Raw honey

[pargyle]

Your penultimate sentence is basically 'other people shouldn't force me to change to the way that suits them and if they don't like it they should change to the way that suits me.'

Somewhat hypocritical IMO.

Honey regs are clear as to what constitutes honey and the concept of 'raw' is implicit. The issue is no-one is enforcing the labelling of baker's honey on heated honey and the various documents circulating about how to reliquify honey at various temperatures makes it worse. Raw is a superfluous word which aims to improve the user's sales by implicitly maligning any other honey not sold as raw. People can play linguistic twister as much as they like to try and justify it but I doubt they're even convincing themselves- it's all about profit. As has been pointed out in numerous other debates on here and is evidenced by this case, make use of raw common and the big corps. will start using it then another word will be needed and in time we'll need a full sentence to make honey stand out when 'honey' should be enough. My view is that use of raw is both foolish and selfish.

Not in the least bit hypocritical Will ...how can you accept that 'honey' that may come from China, adulterated with God knows what can and processed to extinction can be termed in the same vein as your hand produced, artisanal superior product ? This is an argument amongst beekeepers - it's not and never has been a public debate. Ask your customers, without prompting, to give you an adjective that describes what they consider your honey to be ... you may be surprised.

Personally, I'm liberal minded - until such time as there is a clear distinction in the approved labelling between the honey that we beekeepers produce and some of the stuff purveyed as honey then I'm happy to see people who feed the need to use the term raw to continue to do so. Those who don't are equally at liberty to continue as they do .. live and let live.

Sorry, I don't subscribe to some of the 'thin end of the wedge' theories that have been put forward in the various debates on here.

Just to add one comment to your suggestion that I am hyprocritical ... I wonder how many of those crying about raw breaking the honey labelling regulation are quite happy to flaunt the VMD regulations and treat their bees with generic OA by sublimation ? Hypocritical or what - kettle calling saucepan black ...

 

[Wilco]

Not in the least bit hypocritical Will ...how can you accept that 'honey' that may come from China, adulterated with God knows what can and processed to extinction can be termed in the same vein as your hand produced, artisanal superior product ? This is an argument amongst beekeepers - it's not and never has been a public debate. Ask your customers, without prompting, to give you an adjective that describes what they consider your honey to be ... you may be surprised.

Personally, I'm liberal minded - until such time as there is a clear distinction in the approved labelling between the honey that we beekeepers produce and some of the stuff purveyed as honey then I'm happy to see people who feed the need to use the term raw to continue to do so. Those who don't are equally at liberty to continue as they do .. live and let live.

Sorry, I don't subscribe to some of the 'thin end of the wedge' theories that have been put forward in the various debates on here.

Just to add one comment to your suggestion that I am hyprocritical ... I wonder how many of those crying about raw breaking the honey labelling regulation are quite happy to flaunt the VMD regulations and treat their bees with generic OA by sublimation ? Hypocritical or what - kettle calling saucepan black ...

I'm pretty clear that fake honey shouldn't be sold as honey. The solution isn't to add adjectives to the real stuff, it's to enforce existing legislation. There is clear distinction in law, enforcement is just lacking almost entirely in this country.

Whataboutery is a weak distractor, not a rebuttal. I merely pointed out the implications of your own words.

 

[Etton]

Rather than raw I use the word ‘Pure’ on my honey jars.

 

[enrico]

Your penultimate sentence is basically 'other people shouldn't force me to change to the way that suits them and if they don't like it they should change to the way that suits me.'

Somewhat hypocritical IMO.

Honey regs are clear as to what constitutes honey and the concept of 'raw' is implicit. The issue is no-one is enforcing the labelling of baker's honey on heated honey and the various documents circulating about how to reliquify honey at various temperatures makes it worse. Raw is a superfluous word which aims to improve the user's sales by implicitly maligning any other honey not sold as raw. People can play linguistic twister as much as they like to try and justify it but I doubt they're even convincing themselves- it's all about profit. As has been pointed out in numerous other debates on here and is evidenced by this case, make use of raw common and the big corps. will start using it then another word will be needed and in time we'll need a full sentence to make honey stand out when 'honey' should be enough. My view is that use of raw is both foolish and selfish.

Then I will continue to be useless and selfish. Thanks for the insult

 

[ericbeaumont]

Rather than raw I use the word ‘Pure’ on my honey jars.

An acceptable word to use, as far as I am aware, and use it when necessary, though I've found that greater reassurance is shown by a customer asking is it raw? when they hear that the bees & honey are my produce and that I do no more than* extract, strain and bottle.

When all is said and done, the raw genie is out and will not be persuaded to return. Better to define it in the regs. as Laurence proposed, though the goal remains to determine jointly the method of extraction, grade of straining and max. warming, but as all the players are not yet on the same field the game cannot start.

*Edit: warm no more than 43C (nearly forgot!).

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Laurence is definitely in the minority as far as bee farmers are concerned and if we are going to depend on the backyard dabblers to supply us with decent home produced honey we're pretty much boogered - I've had the misfortune to see some of their offerings (and that's at shows!) and I would steer well clear

 

[ericbeaumont]

I rest my case your honour, thank you for at least saying that including the word raw is not an offence

Yes, in his view in this case, but

doesn't really matter what the one judge in a single tribunal said - it's still not a test case.

I agree with JBM, this does not clarify anything but this case, a muddled one brought without skill and wisdom and thought for the long-term benefit of honey producers. The inevitable outcome is that many will read the headline and interpret the verdict as if it is a test case that resolved the legitimacy of raw for evermore.

 

[ericbeaumont]

Laurence is definitely in the minority as far as bee farmers are concerned

Interesting to hear that; perhaps opinion differs between those who produce by the tonne but do not retail, and those who care more about the matter because they produce less but do retail. In-between may be those who are unaware, don't care enough or want to hang on to the skirts of historical definition.

 

[fian]

We must understand what are the two processes that degrade honey:
Fermentation when the bacteria/yeasts present consume glucose and fructose, reducing it to acetic acid. The action temperature of bacteria of 20-35°C and pH lower than 4.5 represent a barrier to survival.
Caloric degradation, most biological processes (enzymatically mediated) take place at 25°C. As the temperature increases, the processes accelerate, degrading the microcomponents.
Thus, the two control parameters will be: pH and HMF.
I would consider using the words raw/pure/natural as long as the deviation from the non-meaning values is less than 10%. The non-significant value is calculated as the average of the lower third of results for honeys displayed and collected "in situ" from apiaries from May to August by a BBKA/NBU campaign.
Without qualifiers, only "Honey" for those that meet deviations of 15% from the averaged parameters. Finally, if the deviation of 15% with respect to the average parameters is exceeded, the specification of "industrial/bakery use" will be mandatory and marketing in jars less than 1.5Kg will be prohibited.
Any other honey from abroad must meet the same parameters, with the marketer being responsible for testing compliance by two organizations authorized by the government for food analytics.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

a BBKA/NBU campaign.

the NBU has nothing to do with honey, and why on earth would you want to get the BBKA involved? they're the last organisation you want anywhere near this.
The rest really has nothing much to do with this issue

 

[fian]

the NBU has nothing to do with honey, and why on earth would you want to get the BBKA involved? they're the last organisation you want anywhere near this.
The rest really has nothing much to do with this issue

I didn't know that in the UK bees didn't make honey.
If the NBU is the state body in charge of bee health, I do not understand why it should not also be in charge of establishing the quality parameters of the food they produce.
In any case, replace NBU/BBKA with any other state body you consider.

 

[fian]

I didn't know that in the UK bees didn't make honey.
If the NBU is the state institution in charge of bee health, I do not understand why it should not also be in charge of establishing the quality parameters of the food they produce.
In any case, replace NBU/BBKA with any other state body you consider.

 

[pargyle]

Laurence is definitely in the minority as far as bee farmers are concerned and if we are going to depend on the backyard dabblers to supply us with decent home produced honey we're pretty much boogered - I've had the misfortune to see some of their offerings (and that's at shows!) and I would steer well clear

"if we are going to depend on the backyard dabblers to supply us with decent home produced honey we're pretty much boogered"

You have probably just alienated about 90% of the members of this forum ...

 

[ericbeaumont]

NBU is the state body in charge of bee health, I do not understand why it should not also be in charge of establishing the quality parameters of the food they produce

Since 2002 the VMD has commissioned the NBU to take honey samples from beekeepers to test for chemical residue and the like. Note that the link address states consumer and environmental protection.
https://www.nationalbeeunit.com/bee...vironmental-protection/honey-and-food-safety/

 

[pargyle]

Since 2002 the VMD has commissioned the NBU to take honey samples from beekeepers to test for chemical residue and the like. Note that the link address states consumer and environmental protection.
https://www.nationalbeeunit.com/bee...vironmental-protection/honey-and-food-safety/

Must be a bit of a worry for those smaller beefarmers, who are likely to be inspected and who use generic OA by sublimation to clean their hives, rather than us backyard dabblers who are probably not as visible to the NBU. Although, I've nothing to fear as I don't treat my bees with anything - what goes in to the hives is what the bees bring in.

 

[fian]

Since 2002 the VMD has commissioned the NBU to take honey samples from beekeepers to test for chemical residue and the like. Note that the link address states consumer and environmental protection.
https://www.nationalbeeunit.com/bee...vironmental-protection/honey-and-food-safety/

Tell it to jenkinsbrynmair who said: "The NBU has nothing to do with honey." It seems strange to me.

On the other hand, if the NBU has honey samples in the apiary, it would not be so difficult to calculate the 2 values (the average of the smallest third of values and the average of all the samples) for pH and HMF. Tell it to jenkinsbrynmair who said: " "The NBU has nothing to do with honey." It seems strange to me.

 

[The Poot]

"if we are going to depend on the backyard dabblers to supply us with decent home produced honey we're pretty much boogered"

You have probably just alienated about 90% of the members of this forum ...

That’s not so very unusual……

 

[Murox]

What is strange is how bloody awkward there site is to use, the links are there but just takes you in circles. Very unhandy, not intuitive at all. In fact I actually gave up trying to get information out of it and simply reverted to google. All I want was an up-to-date set of contact details for reportable diseases.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Tell it to jenkinsbrynmair who said: "The NBU has nothing to do with honey." It seems strange to me.

On the other hand, if the NBU has honey samples in the apiary, it would not be so difficult to calculate the 2 values (the average of the smallest third of values and the average of all the samples) for pH and HMF. Tell it to jenkinsbrynmair who said: " "The NBU has nothing to do with honey." It seems strange to me.

I think you need to educate yourself a bit rather than pontificate at every opportunity

 

[fian]

I think you need to educate yourself a bit rather than pontificate at every opportunity

I don't feel unauthorized and I honestly don't know what the problem is with my proposal other than the fact that it hasn't occurred to anyone. And if what really bothers you is that I can express it, then you are the one who has a problem because I do not force anyone to carry it out.
The use of labels would be legally codified. The proof (and the sanctions) falls on the marketer (who may be the one with the highest performance and the one most willing to commit fraud).
If NBU has samples of all the honeys produced in the UK perhaps "local" can be a distinctive by adding other parameters such as humidity, conductivity, density.