# eczema and honey



## carbide (Nov 21, 2004)

I've been getting eczema in the fall for the last 4 or 5 years. My dermatologist originally prescribed steroids, unfortunately I am diabetic and after two pills my sugar level was dangerously high and I had to go to the ER to get it to come down. After that episode he suggested that I go to a tanning booth and try tanning. I have since gone to the tanning booth two or three times a week when the eczema starts in November. By late March the problem is usually gone. Two or three tanning sessions a week allows me to sleep at night and keeps me from scratching my skin off.

Since I am a regular customer I normally purchase the six months of unlimited tanning for $200. Otherwise I would have to go to the dermatologist'S office and pay a $15 co-payment for every trip.


----------



## deejaycee (Apr 30, 2008)

I've gotta say, sun exposure is the absolute best thing for mine, too. 

I've had it all my life.. in adulthood primarily on my hands, but odd patches elsewhere. At present all of my fingers and one thumb are quite affected - swollen, sensitive and some weeping where I've not been able to resist abrading it. 

Honey.. sad to say.. is about my worst nightmare. Worse than getting acidic fruit juice in the skin breaks, and can start a systemic reaction that will see me scratching everywhere and shaking, and sticking my hands in the freezer to try and stop the pain. 

(and yes - I'm the primary hands-on beekeeper in the family... but I work with gloves at all times to avoid contact with the honey more than the stings). 

Just be aware that honey might not be the magic cure-all, and if she shows any negative reaction to the honey - any increase in itching or pain, get it off straight away and don't assume it's a case of 'getting used to it'.


----------



## woodguyrob (Jul 29, 2010)

Just curious if sun helps, do you think there is a correlation to vitamin D?


----------



## deejaycee (Apr 30, 2008)

woodguyrob said:


> Just curious if sun helps, do you think there is a correlation to vitamin D?


I have wondered that, though I'm in a temperate climate year round and D-deficiency is only rarely seen here in women in cultures that wear full body/face covering clothes.

Maybe there's something in my physiology that just needs a bit extra?


----------



## Jonhuang (Feb 12, 2012)

Remember that honey can be dangerous for infants under 12 months of age. A 2-year-old is probably fine, but you might want to do some research before feeding a lot of honey.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Remember that honey can be dangerous for infants under 12 months of age.

I'm not recommending feeding honey to infants, but I don't buy that number at all. Six months might be reasonable, (or any baby not on solid food) but most of the world has put honey in infant formula for most of time (including now for a lot of the world and as recently as the 60's in the US) with no noticeable problems. I don't know of a single case of botulism (the only concern) that has been definitively linked to an infant eating honey. The spores are everywhere and any raw food might contain them and the dust on the floor contains them in higher numbers than honey might.

That said, I assumed she was talking about applying the honey topically... perhaps I was mistaken?


----------



## summer1052 (Oct 21, 2007)

I have anecdotal evidence to offer:

I sold several jars of honey to a family at my daughters' school. They were specifically interested in using it to cope with hayfever allergies. Their youngest daughter has them, and struggles with eczema as well. They reported to me, delightedly, that her eczema had totally cleared up, and her hayfever improved when she started eating 1-2 Tablespoons of honey daily. They honey was used INTERNALLY, not externally. Now, what other treatments or strategies they may have been using besides honey are unknown to me. But when they bought more honey, THEY believed it to be helping her cope.

Michael Bush is correct. The warning about feeding honey to infants is due to the fact that (theoretically) honey is an un-pasteurized product, and therefore *could* contain botulism spores (which are present everywhere), which *could* infect and infant, whose digestive tract has not yet had time to build immunities to botulism. Since the law was passed requiring honey labels to carry that warning (some 75 years or so, I believe) there has not been a single recorded case of botulism poisoning attributed to honey.

I am unaware of other cases of eczema being helped by honey, but I haven't looked for them, either. I can only tell you that Heidi's happy Mom plans to keep feeding her honey on a daily basis, and is relieved to be able to cut back and discontinue steroid treatments, which she was NOT happy about.

*Summer*


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

summer1052 said:


> Since the law was passed requiring honey labels to carry that warning (some 75 years or so, I believe) there has not been a single recorded case of botulism poisoning attributed to honey.
> 
> .
> 
> *Summer*


Has there ever been a recorded (Proven) case of botulism in infants caused by honey?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Since the law was passed requiring honey labels to carry that warning (some 75 years or so, I believe)

I am not aware of any law about warning labels and I know people were still putting honey in the infant formula when I was a kid and it was still fairly common in up into the 1970's. Does anyone know of a law requiring warning labels?

The thing that is bugging me lately is that it used to say "under six months" which was a reasonable thing since a child under that age is susceptible to botulism and honey is one source of raw food that in theory could contain botulism (no more so than any other raw food, but it is in that category of "raw food"). But then "just to be on the safe side" people started saying a year. Then they started saying a year and a half and then two years. If you are feeding a child raw food, they are already getting exposed and honey is no different. Not to mention it's in the dirt and kids eat a lot of dirt... but my frustration is that this makes honey look unsafe, when it is no more unsafe than raw carrots, and this "inflation" from six moths up to 2 years makes no sense. The next thing you know people will be saying no one should eat honey until they are 60 years old, after all why take the risk?


----------



## summer1052 (Oct 21, 2007)

Try this:
http://www.libraries.psu.edu/dam/ps...fant Botulism Is There A Honey Connection.pdf

Now I can't find the specific reference I found before. Those more efficient at searching government regs and scientific journals might have better luck. I think the original statue goes back to the 1920s or so.

According to all the standards of the USDA and FDA, Honey is GRAS. Generally Regarded As Safe. But there is a TON of misinformation out there about it. There are a few cases of botulism with honey being IMPLICATED as a source, but none CONFIRMED that I could find. In several instances, it was implicated because it was one of the ingredients in something that caused botulism.

The spores are present everywhere - in dirt, on surfaces, etc. But by the time we've reached a year or so old, we have picked up enough spores to have developed immunities. Infants haven't. You're more likely to get botulism from improperly prepared home canned goods than honey.

I'm a lot more worried about the stuff in imported honey than I am about a botulism spore.

I'll end with a quote from Robert A. Heinlein here, as it seems appropriate.
"I shot an error in the air. It's still flying -- everywhere!"

*Summer*


----------

