water? Is it now processed water? What will it be when it cools?

of coarse "processed" - it will loose 50% of dissolved CO2 and therefore pH will change. Also, at the high temperature, elements of container will leak into the water, contaminating it (potassium from the glass,for instance). Normally, we do not store distilled water - it is produced by purification system for immediate use. Quality of water is more important than quality of honey, I guess.

[cerezha]

OK, from a strict chemical standpoint, I agree. But what do you call that liquid that flows from the faucet?

Do you really want to know what is flowing from SOME faucets? Definitely not water! The quality of liquid sometimes is horrible. May be, we could call it chlorine solution? In Chemistry, we use dihydrogen monoxide or simply H2O when in pure form. Liquid from faucet may contain actually some water, H2O. Same with "honey" - liquid in the store may contain some honey...

[BMAC]

Water and honey are opposite - "water" is a chemical term for H2O. H2O contains only H2O. If it contaminated by something, from chemical point of view, it is not water anymore. Thus, pure water is more "water" than water with "additional" content.

Sergery your logic is slightly flawed here in relation to the topic. If H2O can only contain H2O to qualify as water (which is what you are stating), then how can pure water be more water than water with additional content? It can't be water if it has additional content according to your logic above. It would have to qualify simply as a solution. Possibly break it down with percentages of the solution CO2, CH4, H20, FE, S, CI, F, HOPS, Barley, Yeast, etc...

[sqkcrk]

Sergey,
Is honey a solution, as that term is defined scientifically?

[hpm08161947]

I think they call it a supersaturated solution.... one grain and it's ready to crystallize.

[ryan]

The USDA defines honey as "honey", it may or may not contain pollen, DOESN'T matter. Honey may contain pollen but it is not needed. Standard filtering may remove all the pollen. Honey without pollen on store shelfs does not mean it was Ultrafiltered.

Go read the follow up article april 2013, it's basically an apology for the fraudulent article they wrote earlier. Same publisher, food safety news.

[sqkcrk]

I think they call it a supersaturated solution.... one grain and it's ready to crystallize.

So what is it when pollen grains are suspended in it? A suspension?

[Kieck]

... it will loose 50% of dissolved CO2 and therefore pH will change. -cerezha

Wait. I thought this was "pure" H2O here. Now you're telling me that the "pure" water has carbon dioxide in it?!?!

Of course, I jest. I didn't mean to pick an example that would send us down this rabbit hole when I brought up tap water. What I was trying to get at is that "water" from my tap is different than "water" from your tap is different from "water" in a bottle sold in a convenience store, yet we use the common term and all are recognizable as being roughly the same thing.

The same latitude and flexibility is useful when trying to define "honey." Honey is not an absolutely consistent product. In fact, its variability even from day to day may be part of what makes it what it is.

Go read the follow up article april 2012 [correction Kieck's], it's basically an apology for the fraudulent article they wrote earlier. Same publisher, food safety news. -ryan

Yes. Unfortunately, some of these stories gain immortality from the Internet. The articles that correct or refute seem to be less popular than the initial piece.

[deknow]

Sergey 's comments about water supports the contention that extracted honey isn't honey. Extracting most assuredly adds air (dissolved and in bubbles) to the honey....along with whatever contaminants are in the air. Honey in a glass jar must also absorb substances from the glass jar.

Deknow

[Ian]

dont forget the odd bee leg and antenna

I had a buyer come to the honey house asking for whole honey one time, "you know, the stuff right from the tank, with the bee legs and all"

[brooksbeefarm]

This thread has become silly,trying to make comparisons of honey to milk, water,ect. and what man has to do to it to make it better? Any beekeeper worth his salt, knows that raw honey straight from the hive is what honey is supposed to be. The more man does to it the less it becomes real honey, so i'm saying to the packers, you can't have your cake and eat it too. I check every frame of honey and brush it off before i extract it, so i don't get the trash in my extractor like the big boys do.I know some people who have worked for some bottlers that told me if a frame of honey comes through the decapping machine with some brood in it,they don't stop and remove it, it goes on through. so yes i can see how it could have legs and antennas in it. Of coarse heating and filtering it will make it alright for the unknowing public to eat.