Biopotency and activity in honey - what does it mean?

[wilderness]

I've just read in the June 2012 edition of Beecraft about Chilean Rainforest honey. The article on page 5 quotes

"The 100% pure Chilean honey is derived from the unpolluted and uninhabited volcanic areas of Chile and is incredibly potent because it is raw and unpasturised to maintain activity and biopotency"

"As a traditional edible honey, it is available in four active strengths: 10+, 20+, 30+ and 40+ with clinically proven health and wellbeing benefits which include successfully tackling coughs, colds sore throats, mild digestive complaints and dry skin conditions"

I understand that Manuka honey has UMF ratings which seem to be measured only by the laboratory who first detected the property!?

Is this a load of marketing BS?

Can I put "20+ Active" on my Oxfordshire honey label?

 

[Luminos]

Sounds like to me

 

[Dusty Rhodes]

 

[alanf]

Sounds like to me

Amazed to see a woo marketing release reproduced as news.

 

[psafloyd]

I've just read in the June 2012 edition of Beecraft about Chilean Rainforest honey. The article on page 5 quotes

"The 100% pure Chilean honey is derived from the unpolluted and uninhabited volcanic areas of Chile and is incredibly potent because it is raw and unpasturised to maintain activity and biopotency"

"As a traditional edible honey, it is available in four active strengths: 10+, 20+, 30+ and 40+ with clinically proven health and wellbeing benefits which include successfully tackling coughs, colds sore throats, mild digestive complaints and dry skin conditions"

I understand that Manuka honey has UMF ratings which seem to be measured only by the laboratory who first detected the property!?

Is this a load of marketing BS?

Can I put "20+ Active" on my Oxfordshire honey label?

Sounds like marketing BS to me. Is there no 'biopotency' in all raw, unpasteurised honey?

I don't get BeeCraft, but someone should challenge this or if someone can send me the copy so I can see it, I may do so myself.

 

[Brosville]

I think most people are agreed that broadly speaking, honey is "good for you" - it is excellent in "folk remedies" like honey and lemon, it helps people with allergies by exposing them to a natural form of local pollen (possibly the only objection to such honeys as these is the idiocy of carting them halfway round the world, and the fact they aren't local pollens contained in it), and it is widely used for burns and other skin problems.
As a firm believer in the superiority of "raw" foods (unprocessed, unfiltered, not homogenised, pasteurised, or otherwise bugg*red about with), then this Chilean honey would appear to tick all the wholesome boxes, and can reasonably command a premium price - and as the horrors of high tech farming advance around the globe, such products will become rarer and more valuable.
As for the "active strengths" thing, I gather this is based on some form of scientific testing, so I can see no particular reason to doubt they've found a reasonable way of classifying the stuff......
~I'm quite happy to stick with my own "raw" honey...........

 

[victor meldrew]

NewZealanders are at it again . Flogging Active 'Beech honey'
If they can sell yucky Manuka honey they'll certainly have half the UK market extolling the virtues of NewZealand Beech honey
Suppose they'll have to coin the phrase UBF (Unique Beech Factor )
VM

 

[alanf]

It's 34.99 for a half pound jar...

The only specific note on the marketing website is that it contains Glucose Oxidase, as will local honey if you don't heat treat it. Chief claim to fame appears to be that the stuff has got mentions in the Daily Express and the Mail. Hardly proof of anything much.

 

[Black Comb]

I'm disappointed that Beecraft appear to have printed verbatim a PR handout. I expect better of them, bearing in mind it is British beekeepers who pay their wages.
Glucose oxidase is added by British bees and results in gluconic acid and hydrogen peroxide being present in the honey.

This article is full on BS.

 

[Skyhook]

I've just done a bit of wickipeding. Biopotency is a legit term and refers to the effectiveness of a substance on the function of the body, eg comparing different preparations of a vitamin or supplement.

The effect they are referring to is honey's antiseptic properties. All raw honey is mildly antiseptic due to the presence of peroxide. Some manuka honey has an extra constituent, referred to in marketing as UMF (unique manuka factor).

This apparently refers to methylglyoxal. This is genuinely present in some manuka honey and increases the antiseptic properties. Interestingly, it can also be produced within the body as a metabolic by-product, in which case it is toxic (antiseptic= kills cells).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methylglyoxal

.

 

[Brosville]

I suspect it's more complex than that - and that there are synergistic actions taking place between the honey components (in raw honey, there's a heck of a lot of them) - just as there can be "cocktail effects" in all sorts of fields like drugs and "icides" - just to isolate one component, and claim that it is the therapeutic agent is somewhat simplistic, and possibly misleading

 

[RoofTops]

Some manuka honey has an extra constituent, referred to in marketing as UMF (unique manuka factor).

This apparently refers to methylglyoxal. This is genuinely present in some manuka honey and increases the antiseptic properties.

It has also been found in some other monofloral honey - so I guess the Chile stuff probably does as well.

I like the UBS term - but I think it means Unique Bull**** Factor.

 

[flemage]

I think that in all probablity if my honey were to be tested i could claim a UOSRF +30 ?

unique oil seed rape factor.

in that it is very sweet tasting and good for you!

How about £20 a pound? any takers?

 

[Skyhook]

I suspect it's more complex than that - and that there are synergistic actions taking place between the honey components (in raw honey, there's a heck of a lot of them) - just as there can be "cocktail effects" in all sorts of fields like drugs and "icides" - just to isolate one component, and claim that it is the therapeutic agent is somewhat simplistic, and possibly misleading

Possibly. However there's quite an interesting paper here, where they seem to show a very direct correlation between the level of MGO and the level of antibacterial activity.

This assumption was finally verified by adding the amount of pure MGO, which is present in a 20% solution of an active Manuka honey, to a 20% dilution of an “inactive” forest honey. This “inactive” honey did not show an antibacterial activity at a concentration of 20% (Fig. 3, sample 4), whereas for the sample of Manuka honey, an inhibition zone was clearly visible (Fig. 3, sample 1). This Manuka honey dilution contained 1.9 mM MGO. After adding 1.9 mM MGO to the 20% solution of the forest honey, an inhibition zone comparable to that of an active Manuka honey was visible (Fig. 3, sample 3). Based on this observation, it can be concluded the MGO present in Manuka honey is directly responsible for the pronounced antibacterial activity of Manuka honey.


.

 

[Brosville]

The obvious test that needs doing is to try MGO on it's own, then they could work out if it is acting synergistically with the other honey components, or is in itself the active agent...

 

[Skyhook]

The obvious test that needs doing is to try MGO on it's own, then they could work out if it is acting synergistically with the other honey components, or is in itself the active agent...

If you read the paper they've done that, and one of the comparisons was with an MGO based antibacterial ointment.