For those of you who know me well you know that I do not enjoy the “news”. I do understand its place in life and find it necessary to keep up on. One of my goals is to get the news out to our members before it has become history. It is important for all of us to read the articles and then take the time to investigate them to determine their accuracy.
Recently, the ABF sent out a couple of news releases that brought questions to many of us. One was the report released by the FDA: “FY22/23 Sample Collection and Analysis of Imported Honey for Economically Motivated Adulteration”. Economically motivated adulteration is the term used by the FDA for food fraud. While I support and encourage FDAs interest to combat food fraud, this article stirred many questions in the industry. The methodology was one. Why was the use of Stable Carbon Isotope Ration Analysis (SCIRA) used as the only test? Please find a report from Dr. Jeff Pettis on honey testing methods to food fraud below. You will notice that Dr. Jeff Pettis reminds us that SCIRA is more or less obsolete, as most adulteration with syrups no longer involves corn or cane sugar derived syrup.
It is important for all of us to work together to help our industry stay strong. We need to establish a strong standard of identity for honey and labeling laws that include the country of origin. Honey fraud has a significant impact on US beekeepers as it contributes to the lower wholesale honey prices we deal with so often.
This is one of the top issues that the ABF leadership takes to leaders in Washington. Alongside our lobbyist, Fran Boyd, and our Legislative Committee, we continue to talk to our elected leaders about the importance of combating honey fraud in the United States. A few of the other key issues ABF will take to Washington in the upcoming months include the Farm Bill, securing an increase in funding support for our research labs, securing the position of USDA Departmental Honey Bee and Pollinator Research Coordinator, public land access and habitat for honey bees, our concerns for the health of the honey bee industry and possible new threats to us.
We continue to need your support in advocating for our industry with your elected officials. Contact myself or Debbie Seib, Legislative Chair, with any questions you may have about ABF’s positions on these important issues.
Detection of Honey Fraud: Honey fraud is an ongoing issue worldwide and many tests are available to try and detect fraud, but no single test alone is sufficient. A combination of two or more tests are needed and even then, no amount of testing will always detect all fraud. This does not mean we should not demand testing by importers and customs agencies. The threat of testing and the rejection of honey found to be fraudulent will help to improve the honey market and help protect the public opinion of honey as a pure, natural product. Four tests are outlined below and any combination of two or more of tests 2-4 tests will help fight honey fraud. The first method listed is more or less obsolete as most adulteration with syrups no longer involves corn or cane sugar derived syrup. The descriptions below are from the National Honey Board FAQs on honey fraud. Table 4 of this document shows the various strengths and weaknesses of each of these tests. In order of importance test # 4, HRMS should be used coupled with #3 NMR.
If honey is found to be not pure or adulterated, it should be destroyed. Destruction of the honey will serve to deter future fraud but also prevent the fraudulent honey from being reclassified or re-labeled, which is a very common means to try and re-market fraudulent honey.
- 13C Stable Carbon Isotope Ratio Method (SCIRA) or EA/IRMS. Limit of C4 Syrup Detection 7% Originally developed in the 1970’s and the only AOAC Official method – 998.12 C4 Plant Sugars in Honey. This method can detect only corn or sugar cane derived syrups (C4 sugars), it cannot detect syrups made from beets, rice, wheat or other plants (C3 sugars).
- 13C Stable Carbon Isotope Ratio Method paired with a Liquid Chromatograph or EA/LC-IRMS. Limit of Syrup Detection 3-5% C4, 10-30%* C3 Developed in 2008, this method is also good for directly determining adulteration with C4 sugar syrups; but can also indirectly detect adulteration with C3 sugar syrups, though with less sensitivity than for C4. *(some custom C3 syrups are undetectable by this method).
- Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Profiling or NMR. Limit of Syrup Detection 10-40%. This is a rapid screening method designed to test for both known and unknown syrups, as well as to detect prohibited processing methods and other potential manipulations of pure honey. NMR compares each sample against a database of curated pure honey samples using an array of 53 parameters to detect sugar syrups and a quantitative analysis of 36 compounds. This technique is not as sensitive as other methods, but can also be used to determine the country of origin and botanical source of honey.
- Liquid Chromatography-High Resolution Mass Spectrometry analysis or HRMS. Limit of Syrup Detection as low as 5%, similar to NMR, this method can test for both known and unknown syrups in honey, although in the case of HRMS the focus is on the identification of specific markers typical of sugar syrups. HRMS is highly sensitive, detecting very low concentrations of telltale syrup markers where they may be present in otherwise pure honey.
The numbers in 1-4 above are taken directly from the National Honey Board Frequently Asked Questions document on honey fraud. https://honey.com/images/files/NHB-Honey-Testing-FAQs.pdf
Prepared 7 March 2024 by: Dr. Jeff Pettis, Apimondia President and Pettis and Associates LLC. Salisbury MD 21801. +1 443 766 9932. pettis.jeff@gmail.com
Respectfully,
Patty Sundberg
President
