The ACCC has stated that “NMR testing is not yet reliable enough to determine whether honey is adulterated”. Technically it’s the Department of Agriculture who is in charge of the testing, but due to the consumer interest, the ACCC is now involved.
There’s seems to be a great deal of misinformation being spread around. Most of the time when I speak to people, they are actually concerned about country of origin (fears about toxicity, food safety) rather than quality issues (watered down, adulteration). That’s not to say that quality is or isn’t a concern, just that there seems to be a lot of confusion about the issue itself.
Yes but what is the context? Are they saying that the technology is not yet reliable or are they saying that it cannot be applied as there is no panel of standard samples for comparison? The press release doesn’t say.
If the former then your idea of procedural verification needs to be examined. If the latter then why are we not building a panel?
Maybe, maybe not. Until there is a reliable measure of the size of the problem we will never know. What we do know is there appears to be significant amounts of “honey” coming from some regions that didn’t come from bees. Where does it end up?
As I said before no explanation has been offered, there is just no action. We are entitled to know if:
the problem is small and it isn’t worth doing anything more,
it is worth doing and somebody is on the case, or
we have no idea because nothing has been done about it.
To my understanding it is the former, but it would be interesting to get opinions from a number of experts on the matter. I’ll mention it to our investigations team as a possible story idea
I have been following this saga for some time and remain confused. I have decided to buy only local honey from “locals” eg my neighbours or other residences that advertise along rural roads and where the sellers can tell me the source of the honey…eg the plants that the bees usually feed on. In this way it is possible to enjoy the flavours of differently sourced honeys…maybe one day I can be just like a wine taster “one sniff” and I can determine the GPS co-ordinates of the hunting bees?
This topic might best be expanded to ‘the purity of food’ not just honey.
Consumers are expected to trust the labelling on what we purchase and consume to make choices, but it appears many labels and the ‘process’ behind them ranges from best efforts, to ignoring and throwing values into a table from wherever, to real analysis, and there is no way to discern one from another in most cases, thus government regulators or consumer bodies such as Choice are needed to step in. This does not touch on origin issues where there is at least an effort being made to simplify a complex global supply chain.
As for the regulators, any ‘red tape’ put upon the food chain also affects donations (and voters) so what are the odds the pollies would do much to inconvenience their donors or indirectly cause the price of food to rise? Thus it falls to Choice and its similar organisations to publicise the ‘cause’.
I too wonder as to the true extent and facts relating to the authenticity of honey products?
Also for those in the community that suggest buying locally produced product is a reliable solution - it may be that there are many locally branded products that are also questionable.
Regulated production with Quality Assurance requirements may be one necessary solution, albeit at expense to the consumer. For enforcement and application to small producers doing the right thing the costs would likely be disproportionate. However, as honey becomes harder to produce and source the opportunities for small backyard operations that choose deception over honesty cannot be ignored. Targeting large producers is only part of the need.
As examples are two recently purchased honey products. Both came from a notable permanent roadside Fruit and Veg store in the Glass House Mountains Qld.
The first in a plastic tub cost $12.95 for 1kg, has a mild taste light clean colour and is moderately runny. The label only asserts two things. The contents of the container is honey, and that the container was “packed” (not sure if packed equals filled, or simply the container was placed in a larger box for shipping) by someone in Cooloolabin on the Sunshine Coast. Oh! and the brand name is of an Australian owned company.
The second product came in a Glass jar and was purchased some 12 months previously for $14.95. It’s now very empty. The contents were described as “Raw Honey”. IE the honey is as harvested directly from the hive by cold spinning the comb or similar. The product was very light in colour, ran more like water in a similar consistency to maple syrup, even in winter, and refused to candy over 6 months of consumption? The product was incredibly sweet to the taste The remainder of the details can be read from the label.
I could compare these products with another local supplier, registered bee keeper with personal contacts who can verify the production chain. The two previous products were very different from the one that I have a high degree of confidence in. Perhaps all three are genuine product. The labeling in the absence of any other assurance on the first two products is sufficient cause for concern?
p.s. The product that is local and for which there is a high degree of assurance sells (last year and current) at a number of small outlets for more than twice the price of the two examples noted above!
Perhaps Choice can develop a “Buzzer” app to categorise honey products by label similar to “Cluckar”?
About bloody time. Nearly two years have passed since the ACCC returned an open finding re the Capilano scandal. Better late than never I suppose.
The study has only just begun and will take at least a year to get going possible much longer. The announcement does not clearly say what the scope will be, it seems to be only Australian honey but what proportion of the market it will cover is not said. The main purpose seems to be to give provenance to locally produced honey. It is being sponsored by B-Qual a voluntary industry group and the Cooperative Research Centre a branch of the Dept of Industry.
The project seems to be mainly focussing on tracking and tracing and the method of analysis and identification is not mentioned. Building a database of known sample would support NMR analysis but they don’t say that.
Maybe - maybe not. There is nothing about whether imports will be tested nor the point that local bottling will be tested or even if all local bottling will be tested or just volunteers.
the Department of Agriculture has tested imported honey using the C4 test, which did not detect adulteration in ‘Allowrie’ honey or some supermarket private-label products
and
“During the course of our investigation however, it also became evident that there is low confidence in the current test method (the C4 test) used to detect adulterated honey.
Some experts at the time indicated that while the C4 test may be suitable for imported honey, there is in sufficient information to rely on it for Australian honeys. The Department also at the time didn’t use the NMR test and relies on the C4 test. The NMR test, like the C4 test also has limitations.
There was no evidence of the claims at the time by some within the industry which had their own reasons to target and make unsupported accusations again Capilano honey brands.
The potential to use a system to support a product certification system is significant.
Protecting any system against fraudulent product might be another need. Something our regulators most often fail to deliver on. It will be interesting to see how the industry adapts to describing product.
P.S.
How good can any system be?
I take ‘Mixed Blossom’ to be the most honest product flavour description.
Alternatives such as ‘Yellow Box’ or ‘Stringy Bark’ etc I suspect are more descriptive of the environment where the hives were located (most of the time). The flowering periods for many native species are relatively short. Weeks out to a month or two. This does raise some doubts as to what the bees have been feeding on.
Personal observation around home is also that no one environment is a monoculture. The European honey bees are currently as enthusiastic about dandelions in the paddocks and blue billy goat weed in proliferation in the verge as they are for the early flowering acacias. The local gums (various varieties) are yet to flower, although the noxious African Tulip trees have been in full bloom.
In some ways it may also serve to be able to track hives and hence product by locale and dates. That’s if the industry really desires to assure premium branding and authenticity. Likely necessary also to cover the cost of the assurance procedures. Cask honey vs individually bottled and numbered vintage honey bottles?
Would you accept that the enquiry could not proceed due to lack of evidence?
The ACCC’s deputy chair Mick Keogh told Fairfax Media on Friday that the commission had concluded its investigation and found no evidence that Capilano’s Allowrie product was adulterated with sugar syrup.
However, he said that based on expert advice, it found that the none of the available methods to test honey - the C4 or the NMR - were reliable enough to stand up in court.
“On those two bases, we made the decision we can’t proceed any further with this matter," Mr Keogh told Fairfax Media.
True but for different reasons. The C4 test was and is inadequate because it can be spoofed by cunning choice of adulterants that it cannot distinguish, it will never get any better than it is. The NMR test was inadequate at the time of the enquiry due to lack of reference samples for comparison, which can in principle be remedied by suitable data collection. Whether this project will tell us if any local and imported honey is adulterated depends on the scope and validity of that collection.
Whether the NMR test can support prosecution depends on the court accepting the quality of the data collection and testing procedure, which we won’t know until it is addressed by a suitable test case. It looks to me that clarity is still years off.
True, and they also (just as the cane toad has in it’s respective world), displace native bees and pollinating insects by aggressively competing for resources.
Fortunately the European Honey bee is not protected as far as I am aware, so eradication around the home would seem a worthwhile activity for some of us.
As for our local native bees.
Just as cane toads threaten a number of native animals due to their toxicity, European honey bees can also be a more aggressive threat to native bees. One pathway forward, a total ban on European bee hives from within several kilometres of National Parks. The same might be necessary for native State Forrests. Currently there are restrictions for some National Parks.
Something to do when poisoning pigeons in the park is forbidden by COVID restrictions. Many people do this unaware when then get out the spray for some pest and don’t notice the bees dropping like … er… flies.
For those interested approx one third of Australian honey production over the next 6 weeks will be almond flavoured/scented.
Produce of Australia, although almond flavouring is not.
Mark, there is no need to be concerned with the perceived almond flavoured honey, as the bees get very little honey off almond trees. The reason that beekeepers put their bees on almond trees, is because they enter into a commercial partnership with the almond growers, that makes it financially viable to do so. The almond growers will have a much better yield using commercial bees to pollinate the crop, than they would if they left it to wild bees.
Commercial honey packers blend the almond honey, with other types of varietal honey, to provide year-round consistency of flavour profile, and unless consumers, are employed and trained as a honey blender and taster, they will not be able to taste the almond flavour in the honey.
Typically, they get none. Almond tree flowers produce nectar and pollen, both which are harvested by bees and taken back to the hive.
An interesting Australian honey is that of the Tasmanian leatherwood tree. While I haven’t seen it on the mainland, it is readily available in Tasmania and has a distinctive taste. It takes a little to get used to, but after a little while, it is a flavoursome and very enjoyable honey. It would also be a difficult one to manufacture due to its distinctive taste.
