# Pollen Substitue Comparisons?



## Ben Brewcat (Oct 27, 2004)

The nutritional analyses are right on the packaging and in many cases on the website/in the catalog. The main difference is between the newer "scientifically formulated" products (Megabee, Bee Pro, FeedBee) and the older products that have good stuff but aren't necessarily targeted to be a complete diet. Megabee has certainly blown the bank on promoting their product (aka Tucson bee diet), and the price reflects it. Nutritionally it seems to be pretty comparable to Bee Pro. The "formulated" ones all seem to get in the same areas as bee bread, around 30-35% sugars, 4-6% lipids, 2-6% ash (minerals), and the spread of micros and aminos.

Unfortunately I think most of the studies I've seen referenced have been sponsored by the manufacturers themselves. Amazingly, each one indicates that their product will make your bees disease proof, gentle, high producers, immune to CCD, and also make your marriage happier and reduce mineral deposits in your coffeemaker. Truly incredible products .


----------



## Bean (Jun 13, 2004)

That's what I found as well - studies paid for by the manufacturer... But thank you for the response.


----------



## Ben Brewcat (Oct 27, 2004)

I note in the new ABJ that Megabee has lowered their prices "permanently". Maybe someone read this thread .


----------



## Jonathan Hofer (Aug 10, 2005)

We did a small comparative study on three different pollen supplements last year, and am repeating the study with different supplements this year. The results can be seen at:

http://www.keystonehoneyhouse.bravehost.com/Pollen_Supplement_Study.html


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

Randy Oliver has lab test chart of pollen sub done on his web site.

They are not all the same.


----------

