# Looking to buy treatment free honey



## benstung

just would like to fill you in that what you are doing is bad for beekeepers in general. I looked over your web site, i noticed a lot of things that are unsettling

from your web site:
"Our honey is completely free from the dangerous chemical and antibiotic residues used by most beekeepers today"

all beekeepers i know sell honey without antibiotics or chemicals in it. your not the only one 
go to the whole foods co-op and buy every honey on the shelf and have them all tested for any antibiotics or chemicals and you will find that there will be none.

with that being said what makes you think you can lie to people and say what you are saying?
let your honey sell itself with out lying and bad mouthing other beekeepers

your asking to buy barrels of honey that you didn't produce, remember.
"treatment free honey"
if it werent for treatments you wouldn't have your package bee's.

ya know there are things like formic acid and thymol that are used to treat bee's.
those are not chemicals or antibiotics, but they are a treatment.


----------



## Beregondo

Benstung, 
Most beekeepers use chemicals and antibiotics to treat their hives.

You yourself say that every honey on the shelf is free of those pesticides.

So if someone say their honey is free of dangerous chemicals and antibiotics used by most beekeepers, what they are saying is true, isn't it?

Where is the lie here? 
I see no untrue statement.


----------



## [email protected]

I would bet that anyone who has barrels of "treatment free honey" is at best, stretching the truth. How do you plan to verify his or her statements?


----------



## sqkcrk

Beregondo said:


> Benstung,
> You yourself say that every honey on the shelf is free of those pesticides.


I see no mention of the word "pesticide" in Benstung's Post.


----------



## sqkcrk

BareHoney said:


> Do you produce more treatment free honey than you can sell? If so, we are looking to buy barrels. Please send a message if you are interested in selling?


How much are you paying and how many barrels are you prepared to buy?


----------



## adamf

sqkcrk said:


> How much are you paying and how many barrels are you prepared to buy?


Yeah, really! A barrel's worth of treatment free honey is going to cost. We don't mark our honey down in quantity--why when we can get our good wholesale price in 40lb containers?
Adam Finkelstein
www.vpqueenbees.com


----------



## Beregondo

sqkcrk said:


> I see no mention of the word "pesticide" in Benstung's Post.


Neither do I. 
I suppose that the dangerous chemicals he was commenting on might be paint thinners or polychlorinated biphenyls, but what do you want to bet they were more likely acaricides?


----------



## sqkcrk

I would bet they are more likely the any number of chemicals not put in beehives by beekeepers.

Notice the OP want Treatment Free Honey, not chemical free or pesticide free honey. 

Pesticide residue is brought into the hive by bees. If the buyer wants chemical free honey they will have to go to thge ends of the Earth to find it. And, maybe, that won't be far enough.


----------



## jim lyon

Implied in BareHoney's query for treatment free honey is the assumption that any sort of treatment to a bee hive at any time of the year results in a less than pure product. This is a myth. Mite treatments such as Hopguard, thymol, Formic or oxalic acid placed on hives this time of year after all extracting comb has been removed will not show up in next years crop with even the most sensitive testing. Any antibiotic use such as tetracycline should only be applied as a powder in the late summer or very early spring. Tylosin if used at all is best used in the fall and also should not be added to syrup. I have only experimented with Fumidil a few times and have never had a positive reading in any honey I have ever had tested so I can't speak with much certainty about that but, as is the case with many of these other treatments it is best used in the fall.
I am not about to say that all honey you see on the shelf is going to test completely clean of some residues. I suspect there is some misuse out there and some honey packers that may be less than diligent in their testing. What I am saying, though, is that responsible use of treatments will result in a product that tests every bit as clean as anything that comes from a treatment free hive.


----------



## dfortune

"What I am saying, though, is that responsible use of treatments will result in a product that tests every bit as clean as anything that comes from a treatment free hive."

I dont disagree with you, but now you've got me wondering what the advantages of treatment free beekeeping are.


----------



## benstung

beregondo why do you put pesticides on your hives?


----------



## Solomon Parker

55 gal/barrel x 4 quarts/gal x $15 per quart = $3300

I'm going to be rich!

Let's cut down on the chatter. Either you have what the gentleman wants or you don't. I am seriously considering moving this whole thread to one of the marketing forums where it belongs.


----------



## sqkcrk

Well, I wondered why it wasn't in the Wanting to Buy Forum to begin with. But maybe Treatment Free folks wouldn't see it there.

Solomon,
Folks sell honey by the pound, not the quart. Fiftyfive gallon drum contains around 660 lbs of honey times $3.00/lb equals $1980.00. $5.00/lb would come out to $3900.00. Even better.

But why stop there? $10.00/lb would come to $6600.00/barrel.

Where did you get you $15.00 per quart? Did BareHoney mention a price somewhere?


----------



## benstung

$15 dollars a quart is a lot. but take a look the person who started this thread is asking $28 per lb. and up

$28 per lb. seems about fair eh


----------



## sqkcrk

If they can get it I am all for them doing so. I will gladly sell them honey at one quarter that price so they can make some profit. But I don't know if I have what they want.

benstung, I don't know where you got that price from. I went to their site and most of what I saw was around $8.00 to $10.00 per lb.

Nice looking site, nice looking product line. I would love to sell them honey.


----------



## Solomon Parker

$15 per quart is our going rate here in Northwest Arkansas. Finagle the measurements however you want, that's how I sell it.


----------



## sqkcrk

You label it that way and get away w/ it? Ain't no finagling about it. Honey has traditionally been sold by the lb for ages and ages. But, whatever works for ya.

You really get $60.00 per gallon? That comes out to $5.00 per lb. The economy must be better than it is here. I wholesale half gallon/6 lb "Jug-o-Honey"(TM) for $18.00 each, which is $3.00/lb. Maybe I should move to Arkansas.


----------



## Solomon Parker

No label, treatment-free honey, tastes better, people happily pay for a quality product. If they won't, then I don't need them as customers.

Yes, the economy is better, but there's a reason there are no commercial beekeepers here.


----------



## benstung

they list sweet white clover honey: $7 for 4 oz. 
do the math


----------



## cerezha

Healthy competition does not hurt. If someone wants "treatment-free" honey and beekeeper could prove it, than - it is great! Healthy competition with "non-treatment-free" folks! I think this is how capitalism works, right? Sergey


----------



## Haraga

How does one prove that a hive is treatment free?


----------



## cerezha

Haraga said:


> How does one prove that a hive is treatment free?


 I do not know, but I assume that BareHoney people who wants to sell "treatment-free honey" should have some mechanism to prove that this IS "treatment-free" honey... ask them.
It should not be really difficult if they would use the analogy with FDA definition of "organic" - it is simply something, which grows on the land, which did not see chemicals for 10 consecutive years (or 15, I forgot). As far as I know, FDA actually do not check quality of "organic" product - they assume that it is good if grows on "treatment-free" land. Similar rules may be established for honey. For instance, if beekeeper could prove that the hives did not see any chemicals for let say 5 years and comb was not rotated (accumulation of pesticides), than it may be considered "treatment-free". Sergey


----------



## sqkcrk

benstung said:


> they list sweet white clover honey: $7 for 4 oz.
> do the math


I see. I did the math on the 3Lb container and you came at it froim the other angle. But what are they paying for honay. That's the important number to know.


----------



## sqkcrk

cerezha said:


> Healthy competition does not hurt. If someone wants "treatment-free" honey and beekeeper could prove it, than - it is great!


You don't have to prove it, you just have to get people to believe it.


----------



## sqkcrk

cerezha said:


> As far as I know, FDA actually do not check quality of "organic" product - they assume that it is good if grows on "treatment-free" land. Sergey


Well, actually someone did check the quality of organic produce and found no nutritional difference. I'm sorry, I can't point to a limk of the study.


----------



## cerezha

sqkcrk said:


> You don't have to prove it, you just have to get people to believe it.


 Unfortunately - yes! Sergey


----------



## sqkcrk

Also, if you have to prove something you have already lost.


----------



## cerezha

sqkcrk said:


> Well, actually someone did check the quality of organic produce and found no nutritional difference.


If I understand correctly, FDA does not require analysis. It is somebody, who decided to compare. This comparison is not "official". As far as "organic" go - I am not great believer in it. I know that half-life of DDT is 50 years. So, if DDT got into the soil in 1960, in 2010 it would be 50% of initial amount of DTT. 10 or 15 years of not adding new chemicals did not change this situation - DDT is here as well as other nasty stuff. In general, I am cynical regarding FDA - it works hard to satisfy requests from big monopolies and do nothing to protect citizens. For instance, all world regulated nitrites in the vegetables and produce but FDA. Nitrites caused brain defects in children. Sergey


----------



## jim lyon

My suggestion to Barehoney if he truly wants to sell an absolutely pure product is to decide what chemicals he wants to test for and have any producers he wishes to purchase honey from share the testing cost. A clean pure product is an admirable goal and one that should bring a premium price. Forget all these attempts at trying to define what is and what is not treatment free, let the lab decide. Expensive? Perhaps yes at this scale but it's a cost ultimately borne by the consumer who is demanding it. Want a sample? PM me and I will gladly send one your way.


----------



## sqkcrk

Yes, I believe you are correct. FDA doesn't require analysis of what is produced, they set standars, I believe. Standards of what qualifys as organic.

No nutritional difference. I said nothing about all the other things you mentioned.

I heard this reported on National Public Radio sometime in the last week, could have been Saturday morning. I really am sorry about not having a link. It would better illustrate what I am saying. Maybe someone better at computer manipulations than I am could find the article.

Okay, here's what you do. Search npr and look for the article "Why Organic Food May Not Be Healthier For You" by Allison Aubrey and Dan Charles.

Back to my statement about getting people to believe something instead of proving something, that's what Organics have done. People assume that organic this or that is better for you when it might not be any more nutritious.

Just like people think that Local is better. But is it necassarily so. It isn't even necassarily more beneficial to the environment.


----------



## The Honey Householder

How do you know your a 100% treatment free???

PRODUCE WHAT YOU SELL!!! That way you know what you have. OH YA I'm sold out for this year too.


----------



## cerezha

sqkcrk said:


> Maybe someone better at computer manipulations than I am could find the article.
> 
> Okay, here's what you do. Search npr and look for the article "Why Organic Food May Not Be Healthier For You" by Allison Aubrey and Dan Charles.


Mark, this is your link:
http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=160395259&m=160526718

I have a mixed feeling about this report. From one hand, I already expressed my scepticizm regarding "organic" anything (see above). From another hand the way how scientific data was interpreted is controversial for couple of reasons:
- all good nutrients in organic or non-organic food should be the same - it is obvious - organic carrot contains exactly the same carotene as non-organic. Thus, "nutrient value" must be the same, no surprise here.
- standard "nutrient" tests cover only very small portion of what is in the food. For instance, they measure amount of carbohydrates - sure, it would be very similar in organic and non-organic. Non-organic could be even more sweet!
- BUT: there are million other elements in the food, which may be beneficial to us or not, which were not measured for some reason. This is what makes a difference between my tomato from my garden and ANY other tomatoes! This part was completely missed in the study and authors confirm that. 
Simple example: technically, the major composition of honey is very similar to high-fructose corn syrup. So, following the logic of the study, there is no nutritional difference between these two. But we all know that honey is way different from the corn syrup, right? So, unfortunately, I have to admit that even Standford sometime produces very shallow science - they checked only big things and ignored small things, which actually do a difference. 

The problem is that FDA set very "wide" limits and if you are within these limits - everything is the same. I would not be surprised if they measure the nutritional value of toilet paper and will find that it is withing the limits, AND very dietic - zero calories and a lot of beneficial fibers - go ahead, eat toilet paper instead cucumber (cucumber is just water and fibers).

If somebody interested, there is more balanced presentation of the story:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/10/stanford-organic-study-author-limitations_n_1870952.html

Keep in mind, that they are talking only about "nutrition value", which is the same as expected. The presence of antibiotics and pesticides and other stuff was not included in their conclusion. They also did not perform their own research - they just use published data... Totally useless work. I am shocked by such low quality of research under Stanford name. 
Sergey


----------



## sqkcrk

Where is the Original Poster? It seems as though BareHoney does not want to participate. I guess they got what they wanted from us.


----------



## MichaBees

I had a chance to visit apiaries in Oaxaca Mexico’s diverse regions. 
Some are situated where there is no agriculture or any other kind of intensive human intervention. The farming is mostly primitive and gathering of products from the jungles are a food resort for the beekeepers. These places are remote and hard to get to, some are rain forests, jungles, mountains where lots of Europeans and Americans seek mushrooms, and where the beekeepers produce a little- maybe for lack of marketing or interest on their products, or maybe, because they had found a way to deal with adjusting with what they have . There is no intensive farming, or massive beekeeping; most hives are Africanized and treatment free. When a hive is infested, they just let it die for treating hives is expensive and rebuilding from the survivors is what they do. I do not think they do it to keep the survivors but because getting medications or forms to diagnose is just out of reach. I am not saying this is right or wrong, but that’s what it is. I may be moving to the city of Oaxaca with the intention of building an orphanage there but, I also may be forming some kind of a co-op to help this primitive farmers a chance to market their wonderful products. I have asked different governments agencies to allow me to build the orphanage and allow me to help the beekeepers by helping them expose their products outside their limited boundaries. The respond has been positive but painfully slow. Some – just a few- of this honeys already reach the European markets, my understanding is that some were certified by the European Union and Mexico as organic, and those go mostly to Germany. The goal is to expose the growers and their products, with their own labels and short stories as a way to help them earn their way out of poverty. 
So, I do believe that there are honeys that can and are produced free of pesticides, treatments or contaminants. 
Aurelio Paez


----------



## jmgi

Organic is just a marketing term used to keep the wool over our eyes a bit longer, it satisfies a population who is tired of being poisoned to death, and wants an alternative. Yes, they do require you meet certain conditions to be able to label your product as organic, but in the end its just another joke. Oh yes, and the free trade products that you see on the grocery shelves that cost twice what a regular product does, including honey, that's another joke that the large corporations are pulling on us. John


----------



## DonShackelford

jmgi said:


> Organic is just a marketing term John


I would disagree on one point; Comb honey made with foundation has a thick center wall with thin sidewalls. "Natural Comb Honey" has all thin cell walls. The center wall is the same thickness as the sides. There is a difference when the two are compared one bite from each. The thin-walled comb has a more delicate taste.

Rather than telling people my honey is organic, I just state that the bees made the comb naturally and that I have put no chemicals in the hive.


----------



## Beregondo

benstung said:


> beregondo why do you put pesticides on your hives?


I don't.
Many do.
Acaraicides (miticides) are pesticides that are used for mite control.


----------



## kincade

cerezha said:


> Mark, this is your link:
> http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=160395259&m=160526718
> 
> 
> If somebody interested, there is more balanced presentation of the story:
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/10/stanford-organic-study-author-limitations_n_1870952.html


Here is another:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robyn-o/organic-food-vs-conventio_b_1857802.html



> sqkcrk
> 
> Re: Looking to buy treatment free honey
> Where is the Original Poster? It seems as though BareHoney does not want to participate. I guess they got what they wanted from us.


He's probably looking at his thread wondering why he's getting attacked for wanting something (whether or not it is valid) and in awe that a moderator hasn't either moved the thread to a more appropriate forum or kept this as a wanted/for sale thread. Personally I'm shocked it's been allowed to go this far.


----------



## sqkcrk

DonShackelford said:


> Rather than telling people my honey is organic, I just state that the bees made the comb naturally and that I have put no chemicals in the hive.


Why would you bring up chemicals at all? Why wouldn't you just say the bees made the comb and the honey.

You do know that just because you didn't put any chemicals in the hive that doesn't mean there are none present. The bees bring them in from the environment.


----------



## jmgi

I think everyone would agree the environment is contaminated, the consumer who looks for "organic" foodstuffs understands that its just the way it is and you either eat or die, but what they are looking for is food that was produced intentionally without chemical contact. Its surely not completely chemical free, but it is assumed to be better than the average product on the shelf. Honey is surely not pure, but we still use the word "pure" on our labels, because its the best we can do, and who is going to nit pick about the truthfulness of what our label says. Organic is a feel good word. John


----------



## cerezha

sqkcrk said:


> You do know that just because you didn't put any chemicals in the hive that doesn't mean there are none present. The bees bring them in from the environment.


 I think Mark, it is a big difference how to present the case: one thing if one intentionally did not put anything unnatural in the beehive and another story if one is dishonest and hide the truth behind wordings that bees brought some nasty stuff in the hive (not you, bees!). To me, this two scenarios are entirely different! I would appreciate the honest disclosure that beekeeper intentionally did not treat bees with chemicals. Another scenario, which you propose (hiding information) makes mi sick! Sergey


----------



## sqkcrk

Who is hiding information? How big a label should I put on my jar? Should I add a book to my label to tell people exactly everything I do? When you get into selling honey, are you going to put on your label in big RED letters. "I never put any chemicals in my beehives. I have no control over what chemicals the bees bring into the hives themselves."

Consumers in general do not care. Otherwise there would be Chemical Content Labels on Carrots and Grapes.

Look, marketing is not a nasty word which means lying. Let's start with that. I don't think you understand how to market what you make. Clearly Bare Honey does. "Beyond Organic". Now that's a claim which would appeal to a consumer who thinks they are smart and discerning, who simply want someone to tell them what they want to hear so they don't have to delve deeper into how some honey was produced.

If any of my customers (I know you weren't going after me, personally) asked me I would tell them what they want to know. So far my customers want to know if there is honey in the jar. By simply labeling the jars HONEY, am I lying by omission?


----------



## Solomon Parker

Interestingly enough, conventional beekeepers often claim that it doesn't matter because customers don't care.

Treatment free beekeepers claim that it does matter and customers do care.

My customers care, and they ask for honey year 'round and for years after I've ran out (in the case of bad non-harvesting years). That's just my experience. It's worth explaining to them why.

I was recently told that someone in this area keeps five gallon HFCS feeders on constantly.


----------



## sqkcrk

Solomon Parker said:


> Interestingly enough, conventional beekeepers often claim that it doesn't matter because customers don't care.


Interestingly enough, conventional automobile companys ....
Interestingly enough, conventional manufacturers of almost anything you can name ...

Consumers do care, up to a point. Once the consumer has their mind made up any additional information is no longer useful or pertinent.


----------



## cg3

"Beyond Organic", while a nebulous claim, conjures up an impression that their product is cleaner than even an organic farmer could produce. It just strikes me as a cynical ploy to take advantage of the consumer's ignorance.


----------



## jim lyon

Interestingly enough the implied notion that only honey sold under someone's arbitrary definition of treatment free is in fact better than someone else's is uninformed at best and at worst dishonest. Making insinuations without any evidence does our industry a great disservice. What is the point of some murky story about someone, somewhere who allegedly keeps syrup on his bees constantly. if I did that my honey would be rejected by buyers who actually do test my honey for lots and lots of things.


----------



## Barry

Hey Jim, do you produce comb honey? If so, has it ever been tested? I know this is a bit off the OP, but I'd like to get some real data regarding chems in wax foundation, especially foundation for comb honey. I'd do some comb honey again if I felt the wax was in fact 'clean'.


----------



## sqkcrk

Solomon Parker said:


> I was recently told that someone in this area keeps five gallon HFCS feeders on constantly.


Told by whom?
How did they know?
How did they know that there was HFCS in the feeders? Maybe on the hives is a good place to store the feeders. I have feeders in my hives all year round. That doesn't mean they are full of syrup all year round.

What makes you think your source is true and accurate?


----------



## sqkcrk

Barry said:


> Hey Jim, do you produce comb honey? If so, has it ever been tested? I know this is a bit off the OP, but I'd like to get some real data regarding chems in wax foundation, especially foundation for comb honey.


Dr. Maryanne Frazier might be able to answer your question for you. I imagine her reports on the composition of wax in beehives w/out foundation would have an answer for you. She is from Penn State. I'm sure you or someone coulkd link us to her published papers.


----------



## Solomon Parker

jim lyon said:


> if I did that my honey would be rejected by buyers who actually do test my honey for lots and lots of things.


So I imagine you don't do it.




sqkcrk said:


> Told by whom?


Jesse




sqkcrk said:


> How did they know?


The guy told him.




sqkcrk said:


> How did they know that there was HFCS in the feeders?


The guy told him.




sqkcrk said:


> What makes you think your source is true and accurate?


Well, he was standing there telling me to my face. 
What makes you think he isn't? It seems to me I have far more evidence to work from than you. It seems your criticism is based purely on speculation about something you heard third hand.


----------



## jim lyon

Barry said:


> Hey Jim, do you produce comb honey? If so, has it ever been tested? I know this is a bit off the OP, but I'd like to get some real data regarding chems in wax foundation, especially foundation for comb honey. I'd do some comb honey again if I felt the wax was in fact 'clean'.


No I don't. Yeah I would love to see some of that data as well particularly since there is the perception by many that comb honey is the purest of all honey products. I can say that no residues (that means 0 ppb) of any mite treatment chemicals have shown up in my recent honey tests. We haven't used any such hard chemicals in about seven years. Mark has a good suggestion there.


----------



## sqkcrk

Solomon Parker said:


> What makes you think he isn't? It seems to me I have far more evidence to work from than you. It seems your criticism is based purely on speculation about something you heard third hand.


Did I say he wasn't? Remind me. I asked questions. I didn't make statements about anyone elses specific cercumstances. If you find questions asked as criticism I don't know what to say.

Testimony is evidence? You know better than that. I probably wouyld have believed your friend Jesse too, if I knew him and his relation to the beekeeper.


----------



## cerezha

sqkcrk said:


> ... By simply labeling the jars HONEY, am I lying by omission?


Mark, I do not know if not disclosing known information, which potentially may be beneficial to people is considered to be a lie? probably not (in US) since corporations do it all time. But it sounds not right to me. It's like doctor who do find a problem in your body and did not tell you because you did not ask... I think, it is in the area of decency... everyone decided for him/herself... I did not mean you personally, I am speaking in general and as you know - I do like your label! But,see, there is the trend - people are more and more aware of presence of bad chemicals/etc in the product. It creates a pressure to the manufacturer to disclose what is in the product. For instance in milk industry, now, many companies disclose that they do not use growth hormone, similarly, many disclose if they use corn syrup... If company disclose some useful information, why it is bad? I think, trend would be, that customers would like to know more details about the content of the products they consume. Smart companies, who noticed the trend and adjusted in time would benefit from it. Example - "organic" food - people agree to pay twice for "organic" carrot! Similarly,I am sure,there are bunch of people who would be happy to pay premium price for trusted "treatment-free" honey. Sergey


----------



## Haraga

I have some treatment free honey. How much do you want to pay per pound?


----------



## tMcf

BareHoney said:


> Do you produce more treatment free honey than you can sell? If so, we are looking to buy barrels. Please send a message if you are interested in selling?


BareHoney, Tim McFarline of McFarline Apiaries here. I use no treatments on my bees. However I bottled all my honey as it is raw and has crystalized. I have 25lb buckets, 3lb jars and 1lb jars. My phone # is 802 558 5382. I live in Vermont/ I sell my honey to stores at $5 / lb


----------

