Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
July 23, 2014, 06:49:34 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: ATTENTION ALL NEW MEMBERS
PLEASE READ THIS OR YOUR ACCOUNT MAY BE DELETED - CLICK HERE
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat  

Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Need legal minds....  (Read 3700 times)
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« on: August 17, 2010, 07:00:07 AM »

On another thread, it was indicated that feeding sugar or HFCS is considered a "chemical". And I suppose we can throw in the contaminates of smoking, and any number of things. And since the bees will drag in chemicals from down the road, can we really be using labels with "Pure" anymore.

Since I have never seen anyone pay for honey analysis, and be shown to actually have "pure" honey, maybe we should all protect ourselves.

One person has already suggested that he tells ever customer that his honey is un-pure. I'm not going to assume anything. But I have some serious doubts. What about that one customer that bought while nobody was looking? Did anyone tell him of the dangers and potential risk of contaminates in honey? If you do tell every customer, don't you think that having it in writing would be better protection?

So lets make a move to change our labels on the front to "Unverified Honey". That way, unless you have testing done, the consumer should never assume a pure product, to which they are not buying anyways. Beekeepers are calling out other beekeepers in this area of full disclosure, so why not just nip this in the butt now and get it done? Honey is not pure and we should not be fooling the consumers anymore.  

On the back, how about this.....

This honey is unverified, and should never be assumed to be without contaminates. Bees collect from a wide source of flowers and sugar sources to include other hives (through robbing) maintained by beekeepers who may use applied chemicals. This product may or may not be contaminated with but not limited to: pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, etc. Never assume honey to be pure and safe. Those Pregnant, with sensitivity to certain chemicals, and those on certain medications, should consult a doctor and medical advice prior to consuming this product. No guarantees written or assumed should be made.

So what did I miss? How can this be cleaned up and made more official?

Time we looked in the mirror and faced facts. No beekeeper knows what their bees worked, what chemical are in the honey, and at what levels. So lets stop fooling ourselves. Unless we submit samples and pay for the analysis, nobody can say they have "pure" honey. And lets cut the crap on ever-changing terms to fool the public like "Treatment Free". Everyone's honey is contaminated.. Period!

 lau


« Last Edit: August 17, 2010, 07:35:13 AM by BjornBee » Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
gardeningfireman
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 564


Location: Richfield, OH (Summit County)


« Reply #1 on: August 17, 2010, 07:56:53 AM »

Do I note a tiny tad of sarcasm here? grin Political Correctness at its finest! You need to add to the label that honey is technically bee vomit!! grin
Logged

mtnmanky
New Bee
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2

Location: Grant County, KY

Sun Mon Tues Wed Thu Fri Sat. see, is no someday!


« Reply #2 on: August 17, 2010, 08:50:31 AM »

"Caution!  Breathing may be hazardous to your health." 

Just proves the old saying that Common sense isn't....common.

 beat a dead horse

and I'm a lawyer!   Wink
Logged
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 5900

Location: Randleman, NC


« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2010, 09:19:20 AM »

If the bees made it, it is pure honey. Different honeys are made using different recipes. If bees put arsenic in it, it is still pure honey. Who are we to say their recipe is wrong?
Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
AllenF
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8104

Location: Hiram, Georgia


« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2010, 09:44:03 AM »

Bees can poison the honey with Rhododendron.  There is no telling where they get there water.  I think there is a given amount of risk in all food we eat.   Can you call the catfish I eat pure?  What did he eat or the mercury what is from the coal plant upstream.   This can be applied to all pure and natural food we eat. 
Logged
bigbearomaha
Guest
« Reply #5 on: August 17, 2010, 09:57:56 AM »

see, when  I hear terms like "pure honey" I first thought about honey that has no other ingredients but the honey from the comb.  As opposed to honey mixed with corn syrup or honey with artificial flavorings added to it.

in terms of unpleasant things being brought into the picture like pesticides on the pollen and unsavory flowers, we have little to no control over where the bees collect from or visit.

I'll just keep on eating honey and be blissfully ignorant.   I may die sooner, but I will die happy.  That's all that matters to me.

 grin

Big Bear
Logged
caticind
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 385

Location: Carrboro, North Carolina

Nothing sweeter...


« Reply #6 on: August 17, 2010, 11:07:18 AM »

Let it go already.  No judge in their right mind would take this case.   Wink

For the purpose of testing and regulation, "pure" honey is honey made from floral sources of nectar, rather than being fermented and condensed from HFCS, a man-made substance.  And the regulators are gracious enough to admit that they have a 5% margin of error in determining that chemically.  Below certain tolerances, they don't care about other possible contaminants.

I'm pretty sure both of you agree that feeding barrels of HFCS while supers are on leads to adulterated "not-pure" honey and is bad beekeeping besides.  And it seems reasonable that if bees are fed HFCS in the fall, and not fed in the spring or during flow, they will eat enough of the HFCS stores that it will not turn up in the honey at a level relevant to the people doing the testing.

I have my own opinion re: advertising chemical-free hives and honey, but there is no legal or even industry-wide definition of "chemical-free" for beekeeping so long as the honey meets the testing standards above.  Only BjornBee and deknow's customers can determine whether they believe what they are told and whether they like the product they are getting.  Hopefully customers who claim to want "chemical-free" honey will do some research online, perhaps here.  And if they do, now they have this thread (and all the others on the SAME TOPIC  rolleyes) to use as evidence when they weigh claims about that honey.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2010, 12:20:02 PM by caticind » Logged

The bees would be no help; they would tumble over each other like golden babies and thrum wordlessly on the subjects of queens and sex and pollen-gluey feet. -Palimpsest
bigbearomaha
Guest
« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2010, 11:16:25 AM »

Quote
And it seems reasonable that if bees are fed HCFS in the fall, and not fed in the spring or during flow, they will eat enough of the HCFS stores that it will not turn up in the honey at a level relevant to the people doing the testing.

similar has been said about the fall honey having the wonderful scent of old sweatsox and other such described odors.

If one takes the honey they want from the hive before the fall flow and doesn't pull honey in the spring, that fall honey will likely be consumed before any honey is pulled in summer or early fall.

Big Bear
Logged
MagicValley
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


Location: Twin Falls, Idaho, USA

We who are about to bee stung, Salute You!


WWW
« Reply #8 on: August 17, 2010, 11:18:23 AM »

KISS  =  "100% Honey"
Logged

Are you the Moron who keeps re-electing these Idiots?
If not, use this sig-line until we find them all.
L Daxon
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 669


Location: Oklahoma City


« Reply #9 on: August 17, 2010, 03:57:11 PM »

When I wasn't producing my own honey, I always looked for "raw, unprocessed honey," rather than "pure."
It seems to me, if the bee gets the sweetstuff, whether it is nectar from flowers, sugar, HFCS, or some combination, and puts it in her little tummy, adds bee enzymes, then vomits it into the cells, it is honey.  Isn't it what the bee does to the nectar, sugar, etc. that really makes it "honey."  As to the pure part, i.e. no chemicals, etc.,  no one can ever guarantee purity unless you follow every bee on each outing to make sure they only go to unchemically treated flowers and back. Not happening.
Logged

linda d
caticind
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 385

Location: Carrboro, North Carolina

Nothing sweeter...


« Reply #10 on: August 17, 2010, 08:45:29 PM »

Right, there's a difference between "honey" from the bee perspective (anything with mostly the right balance of sugars, fermented and concentrated and stashed in a cell for the winter) and "honey" from the FDA's perspective, which comes from trying to stop people from selling cheap substitutes that might be either toxic (melamine as infant formula) or misleadingly advertised (excessively HFCS-diluted honey, rice syrup honey, etc), and "honey" from the beekeeper's perspective.

Most customers don't even know how bees make honey.  They don't realize how bees are kept or what beekeepers do to keep them.  They don't expect honey to contain corn or cane sugars even in trace quantity.  They don't do enough research to realize that those substances are even involved, let alone understand WHY they would be used.  They don't think that the chemicals they apply to their crops or lawns get picked up and end up in honey.  And they don't realize that they consume those chemicals all the time on other products in small quantities (albeit without much harm).

I sometimes think they imagine the bee dancing like crazy on the flower and then wringing out its little sweatband and that's honey!   bee rainbow sunflower

Look, BjornBee is not a dumper selling honey-flavored HFCS.  And deknow is not a my-bees-are-cleaner-than-yours purist.  They are both successful beekeepers who differ in their methodology and their approach to dealing with the gaps in their customers' understanding.  But they are definitely not talking to each other, either.  Those straw men are much better conversationalists, it seems.
Logged

The bees would be no help; they would tumble over each other like golden babies and thrum wordlessly on the subjects of queens and sex and pollen-gluey feet. -Palimpsest
gundalf
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 69


Location: Albright, West Virginia


« Reply #11 on: August 17, 2010, 09:15:03 PM »

I like "raw or unprocessed honey, as pure as our bees can make it..."
Logged

Good fences make good neighbors...   If that don't work, "Remember the Alamo"...     
http://picasaweb.google.com/1bigyeti/BeesOTheShire#
CAHighwind
New Bee
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 40


Location: Elizabeth, Colorado


« Reply #12 on: August 17, 2010, 09:28:07 PM »

This whole health nut garbage about "Chemicals" always gets my goat.  Do they not understand that EVERYTHING is made out of chemicals?  H2O, water, is a chemical.  O2, that you need to breathe, is a CHEMICAL.  The cellulose your coffee table is made out of is a CHEMICAL.  Nothing other than an ABSOLUTE VACUUM is "Chemical Free".  Even the purest of pure honey is therefore, by definition, A CHEMICAL.  Honestly, if we're all such big morons that we need THAT level of hand holding to go on living day to day then maybe nature needs to wipe the slate of those that incapable of surviving without someone who "knows better" policing everything for them.
Logged
Livefreeordie
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 122


Location: Yeagertown PA


« Reply #13 on: August 17, 2010, 09:32:43 PM »

Another vote for " Raw Honey "....
Logged

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. ~ Thomas Jefferson ~
Livefreeordie
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 122


Location: Yeagertown PA


« Reply #14 on: August 17, 2010, 09:34:48 PM »

This whole health nut garbage about "Chemicals" always gets my goat.  Do they not understand that EVERYTHING is made out of chemicals?  H2O, water, is a chemical.  O2, that you need to breathe, is a CHEMICAL.  The cellulose your coffee table is made out of is a CHEMICAL.  Nothing other than an ABSOLUTE VACUUM is "Chemical Free".  Even the purest of pure honey is therefore, by definition, a CHEMICAL.  Honestly, if we're all such big morons that we need THAT level of hand holding to go on living day to day then maybe nature needs to wipe the slate of those that incapable of surviving without someone who "knows better" policing everything for them.

I do like the way you think...and here I thought Colorado was.....oh never mind, good words... Wink
Logged

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. ~ Thomas Jefferson ~
bigbearomaha
Guest
« Reply #15 on: August 17, 2010, 09:35:25 PM »

perhaps it's not worded specifically enough but people are cautious of synthetic chemicals, that is , the chemicals we people come up with in our infamous 'science' experiments' to do those things which attempt to duplicate naturally occurring things or, do things that do not occur naturally.

Big Bear
« Last Edit: August 17, 2010, 11:05:39 PM by bigbearomaha » Logged
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 5423


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #16 on: August 17, 2010, 09:41:58 PM »

Unadulterated might be a good choice. Too bad the litigious society brings out these kind of conversations.
Logged
doak
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1788

Location: Central Ga. 35 miles north of Macon


« Reply #17 on: August 17, 2010, 09:52:21 PM »

I think the term (pure) is meant to mean, no additives, or as said, Unadulterated.

Or you may want to try another Hobby. :)doak
Logged
deknow
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 728


Location: Massachusetts


WWW
« Reply #18 on: August 17, 2010, 10:44:01 PM »

i'm a bit busy to address all of this, however, quickly, i'd like to point out:

1.  in "the other thread", i pointed out that even if one considers cane sugar "not a chemical" (being essentially a product of nature....not a def i'd use, but it is a line that is often drawn), one cannot consider HFCS anything but a chemical...it is synthesized in a lab.  bjorn agreed that HFCS is a chemical.

2.  i have (for years) been intentionally been using the term "treatment free".....being the best short description that i can come up with that accurately conveys what i mean......no "treatments" (substances, drugs, artifical feeds, essential oils, organic acids, fgmo, antibiotics, probiotics, synthetic chemcials, aroma therapy, etc, so forth and so on...) are used on the bees and/or in the hive.  perhaps "input free" or "zero input" would be more accurate?  i don't use the terms chemical free, organic, natural, etc.

3.  the person claiming chemical free bees and chemical free honey is bjorn.  it's probably not fair of me to point out the things that are on his website considering all the contortions i had to do to find his site (i clicked the link at the bottom of each of his posts...just above "marking queens is gay" or somesuch nonsense).

4.  in our book, we note that pcbs have been found in every honeybee sample taken in the last 20 years...in fact, also on page 116:
Quote
Even those of us who don't use pesticides inside our beehives have to face the fact that they are ubiquitous in the environment, and all kinds of pollutants are present in even the most pristine beehives
is that clear enough?

...this is the same book that is on the table at every market we do (7 a week) right next to honey from actual untreated bees.  anyone that knows us at all won't have any trouble believing that ramona and i discuss these issues with hundreds of people every week.

we say "treatment free" and mean that no treatments are used.  others say "...we do not use chemicals in our hives" and feed HFCS.  i have no idea what "non-chemical treatments" may or may not be used....i expect that neither customers or readers of beemaster will find out any time soon.  contamination of honey is only one of the concerns associated with treatments....just like lack of nutrients is only one of the concerns associated with artificial feeds.

deknow
Logged
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #19 on: August 17, 2010, 11:09:09 PM »


Look, BjornBee is not a dumper selling honey-flavored HFCS.  And deknow is not a my-bees-are-cleaner-than-yours purist.  They are both successful beekeepers who differ in their methodology and their approach to dealing with the gaps in their customers' understanding.  But they are definitely not talking to each other, either.  Those straw men are much better conversationalists, it seems.


That made me laugh.  Wink
Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
beee farmer
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 387


Location: Jackson, Mississippi


« Reply #20 on: August 17, 2010, 11:31:35 PM »

This whole health nut garbage about "Chemicals" always gets my goat.  Do they not understand that EVERYTHING is made out of chemicals?  H2O, water, is a chemical.  O2, that you need to breathe, is a CHEMICAL.  The cellulose your coffee table is made out of is a CHEMICAL.  Nothing other than an ABSOLUTE VACUUM is "Chemical Free".  Even the purest of pure honey is therefore, by definition, a CHEMICAL.  Honestly, if we're all such big morons that we need THAT level of hand holding to go on living day to day then maybe nature needs to wipe the slate of those that incapable of surviving without someone who "knows better" policing everything for them.

YOU GO GIRL!!!!
Logged

"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do"  Benjamin Franklin
deknow
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 728


Location: Massachusetts


WWW
« Reply #21 on: August 18, 2010, 12:10:52 AM »

And the regulators are gracious enough to admit that they have a 5% margin of error in determining that chemically.
i don't belive this is a regulator issue. 

the lab that we talked to does 2 tests for HFCS ($40 and $70).  the cheaper one could detect 10% HFCS and up...the more expensive one 5% and up.  ...but rice syrup is a bigger problem.  rice syrup has a profile similar to nectar (unlike corn derived HFCS), and although the results show abnormalities (i believe in the protein profile), they have no definitive test for what the adulteration is...therefore they can't conclude its adulterated.  they also said that it's common that packers have a contract that they can't refuse the honey unless it tests adulterated...the packer is stuck with the honey even though they know it's "funny honey".

deknow
Logged
Michael Bush
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 13563


Location: Nehawka, NE


WWW
« Reply #22 on: August 18, 2010, 12:12:56 AM »

>No beekeeper knows what their bees worked, what chemical are in the honey, and at what levels. So lets stop fooling ourselves. Unless we submit samples and pay for the analysis, nobody can say they have "pure" honey. And lets cut the crap on ever-changing terms to fool the public like "Treatment Free". Everyone's honey is contaminated.. Period!

So we should just dump in whatever we want, it won't matter anyway...

But I AM in control of what *I* put in the hives... but I guess I am not responsible for that... And all honey is the same no matter what we put in the hive... right?
Logged

Michael Bush
My website:  bushfarms.com/bees.htm
My book:  ThePracticalBeekeeper.com
-------------------
"Everything works if you let it."--Rick Nielsen
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #23 on: August 18, 2010, 07:21:46 AM »

>No beekeeper knows what their bees worked, what chemical are in the honey, and at what levels. So lets stop fooling ourselves. Unless we submit samples and pay for the analysis, nobody can say they have "pure" honey. And lets cut the crap on ever-changing terms to fool the public like "Treatment Free". Everyone's honey is contaminated.. Period!

So we should just dump in whatever we want, it won't matter anyway...

But I AM in control of what *I* put in the hives... but I guess I am not responsible for that... And all honey is the same no matter what we put in the hive... right?


Way off base MB.

I never said anything about just dumping in whatever.

This conversation, or at least from what I started, and the quotes you mention, has to do with beekeepers pointing fingers and pulling stuff off of other beekeepers websites and making wide accusations, while conveniently using any number of "terms" on their own label in attempts to fool the consumer themselves.

Point is, many things are considered contaminates. When I mention Chemicals, I an referring to beekeeper based mite treatments, not the rarely used feeding of HFCS on a small number of non-honey producing nucs. But if I'm going to be called out and called a liar by someone who is calling the kettle black, I think we should just pony up to the bar and be honest with ourselves.

Nobody knows knows what is in their honey. You can throw around terms like "Treatment free" and about a dozen other terms. The industry allows the buying consumers to assume that the honey is pure from such contaminates, and to my knowledge, no beekeeper here actually tests their honey ( I do...  Wink  ) for such things as chemicals, etc.

Every beekeeper out there has bees that will collect from soda cans, commercial sugar sources, chemical tainted nectar sources, and about every other nasty thing you can think of. The industry has for years fought the actual testing of honey by the average beekeeper and large operations alike. Better for everyone that they not look was always the standard thought. They may bee looking at imports for tainted honey, but that for me is to protect those big guys and their interests. Certainly has little to do with the 99% of the smaller guys or the buying public, that is for sure.

Anyways, when beekeepers start breaking up into small groups and standing on different corners, attacking others because of the terms they use, or the marketing involved, and sometimes with ridiculous accusations such as what was thrown my way, maybe it's time we all fess up. And maybe we should realize that standing pointing fingers at others, while one provides no proof of the purity of your own honey, is about as hypocritical as it gets.

I don't think there is anyone that can suggest they have pure honey, without clear testing. Yeah, some will try to paint this as a "HFCS" debate, or by using ever-changing descriptions on their own label, try to suggest they are one step ahead (or above) everyone else. But they are not.

It's as if, and what was mentioned, that "we use this way to describe our honey" and for what purpose? So they can tout not actually lying to consumers, but by mentioning management tactics, that have nothing to do with the purity of the honey produced. So in the end, stating "Chemical free" is nothing more than a marketing term at best, with the realization that that honey being sold under that labeling, may or may not be any better than the guy down the street that same very beekeeper is attacking.

It's not about about dumping honey. It's about an industry not knowing what IS in the honey, beekeepers not knowing what is in their honey, yet standing pointing fingers attacking others.

Very simple concept.
Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #24 on: August 18, 2010, 07:26:42 AM »

(i clicked the link at the bottom of each of his posts...just above "marking queens is gay" or somesuch nonsense).

Can't we have at least one discussion without the personal attacks?

For the record, I did not add the comment on marking queens. I can only assume any number of moderators or perhaps even John himself. I happened to think the "duel" meaning comment was funny (or should I say...Gay!  Wink  ) and was appropriate for some of the recent conversations. But if your still looking for personal attacks, please realize that maybe sending off nasty attacks, and offending the moderators, would be more on the mark concerning your personal concerns over my signature.....  rolleyes
Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #25 on: August 18, 2010, 07:56:04 AM »

If the bees made it, it is pure honey. Different honeys are made using different recipes. If bees put arsenic in it, it is still pure honey. Who are we to say their recipe is wrong?

Well iddee, I hope you never lose any hives to pesticides or other chemicals. With your suggestion, no beekeeper could ever report, or claim harm, from sprays, intentional poisoning, or anything else. Your suggesting that if it is in the hive, it is pure honey (and I could assume pollen, etc. ? ), is questionable to me.  

I would venture to say, that if bees actually collect chemicals in large enough amounts (and they do), that massive bees deaths or even hive loss is seen, I would venture to say that your comments might just be a tad off the mark. Even at lower levels, where perhaps bee death is not seen, can anyone really suggest ALL honey collected, by the very fact that bees collected it, should or could be call "Pure".

Your stating that honey based on the fact it was collected and made by bees, that it is pure. I would venture to say that is very convenient, yet is probably way off the mark in regards to the actual meaning applied to the consumer to which reads "pure" on most honey bottles. "Pure" to the consumer, means that it is not contaminated or funky with crap. And so it comes down once again, huge differences of what we mean, and what we suggest to the public.

In an industry where many, and I'm not talking the CCD big boys, are effected by pesticide sprays and hive health is a constant concern, how long are we to suggest that because the bees put it in the hive, that it is pure, then pass it off to the public while acting ignorant and turning a blind eye?

We are making "pure" out to be anything a bee puts in the hive, regardless of where, what, and what the end product is composed of. I can not agree with that.

I bet most consumers expect or comprehend a bit different understanding. I know I do.
Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
deknow
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 728


Location: Massachusetts


WWW
« Reply #26 on: August 18, 2010, 09:09:52 AM »

Can't we have at least one discussion without the personal attacks?

i intentionally kept things polite and civil....until you flung the term "spewing crap" in my direction.

deknow
Logged
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #27 on: August 18, 2010, 09:16:31 AM »

Can't we have at least one discussion without the personal attacks?

i intentionally kept things polite and civil....until you flung the term "spewing crap" in my direction.

deknow

So you went off and ignorantly attacked the moderators (or least whoever put it there), with the best thing you could come up with, that being based on a "signature".   lau

When it was placed in the signature, I had wondered who would use it eventually to attack me, while probably making a point over it due to a lack of real points or dialog of some topic at hand. But now I know....you win the prize! I guess it can come down now that has been answered.

Looks like a long winter......

Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
deknow
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 728


Location: Massachusetts


WWW
« Reply #28 on: August 18, 2010, 09:26:31 AM »

Quote
When I mention Chemicals, I an referring to beekeeper based mite treatments.
i can't think of anything more misleading to tell your customers.

Quote
So you went off and ignorantly attacked the moderators (or least whoever put it there), with the best thing you could come up with, that being an attack on a "signature".
regardless of who put it there, they are your own words, reflecting your own attitudes.

deknow
Logged
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #29 on: August 18, 2010, 09:43:49 AM »

Quote
When I mention Chemicals, I an referring to beekeeper based mite treatments.
i can't think of anything more misleading to tell your customers.

Quote
So you went off and ignorantly attacked the moderators (or least whoever put it there), with the best thing you could come up with, that being an attack on a "signature".
regardless of who put it there, they are your own words, reflecting your own attitudes.

deknow

So you are assuming from what?" From a bit of humor I once made in regards to beekeepers running around with nail polish in their pockets. Is this how you work? You take pun, a joke, or a bit of humor, tuck it away in your "hate pouch" only to be brought out in frustration in a later conversation towards a person you do not like.

I hardly think you are qualified to make mention or think you have a clue of my own attitudes.

As for my customers, I don't understand your great leap of faith in somehow suggesting my use of sugar or anything else in attempts to keep bees alive in NUCS and nonproducing honey units, has anything to do with my very limited honey production. I have already stated very clearly that except for mainly nucs, I do not feed my hives. Anyone actually knowing me, or having spent time at my place, is well aware of that. So yes, for the consumers of my honey, We do not use chemicals in the hives, or at least the ones you selectively and conveniently harp on. I can make that distinction and pass on that to my customers, without the need to change terms and "fool" anyone by the methods you use. I make that statement on only my honey page, which is directly aimed at those buying honey from me, in hives that are not tainted with any chemicals. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Or is it due to your blindness by your attack style and lack of respect of another beekeeper, even after it being explained to you.

As you stand on the other corner attacking fellow beekeepers, pointing fingers, at least use information and specifics based on truth. But I am glad that you continue to back up my suggestions about how this industry is full of those who place themselves on pedestals, make their own rationale for what they do, while pointing fingers. It does help make my point in so many ways.

I bare my soul every day. I openly state what we do. My operation is open for all to see. Even the SHB infested hives I had on display at the picnic with over 150 beekeepers. I wonder how many other beekeepers would of been brave enough to let that be seen? I pulled out my worst graft of 3 cells in my queen rearing class so other could see that it's not always 100%. We could of conveniently staged "full cell bars" and stuck our chest out. We don't fool anyone. My website is proudly displayed, my number, address, and personal information is easily found. You......are not even willing to answer a question of your name or anything else I have asked for many times. So go hide, point fingers, make assumptions, and play your little silly attack games.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2010, 09:55:45 AM by BjornBee » Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 5900

Location: Randleman, NC


« Reply #30 on: August 18, 2010, 10:02:38 AM »

1... I have never taken honey from a colony that was killed by pesticide. I don't know anyone who has.

2. Most things I have read showed pesticide poisons were found in stored pollen rather than stored honey. I've never read of US honey that was found to contain any more pesticide than other raw foods that were tested. Can you show me one?

3. I still say if you don't add anything to your hives and harvest from robust colonies, you are getting pure honey.

Now, Bj, there is an old saying I think you should consider. I copied it from a google site.
"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference"

If you will notice, there is one poster that I no longer reply to, and there's a reason for it.
Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #31 on: August 18, 2010, 10:17:57 AM »

1... I have never taken honey from a colony that was killed by pesticide. I don't know anyone who has.

2. Most things I have read showed pesticide poisons were found in stored pollen rather than stored honey. I've never read of US honey that was found to contain any more pesticide than other raw foods that were tested. Can you show me one?

3. I still say if you don't add anything to your hives and harvest from robust colonies, you are getting pure honey.

Now, Bj, there is an old saying I think you should consider. I copied it from a google site.
"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference"

 lau

I'll keep that in mind.

As for #2, I think the point may be is that nobody is really looking. I know for years, the industry fought to some degree, the random sampling of honey on the shelves. It was better off that nobody looked, and we just let the public assume they were buying a "pure" product. But I think the honey perhaps produced years ago, was probably less likely to have chemical contamination. In today's world of perfect lawns and the ever decreasing forage that bees have in many areas, coupled with many more pesticides being used by homeowners and everyone else, it would be intersting to see what would be found in random samples of honey collected from across the country. I bet the results would not be very good for the industry. I bet that can of worms is one left better unopened.

Some suggest that honey or the bees are like any other product out there. But you can control what your chickens and cows eat. You can not say the same for bees. And we know that chemicals build up over time. That does not happen with chicken eggs or anything else compared too. Bees are unique and present a situating where they could be dragging in all kinds of poisons, only to be detrimental after the crop is collected and the supers removed. Can't say for sure,. I don't think there are studies out there for all this that we discuss.

I guess I should answer you with a question? Tell me who IS looking at the honey produced by the hundreds of thousands of beekeepers out there? Nobody as far as I know.
Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 5900

Location: Randleman, NC


« Reply #32 on: August 18, 2010, 10:27:53 AM »

I agree.

As to your last question, the answer is "the bees". There anatomy is no where near as strong as ours and they will die processing anything that may even come close to making us sick.

Of course, that is just my .02, with no science or research to back it up.
Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
HomeBru
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 137

Location: Chesterton, IN


WWW
« Reply #33 on: August 18, 2010, 10:43:22 AM »

KISS  =  "100% Honey"


*Plus whatever the bees dragged in on their dirty little feet.  grin grin grin
Logged
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #34 on: August 18, 2010, 11:28:04 AM »

I agree.

As to your last question, the answer is "the bees". There anatomy is no where near as strong as ours and they will die processing anything that may even come close to making us sick.

Of course, that is just my .02, with no science or research to back it up.

Thank you for the dialog.

Hmmm....On the surface, that sounds good. But could you not say the same about mutes and other insects?

So why should we not assume that bees may build a certain resistance to certain chemicals and poisons over time? We know bees have been for the most part, able to live with certain chemicals, and verified with CCD sample testing, at levels that previously would of been deemed deadly. Only when these "resistant" chemicals that the bees have been living with for years, are mixed with newly introduced chemicals, did we see deadly consequences.

So bees may have the ability to be resistant to certain chemicals, allowing them to possibly collect higher and higher levels of chemicals, only to pass them on in the form of pollen and honey.

But I will admit, this is only observations, and not anything fully researched. But the question as to whether bees can and do develop resistance to chemicals, makes the possibility of larger amounts in tainted honey, a real possibility. I'm not so sure about anything harmful would kill a bee and not be stored for later consumption. And lets not limit this to honey. We should include all hove products. I know for a fact that the chemical amounts including DDT that I found in commercial pollen, was enough to know I would not eat any of that pollen, let alone honey produced from the same. And some of those chemicals were beekeeper induced chemicals at levels in the pollen that suggested a very high amount in the bee spit to which they use to form the pollen balls.

Anybody know of information on "resistance" bees when it comes to chemicals?
Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 5900

Location: Randleman, NC


« Reply #35 on: August 18, 2010, 11:43:19 AM »

We could go on forever with the what if's. All I can say there is "Eat your honey often, and maybe you can build the resistance at the same time the bees do".

I know as a kid we sprayed DDT throughout the house, kitchen included, on a regular basis, and we all lived to adulthood.

Of course, in my case, there may have been a bit of suspected brain damage, but it was never proven.   Kiss  grin  grin
Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
Livefreeordie
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 122


Location: Yeagertown PA


« Reply #36 on: August 19, 2010, 08:48:33 AM »

Mike,

Thanks for another enlightening thread. It seems I learn tons of info every time you post, ( including a lot about the detractors ) it seems that even though the Truth shall set you free....some prefer to be locked into their prisons of their own creation. Now I have to wonder if the peaches I bought in Chambersburg last week need to be tested for a systemic pesticide, that was in the soil from years past, the Fruit market said organic and treatment free, but one has to wonder. Wink grin
Logged

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. ~ Thomas Jefferson ~
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 5900

Location: Randleman, NC


« Reply #37 on: August 19, 2010, 09:28:08 AM »

You might ought to not trust them. I think it be best if you send them to me for testing. I will send you a complete report on my findings.

Each pie, cobbler, turnover, will be reported on.
Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 5423


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #38 on: August 19, 2010, 08:26:25 PM »

You might ought to not trust them. I think it be best if you send them to me for testing. I will send you a complete report on my findings.

Each pie, cobbler, turnover, will be reported on.

Send me some too,a double blind test never hurt.
Logged
Livefreeordie
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 122


Location: Yeagertown PA


« Reply #39 on: August 19, 2010, 09:54:06 PM »

Hmmm, I am not sure you two can be trusted....LOL...I think the all the testing you are going to do will be taste testing.... tongue
Logged

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. ~ Thomas Jefferson ~
gundalf
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 69


Location: Albright, West Virginia


« Reply #40 on: August 22, 2010, 01:51:16 PM »

Kids!!!   Play nice... grin
Logged

Good fences make good neighbors...   If that don't work, "Remember the Alamo"...     
http://picasaweb.google.com/1bigyeti/BeesOTheShire#
deknow
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 728


Location: Massachusetts


WWW
« Reply #41 on: August 22, 2010, 02:13:42 PM »

I'm reminded of the debate in Pennsylvania about milk produced without hormones...note that they have since reversed this restriction (and rightfully so).

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-11-13-milk-labels_N.htm
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Pennsylvania is stopping dairies from stamping milk containers with hormone-free labels in a precedent-setting decision being closely watched by the industry.

Synthetic hormones have been used to improve milk production in cows for more than a decade. The chemical has not been detected in milk, so there is no way to test for its use, but a growing number of retailers have been selling and promoting hormone-free products in response to consumer demand.

State Agriculture Secretary Dennis C. Wolff said advertising one brand of milk as free from artificial hormones implies that competitors' milk is not safe, and it often comes with what he said is an unjustified higher price.

"It's kind of like a nuclear arms race," Wolff said. "One dairy does it and the next tries to outdo them. It's absolutely crazy."

Agricultural regulators in New Jersey and Ohio are considering following suit, the latest battle in a long-standing dispute over whether injecting cows with bovine growth hormone affects milk.

Effective Jan. 1, dairies selling milk in Pennsylvania, the nation's fifth-largest dairy state, will be banned from advertising that their product comes from cows that have never been treated with rBST, or recombinant bovine somatotropin.

The product, sold by St. Louis-based Monsanto Co. under the brand name Posilac, is the country's largest-selling dairy pharmaceutical. It is also known as recombinant bovine growth hormone, or rBGH.

It has been approved for use in the U.S. since 1994, although safety concerns have spurred an increase in rBST-free product sales. The hormone is banned in the European Union, Canada, Australia and Japan, largely out of concern that it may be harmful to herd health.

Monsanto spokesman Michael Doane said the hormone-free label "implies to consumers, who may or may not be informed on these issues, that there's a health-and-safety difference between these two milks, that there's 'good' milk and 'bad' milk, and we know that's not the case."

Rick North of the Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility, a leading critic of the artificial growth hormone, said the Pennsylvania rules amounted to censorship.

"This is a clear example of Monsanto's influence," he said. "They're getting clobbered in the marketplace by consumers everywhere wanting rBGH-free products."

Acting on a recommendation of an advisory panel, the Pennsylvania Agriculture Department has notified 16 dairies in Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Massachusetts that their labels were false or misleading and had to be changed by the end of December.

"There's absolutely no way to certify whether the milk is from cattle treated or not treated" with rBST, Wolff said. "Some of the dairies that have enforced this, it's absolutely the honor system."

Rutter's Dairy Inc., a central Pennsylvania company that sells about 300,000 gallons a week, began promoting its milk as free of artificial hormones this summer. It has fired back at the state decision with full-page newspaper ads and a lobbying campaign. It is also urging customers to protest.

"We just think the consumers are more keenly aware in today's world about where their food comes from and how their food is manufactured or handled," said Rutter's President Todd Rutter.

Rutter's sells its milk at the state's minimum price, but a national spot check of prices by the American Farm Bureau last month found "rBST-free" milk typically costs about 25% more.
Logged
utahbeekeeper
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 137


Location: Utah


WWW
« Reply #42 on: August 24, 2010, 12:10:04 AM »

I'd rather eat my honey over any other food in the chain.  Eggs anybody??

Dang . . . . I guess my bees are "Free Range"  but are they "Cage Free"?

I know that when one believes a thing then it is true and right for them . . . but not for all.

I'll continue to partake of, market my pure honey to my appreciative and loyal customers.  I also can sleep well at night, and like "the man in the mirror" just fine.

This is a "board" and so folks need to talk about stuff.  Well done every one.
Logged

Pleasant words are like an honeycomb, sweet to the soul and health to the bones.  Prov 16:24
Bee Happy
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1656


Location: Between Panama city, Florida and Dothan Al.

that's me - setting a phoenix free


« Reply #43 on: August 24, 2010, 02:46:18 AM »

I wouldn't consider myself an organic food nut, but organic milk has a much, much, longer freshness period - compare the dates of expiry yourself.
Highwind already pointed out what I intended anyway as well - everything is a chemical, even a pure element with no harmful properties at all.

I also figured I'd post this for your perusal with the warning NOT SAFE FOR  WORK/CHILDREN - there's some very strong language (and I think the plate color had some aesthetic influence on the choices)

Penn & Teller: BS - Organic Taste Test
Logged

be happy and make others happy.
Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 2.897 seconds with 21 queries.

Google visited last this page July 19, 2014, 01:39:23 PM
anything