Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Beekeepers halt honey awards over fraud in global supply chain

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 241 posts

Re: Beekeepers halt honey awards over fraud in global supply chain

#171

Post by DennisP »

bluGill wrote: post #131
domofutu wrote: post #127

Blockchain could track honey from hive to jar, busting fraud with transparent supply chains & smart contracts.

Why do you need a blockchain? A regular database can do that as well, and they use a lot less energy.

Fwiw, the second-largest blockchain barely uses any energy. The real problem is that it's still not scalable enough for something like this, but it's improving pretty rapidly.

As for why blockchain: if you did this on a regular database, you'd be trusting a third party to run that database. Businesses tend not to like that, because sooner or later it gets hard to switch away and the third party starts charging a lot more money.

Re: Beekeepers halt honey awards over fraud in global supply chain

#172

Post by scheme271 »

7thpower wrote: post #68
yumraj wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We buy from Costco and most/all of it crystallizes after some time. Not sure if that makes it good honey, but there’s that.

The first thing that popped into my head after reading this was the large container of Kirkland honey I have. I thought: “Costco wouldn’t lie to me? Would they?” Now I must go and find out.

Costco apparently sells one of the few olive oils that aren't adulterated. So their honey might also be real.

Re: Beekeepers halt honey awards over fraud in global supply chain

#173

Post by Spivak »

Etheryte wrote: post #10

Here's a very straightforward guide to buying honey. If you see honey at a supermarket, no you don't, that's sugar syrup. If you see honey online, no you don't, that's sugar syrup. If you find an old dude with a small stand and a bunch of (most likely unlabelled) jars who only accepts cash, that's where you get real honey.

On the complete opposite end, if you go to a supermassive grocery store and buy their store brand then you'll be getting real honey simply because they have deep pockets and a massive target on their backs if they're committing fraud.

Re: Beekeepers halt honey awards over fraud in global supply chain

#174

Post by refurb »

Aurornis wrote: post #64
Michelangelo11 wrote: post #5

Feels like wherever you turn, you see a high-trust society disintegrating into a low-trust one.

Actually I think the opposite is true in many cases. Food quality and safety standards are higher than ever. This stuff sticks out because it’s getting caught and called out. There was a time when information spread slowly, tracking supply chains was basically impossible, and many businesses would do shady things because they knew they were unlikely to get caught. Now we can sample things like honey with lab equipmen…

Very true.

I lived in a developing country in Asia and the number of food safety concerns that popped up was far, far lower than what you see in the West.

When another foreigner mentioned how "safe" the food was, I said "yeah, concerns don't pop up because nobody is looking for them".

Re: Beekeepers halt honey awards over fraud in global supply chain

#175

Post by 0xEF »

jart wrote: post #79
Etheryte wrote: post #10

Here's a very straightforward guide to buying honey. If you see honey at a supermarket, no you don't, that's sugar syrup. If you see honey online, no you don't, that's sugar syrup. If you find an old dude with a small stand and a bunch of (most likely unlabelled) jars who only accepts cash, that's where you get real honey.

But all the honey labels say the only ingredient is honey. We've always been able to assume that with things like jams, or any other food, when manufacturers adulterate it with things like corn syrup, or even mild poisons, they proudly say so on the label. To not do so is fraud. How can people just claim that an entire industry is committing fraud??? Even this article doesn't mention anything about proof, just suspic…

Wait til you hear about maple syrup...

That aside, yeah, this is a real problem with honey (and maple syrup) in the US. Food manufacturers will go to insane lengths to get around any laws that protect product purity and honest labeling because the profits are far greater than the fine for breaking the rules.

As we all know, if the punishment is a fine, it's only illegal for companies that cannot afford to pay...like the guy at the farmer's market with the mason jars.

Re: Beekeepers halt honey awards over fraud in global supply chain

#176

Post by Aurornis »

Retric wrote: post #140
Aurornis wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually I think the opposite is true in many cases. Food quality and safety standards are higher than ever. This stuff sticks out because it’s getting caught and called out. There was a time when information spread slowly, tracking supply chains was basically impossible, and many businesses would do shady things because they knew they were unlikely to get caught. Now we can sample things like honey with lab equipmen…

It’s high trust in very specific ways. Walk into a supermarket and a box of X name brand whatever and it’s 99.99% guaranteed to be manufactured by the company it says on the box and be safe to consume no need for holographic stickers or whatnot. However, pick up a high value product and it’s likely to be some effectively identical fake while still being sold by the company it says on the box. An expensive restaurant…

> However, pick up a high value product and it’s likely to be some effectively identical fake while still being sold by the company it says on the box.

What is this supposed to mean? Every high value product I purchase is definitely unique to the company that makes it. My laptop, GPU, car, and phone are definitely not some rebranded items.

Re: Beekeepers halt honey awards over fraud in global supply chain

#177

Post by Aurornis »

refurb wrote: post #174
Aurornis wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually I think the opposite is true in many cases. Food quality and safety standards are higher than ever. This stuff sticks out because it’s getting caught and called out. There was a time when information spread slowly, tracking supply chains was basically impossible, and many businesses would do shady things because they knew they were unlikely to get caught. Now we can sample things like honey with lab equipmen…

Very true. I lived in a developing country in Asia and the number of food safety concerns that popped up was far, far lower than what you see in the West. When another foreigner mentioned how "safe" the food was, I said "yeah, concerns don't pop up because nobody is looking for them".

It’s fascinating how the 24/7 news cycle and social media have convinced so many people that everything is awful.

I still hear younger coworkers snidely remark that the US is an “third world country with cellphones” while they live a lifestyle with safety, comfort, and luxury that puts them in the top 1% of people in the world. It’s wild.

Re: Beekeepers halt honey awards over fraud in global supply chain

#178

Post by rrr_oh_man »

tucosan wrote: post #160
nativeit wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean, something like this? > Forty-eight articles published in 42 different journals were analyzed, with a total of 3655 subjects with 29.51 ± 21.51 years of age, of whom 1990 consumed or were treated with honey. Of the 3655 subjects, at least 1803 were women (two studies did not specify). The studies included different population groups (healthy subjects, overweight or obese subjects, diabetic subjects, subjects…

How do they know the study participants consumed honey and not corn syrup?

How do they know 1803 study participants were women?

Re: Beekeepers halt honey awards over fraud in global supply chain

#179

Post by Retric »

Aurornis wrote: post #176
Retric wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s high trust in very specific ways. Walk into a supermarket and a box of X name brand whatever and it’s 99.99% guaranteed to be manufactured by the company it says on the box and be safe to consume no need for holographic stickers or whatnot. However, pick up a high value product and it’s likely to be some effectively identical fake while still being sold by the company it says on the box. An expensive restaurant…

> However, pick up a high value product and it’s likely to be some effectively identical fake while still being sold by the company it says on the box. What is this supposed to mean? Every high value product I purchase is definitely unique to the company that makes it. My laptop, GPU, car, and phone are definitely not some rebranded items.

It’s hard to sell a counterfeit car or GPU without someone noticing a difference.

Clothes, chargers, cables, etc are counterfeit because it isn’t nearly as obvious.

Name brand foods often come with significant markups and would be fairly easy to counterfeit premium bottled water etc. Except as the article mentions food substitutes generally happen earlier in the supply chain not at the grocery store.

Re: Beekeepers halt honey awards over fraud in global supply chain

#180

Post by Dylan16807 »

fsckboy wrote: post #100
crazygringo wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> honey is just sugar syrup That's factually incorrect. First of all, obviously it has tons of extra flavor, which indicates a whole range of additional chemical compounds. > But that's what the honey cult is, homeopathic. Honey has scientifically proven antibiotic properties [1]. > adulterated honey is difficult to detect I don't know what you mean by "difficult", but it can certainly be detected [2]. And it can be…

when people are sloppy with language, they're probably sloppy with the science too. > But it does have a lot of additional chemical compounds in it if a jar of honey had one sloughed off cell from the colon of a honeybee, it would have "a lot of additional chemical compounds in it" because there are a lot of chemical compounds in a single cell. As a percentage of a jar of honey it's trace amounts. Govt standards for…

> One piece of conclusive evidence we have is that it is extremely difficult for scientists to tell the difference between authentic and adulterated honey, and it requires extreme measures not generally taken for foodstuffs, measures never said to be indicative of nutritional value.

It's hard to tell the difference because natural flavors vary so much.

If you give me two jars of honey and tell me one is the original and one has either 0% or 25% or 50% sugar water mixed in, I can run a taste test and figure out the answer. But if you only give me one jar, it's not easy to figure out if weak flavor means adulteration or a bad season.

In other words: Even if I can't figure out if a specific batch was adulterated, the adulteration is making a significant difference. There's a lot coming from the flowers other than raw sugar.

Post reply on HN