# Glycophosphate in honey



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

Quantified by Elisa testing... I think that's an oxymoron.


----------



## rolftonbees (Jul 10, 2014)

I saw no mention of Elisa Testing in the article linked to. Perhaps it is mentioned in the referenced sources.

The article linked to mixes apples and oranges. The writer goes off on a tangent about pesticides beekeepers use to control mites, and potential pesticides in foundation wax, which is not very related to herbacides being found in honey. Especially given that organic honey producers would be using foundationless most of the time anyway.


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

ljbee said:


> I came across this article while researching BT contamination in honey.
> 
> http://www.naturalnews.com/048661_honey_glyphosates_Roundup.html
> 
> ...


Natural News and Facebook do not = "research"

What are the _minimum established limits_ for glyphosate in honey? When were they set and by whom? As far as I know, there are none. 

The original paper found here: http://www.omicsonline.org/open-acc...-soy-products-2161-0525.1000249.php?aid=36354
says that 

_Glyphosate analysis in environmental and biological matrices is problematic because of its small molecular size and structural similarity to many naturally occurring plant materials such as amino acids and secondary plant compounds. It is highly soluble in water, thereby making its extraction with solvents difficult and matrix effects highly prevalent. As a result, glyphosate isolation and quantification has posed a challenge to the analytical chemist. Numerous analytical procedures have been published in the literature for the detection of this highly polar and amphoteric molecule [17], including gas chromatography (GC), high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and capillary electrophoresis (CE), often coupled with mass spectrometry (MS). The co-contaminants in environmental and biological matrixes render instrumental analysis costly and time-consuming. ELISA determination, however, has allowed for the rapid, selective and sensitive determination of glyphosate_

That paragraph is complete nonsense. Nobody uses immunoassay for glyphosate analysis when EPA Standard Method 547 has been around for over 25 years. Oh wait, they used ELISA methods because EPA Standard Methods are _costly and time consuming_. :lpf::lpf:

http://www.caslab.com/EPA-Method-547/


----------



## ljbee (Apr 27, 2015)

Seems like there's some sacred cows that can't be discussed here without ridicule.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Tried to read the origional link but it popped dodgy looking adverts all over my screen.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Can anyone link this Boston University study?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

See the link _Nabber86_ provided in post #4. Here it is again:
http://www.omicsonline.org/open-acc...-soy-products-2161-0525.1000249.php?aid=36354


As far as 'who is Abraxis LLC', they are a testing outfit. Here is their website: http://www.abraxiskits.com/


----------



## ljbee (Apr 27, 2015)

I guess this is a load of BS too

http://naturalsociety.com/us-fda-shamed-testing-glyphosate-in-food-63513/


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

I'm not saying it's not BS, but it's nothing really noteworthy. GMO soy is sprayed with round-up, are you surprised it shows up in soy products? On the ELISA thing, it may be a good test for identifying absence or presence, but Elisa's are very subjective when actually quantifying anything. The other question is, why is glyphosate showing up in all this honey, if in fact this 'study' is accurate and why do you see it published under these very agenda based sites only with no real scientific review? I quote Abraham Lincoln on this subject, "Just because you read it on the internet doesn't mean it's true."


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

:lpf:


ljbee said:


> I guess this is a load of BS too
> 
> http://naturalsociety.com/us-fda-shamed-testing-glyphosate-in-food-63513/



Yes it is a load of BS. It is a blog. So this is where you are getting your "research"?

EDIT: Here is the bio of the blogger providing the "research":

Christina Sarich is a humanitarian and freelance writer helping you to Wake up Your Sleepy Little Head, and See the Big Picture. Her blog is Yoga for the New World. Her latest book is Pharma Sutra: Healing the Body And Mind Through the Art of Yoga. 

What a joke! :lpf::lpf:


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

JRG13 said:


> I'm not saying it's not BS, but it's nothing really noteworthy. GMO soy is sprayed with round-up, are you surprised it shows up in soy products? On the ELISA thing, it may be a good test for identifying absence or presence, but Elisa's are very subjective when actually quantifying anything. The other question is, why is glyphosate showing up in all this honey, if in fact this 'study' is accurate and why do you see it published under these very agenda based sites only with no real scientific review? I quote Abraham Lincoln on this subject, "Just because you read it on the internet doesn't mean it's true."


ELISA is nothing more than a screening level tool. I spent a lot of time and money convincing the state of Kansas to let us use immunoassay as a field screen for volatile organic solvents (PCE and TCE). They finally agreed but requested split samples be sent to a lab for 8260 analysis (Standard EPA Method Volatile Organic Compounds by GC/MS). There was absolutely no correlation between the 2 sets of data; none whatsoever. We then spent the next 6 months trying to explain why the results of the 2 methods were different.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Bring your sacred cows and they will be discussed! You might not agree with the pedigree they are assigned though.


----------



## Brad Bee (Apr 15, 2013)

They lost me at organic honey. Since there are no government standards set for "Organic" honey.

Nobody found it interesting that a bee will bring in 250 lbs of nectar a year? I mean it said so, right'chere on the Interwebs so it must be true. If one bee brings in 250 lbs of nectar per year, and if 1/2 of 1% of that nectar is reduced to honey, then a standard hive should make about 5,000 lbs of surplus honey per year.

I must have some lazy bees. I'm running below that average for a honey crop per hive.


----------



## jdmidwest (Jul 9, 2012)

Does it have any mixing directions for spraying weeds anywhere?

If the honey contains glycophosphate, can it be reprocessed as an organic weed killer?


----------



## Bdfarmer555 (Oct 7, 2015)

May just be a typo, but roundup is glyphosate, not sure what glycophosphate is...sounds like a fertilizer. 
And I thought for honey to be organic, it had to be in an area where bees couldn't fly to areas that were treated with chemicals or fertilizers. If so, where did they get the glyphosate or glycophosphate? Not trolling, seriously asking.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Several possible answers to that. One, believe it or not, is sample contamination. Some years ago research was done to find out contamination levels in beeswax caused by chemical mite treatments. Weird thing, when they tested the wax from treatment free hives, fluvenate and other mite treatment chemicals were found, despite that they had never been used in the hives. How could this be? Debate and various explanations raged for some time, till it was found that good cleanliness procedures had not been followed and the contamination was most likely caused by the treatment free wax being processed in the same equipment used for the wax from treated hives.


----------



## rolftonbees (Jul 10, 2014)

It's my understanding that glycophosphate is a chemical thst is know generically as glysophate, and is brsnded as roundup as well as other things.


----------



## aunt betty (May 4, 2015)

So this is a thread about link to a blogger who writes about typophosphate?


----------

