Sugar 59p x 1kg

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Do you make the same value-judgements when hive insulation is being discussed ad nauseam ?

I agree the constant banging on and obsession with uber insulationcan be nauseating at times, but at least it's based on collected data, observation and sound science.

Whilst the misguided belief that cane sugar is bad for bees is founded on what? misdiredtion by cane sugar producers in the 1930's - regardless of the slight difference in molecular composiion
and the constant need of the hand wringers to feel they're pampering their bees

 

[AndrewE]

Please explain how/why you think the molecules which are "nutritionally equivalent" (you mean chemically identical?) are "not the same." The chemistry is identical or they would not be the same molecules (by definition)...

If you are talking about the differences in the (naturally-occurring) carbon 12 and 13 isotopes then, yes, the molecules in the 2 products do differ: I understand that monocotyledonous plants (grasses including Sugar Cane) use a different metabolic pathway to make their sugars compared with broadleaved plants (dicots which include the beet family,) and as a coincidental by-product the monocots tend to concentrate the trace of C13 in atmospheric CO2. However the only difference is in the carbon isotope ratio and if you can't distinguish between the isotopes then there is no difference (apart from the weight of a few neutrons per molecule.)

We beekeepers have reason to be grateful for this: high fructose corn syrup cannot be passed off as honey if the C12:C13 ratios are checked. My honey ws analysed by the lab that does this for Trading Standards investigations and they said it was now their "zero" sample, having the lowest C12 to C13 ratio they had seen so far (I think it was that way round).

 

[dpearce4]

Please explain how/why you think the molecules which are "nutritionally equivalent" (you mean chemically identical?) are "not the same." The chemistry is identical or they would not be the same molecules (by definition)...

If you are talking about the differences in the (naturally-occurring) carbon 12 and 13 isotopes then, yes, the molecules in the 2 products do differ: I understand that monocotyledonous plants (grasses including Sugar Cane) use a different metabolic pathway to make their sugars compared with broadleaved plants (dicots which include the beet family,) and as a coincidental by-product the monocots tend to concentrate the trace of C13 in atmospheric CO2. However the only difference is in the carbon isotope ratio and if you can't distinguish between the isotopes then there is no difference (apart from the weight of a few neutrons per molecule.)

We beekeepers have reason to be grateful for this: high fructose corn syrup cannot be passed off as honey if the C12:C13 ratios are checked. My honey ws analysed by the lab that does this for Trading Standards investigations and they said it was now their "zero" sample, having the lowest C12 to C13 ratio they had seen so far (I think it was that way round).

no idea what that ment

 

[Jimmy]

Please explain how/why you think the molecules which are "nutritionally equivalent" (you mean chemically identical?) are "not the same." The chemistry is identical or they would not be the same molecules (by definition)...

If you are talking about the differences in the (naturally-occurring) carbon 12 and 13 isotopes then, yes, the molecules in the 2 products do differ: I understand that monocotyledonous plants (grasses including Sugar Cane) use a different metabolic pathway to make their sugars compared with broadleaved plants (dicots which include the beet family,) and as a coincidental by-product the monocots tend to concentrate the trace of C13 in atmospheric CO2. However the only difference is in the carbon isotope ratio and if you can't distinguish between the isotopes then there is no difference (apart from the weight of a few neutrons per molecule.)

We beekeepers have reason to be grateful for this: high fructose corn syrup cannot be passed off as honey if the C12:C13 ratios are checked. My honey ws analysed by the lab that does this for Trading Standards investigations and they said it was now their "zero" sample, having the lowest C12 to C13 ratio they had seen so far (I think it was that way round).

Fab 1st post! I agree with your view, hardly basic science as C3/C4 pathway differences are now beyond A level.

 

[BeeBeeKa]

Please explain how/why you think the molecules which are "nutritionally equivalent" (you mean chemically identical?) are "not the same." The chemistry is identical or they would not be the same molecules (by definition)...

Some compound substances ( amino acids i.e.) having the same chemical formula may have different biochemical and physic properties( polarization, nutritional value e.t.c.) whether due to a different spatial configuration of their radical groups or due to dual/triple bands in their molecules (sorry if I use wrong terms as I did not do PHD in English ) . It`s called isomerization. (l-,D-, cis-, trance- isomerization)But sugar molecule is too simple to have isomers AFAIK. It`s just C12H22O11 Thus if it`s a pure sugar, it really has no matter what source it came from… from the end user perspective IMHO
С12\С13 … a water drop in an ocean I would not worry about C13 in sugar as I do not worry about deuterium in drinking water

 

[Hivemaker.]

no idea what that ment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjwI9Oz0yl0

 

[Pete D]

Anyway, back to the original post.........

Bookers cash and carry are doing 2 x25kg sacks for £23 at the moment.

46p per kilo.

Just put the whole sack into a large bin bag and store it, it won't go hard then.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

no idea what that ment

Maybe you should 'go learn some basic biochemistry' - not

 

[REDWOOD]

I will continue to support British farmers and buy cheap sugar, the bees like it, I like it. and my bank account likes it

 

[Dishmop]

My local post office shop has it for 50p kg.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Well for the cane sugar hand wringers - Bookers are selling 25Kg Tate and Lyle loose sacks for 13.75 each at the moment

 

[Hivemaker.]

Well for the cane sugar hand wringers - Bookers are selling 25Kg Tate and Lyle loose sacks for 13.75 each at the moment

Not many would use cane sugar, often produced using slave labour, with high input of insecticides and herbicides, and imported from half way round the world...

 

[Little John]

. repeat post - blame Microsoft ... ?

 

[Little John]

If you are talking about the differences in the (naturally-occurring) carbon 12 and 13 isotopes then, yes, the molecules in the 2 products do differ: I understand that monocotyledonous plants (grasses including Sugar Cane) use a different metabolic pathway to make their sugars compared with broadleaved plants (dicots which include the beet family,) and as a coincidental by-product the monocots tend to concentrate the trace of C13 in atmospheric CO2. However the only difference is in the carbon isotope ratio and if you can't distinguish between the isotopes then there is no difference (apart from the weight of a few neutrons per molecule.)

Precisely.
It's more commonly known as C3/C4 synthesis - which takes place within the plants, hence my comment for those who think that these sugars are the same 'to learn some biochemistry'.

"Can't distinguish" ? But that is the whole point of my post. It is most certainly possible to identify when honey has been adulterated with C4 sugars.

Many people - in particular those with a basic knowledge of science (which is frequently being promoted here as a pre-requisite for a poster to be taken seriously) - believe that this identification is made through differences in chirality. With HFCS this may be indeed be possible - but both cane sugar and beet sugar have dextro-chirality - thus an alternative method of detection is required. This is where isotopic comparison is used - but - as C3 beet sugar cannot be detected, either by isotopic comparison or by the rotation of polarised light, the implications for the undetectable adulteration of honey by unscrupulous beekeepers must be obvious. Which is why - as this is a world-wide publicly-viewable forum - I did not disclose this information before now, and why I phrased my earlier post in the somewhat oblique manner you have identified.

I am pleased that at least one other person on here understands the isotopic difference between these sugars, but perhaps it might have been wiser not to have 'let the cat out of the bag' ?

LJ

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

And I thought we were talking about feeding bees on this thread - not adulterating honey