EU seeks to clarify honey

Sep 21, 2012
Honey bees are seen in France in 2008. Honey is the purest of foods which under European Commission proposals Friday should remain so once rules about pollen from genetically modified plants found in it are straightened out.

Honey is the purest of foods which under European Commission proposals Friday should remain so once rules about pollen from genetically modified plants found in it are straightened out.

The Commission said that "in line with international () standards, the proposal defines pollen as a natural constituent of honey and not as an ingredient."

Such an apparently simple formulation should, if accepted by all 27 EU member states, clarify the position for beekeepers left in limbo by a European Court of Justice ruling earlier this month.

The court said it considered pollen to be an ingredient in honey, rather than brought there naturally by the bees, and if it came from GM plants, then the honey would have to carry a warning that it contained GM products.

The warning would be needed if GM pollen accounted for 0.9 percent of all the pollen in the honey, thereby undercutting the 'purity' branding that producers prize above all.

In contrast, the Commission judged that pollen gets into the honey "as a result of the activity of the bees and is found in honey regardless of whether the intervenes.

"Consequently, since pollen is considered as a natural constituent of honey, EU labelling rules requiring a list of ingredients would not apply."

The Greenpeace in a attacked the proposal, saying it was meant to sweep the issue under the carpet.

Explore further: Organic apple orchards benefit from green compost applications

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Scientist tracks origins of bootleg honey from China

Apr 29, 2010

A Texas A&M University scientist spends hours at a time peering at slides of pollen samples, comparing them to track down the origins of honey with questionable heritage. Some of the samples contain labels from other countries ...

Recommended for you

Breakthrough in coccidiosis research

31 minutes ago

Biological researchers at the Royal Veterinary College (RVC) are a step closer to finding a new cost-effective vaccine for the intestinal disease, coccidiosis, which can have devastating effects on poultry ...

Seeds keep vital much longer when stored without oxygen

1 hour ago

If seed breeding companies, gene banks and the Svalbard Global Seed Vault on Spitsbergen should store plant seeds under oxygen-poor conditions, it would be possible to store them for much longer while still ...

Native species may be hindering fox control efforts

1 hour ago

Native species interfering with ground distributed baits used to control red foxes in south west Western Australia may mean the baits are not available to the target species, a Murdoch University study has ...

User comments : 5

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Eikka
not rated yet Sep 22, 2012
Well, does the Greenpeace offer any way of controlling what kind of pollen the bees are bringing in?

The ends don't justify the means. If the problem is that bees visit GM plants, it is not solved by twisting the legislation to disregard reality.

They should lobby to change the labeling rules instead, but that's not what Greenpeace does. They just want to slap GMO warnings on everything regardless, to blow the whole thing out of proportion by scare tactics - by spreading disinformation and panic. Oh no! All our food now contains genes! That's what they did for nuclear power anyhow.

That's why people call them ecoterrorists.
antialias_physorg
not rated yet Sep 22, 2012
Well, does the Greenpeace offer any way of controlling what kind of pollen the bees are bringing in?

Since the foraging range of bees is limited that's not as big a problem as it may seem.
Set up in range of a GM field and you get the GM label.

That's why people call them ecoterrorists.

Only the GM people.
Eikka
not rated yet Sep 23, 2012
Only the GM people.


Greenpeace is spreading their FUD all over the place from forestry to fishing. They simply won't have anything that would allow the modern societies to exist like they are - so they oppose pretty much everything.

For example, they were carting around huge 100-200 year old treestumps in Germany going "Look what the Finns are cutting up, destroying all their old forests. Stop buying their paper!", while in reality they got that stump from somewhere in Siberia and Finland has pretty much the world's most sustainable forest industry.
Eikka
not rated yet Sep 23, 2012
Set up in range of a GM field and you get the GM label.


Yeah, but that has got nothing to do with listing pollen as an added ingredient in honey. With the same logic, you'd have to list mercury as an ingredient of fish, as if the industry was deliberately adding mercury to fish.

The Greenpeace simply wants to twist existing legislation to serve their scare tactics. They're simply lying to the people time and time again to create distrust against the establishment.

mrlewish
not rated yet Sep 23, 2012
The rabbit hole goes deeper then this. Most honey sold in the U.S. is not even honey. It is high fructose corn syrup with a small bit of honey and flavoring added. You can tell because most "honey" sold in the U.S. contains no pollen. The manufactures say that they "filter" it out for the consumers taste. I say BS. The Green Peace seem so crazy at times is because they know that these sorts of bastardizations of products take place one small step at a time.. First 1% GM allowed then another 2 years down the road a big industry insider with the ear of a politician quietly puts in a 5% GM allowed and so on.