Total Pageviews

Saturday 20 August 2011

Honey laundering: tainted and counterfeit Chinese honey floods into the U.S.


FOOD SAFETY

Honey laundering: tainted and counterfeit Chinese honey floods into the U.S.

 13
Grist admin avatar badgeavatar for Tom Laskawy
honeyMo' honey, mo' problems.Photo: Kathryn Harper


If it's possible to write a blockbuster story about honey, Food Safety News has done it:


A third or more of all the honey consumed in the U.S. is likely to have been smuggled in from China and may be tainted with illegal antibiotics and heavy metals.

A Food Safety News investigation has documented that millions of pounds of honey banned as unsafe in dozens of countries are being imported and sold here in record quantities. ...
Experts interviewed by Food Safety News say some of the largest and most long-established U.S. honey packers are knowingly buying mislabeled, transshipped or possibly altered honey so they can sell it cheaper than those companies who demand safety, quality and rigorously inspected honey.
This is a serious issue because China has a monumental problem with its honey industry. A bee epidemic in China several years ago led beekeepers there to use an antibiotic that the U.S. FDA has banned in food and that has been linked to DNA damage in children. And as FSN observes, though China has a state-of-the-art honey processing industry, its beekeeping has not kept up -- resulting, for example, in some Chinese honey being contaminated with lead from the use of improper storage containers.
Even worse, Chinese honey brokers have been known to create counterfeit product made of "a mix of sugar water, malt sweeteners, corn or rice syrup, jaggery [a type of unrefined sugar], barley malt sweetener or other additives with a bit of actual honey." A label is slapped on the container and the adulterated honey is shipped through another country -- for the most part, India -- before finally making its way to the US.
Much of this came out two years ago during a major government investigation into "honey laundering" (that's when I first heard the term). But the resulting arrests didn't do much to halt the illegal activities.
For all of the above reasons, honey from India is already banned in the European Union, and it's supposed to be illegal to import food into the U.S. that's been banned in other countries. 
However, the FDA response has been muted. A representative told FSN that the agency "would not know about honey that has been banned from other countries," but experts and other federal agencies believe that's because the FDA refuses to look. Indeed, the FDA appears to have adopted the policy the Pentagon just dropped: Don't ask, don't tell.
And it's not just outside experts who are alarmed at FDA's lackadaisical approach to honey laundering. FDA is supposed to be working with U.S. Customs officials to crack down on this practice. Yet, according to FSN, Customs investigators claim that:
... the cooperation is more on paper than in practice and that the FDA continues to be the weak link. They say the FDA either doesn't have the resources to properly do the job or is unwilling to commit them.
ICE and the border patrol can and do go after the honey launderers by enforcing the anti-dumping and tariff violation laws. But protecting consumers from dangerous honey, identifying it as adulterated and therefore illegal for importation, falls to the FDA. And many of its enforcement colleagues say the food safety agency doesn't see this as a priority.
There's much more to the story, so I highly recommend reading FSN's deep dive in full.
But this article raises major questions for me about the role of U.S. honey packers and distributors. Why don't they care more? Domestic honey production only meets about half of U.S. consumer demand, so it's clear they feel the pressure to find honey somewhere. But at a certain point, you have a moral obligation to the consumer that should trump the profit motive.
"Everyone in the industry knows" about the illegal smuggling, says one industry insider. He claims that four or five of the 12 major U.S. honey packers are responsible for most of the illegal purchases. It's no surprise, then, that executives from those companies refused to comment on the story. Clearly, they are unable to ensure the quality and purity of the product they are selling. What else is there to say?
What's most concerning is that consumers are limited in their ability to avoid tainted honey, since 65 percent of honey sold in the U.S. goes into processed food. So certainly, you should buy local honey from small producers you trust. And if you can't find good honey, don't buy what's on supermarket shelves. But we're also at the mercy of food processors' willingness to ensure the ingredients they put into their products are pure.
The U.S. government could act aggressively to stop honey laundering, as the E.U. already has. But that kind of action could throw the U.S. food processing industry into turmoil. No matter the risks, the feds don't generally consider that an option. So, unless the FDA displays a sudden willingness to trade wrist slaps for perp walks when it comes to food company executives, honey laundering appears here to stay. The FDA did not respond to our requests for further comment.
When I wrote about this two years ago, I said, "This story is really about a food system that's diffuse, international, and impossible to regulate -- in other words, broken." It's still all too true.
Tom covers food and agricultural policy for Grist. Follow him on Twitter.

related stories

Comments

avatar for Brian Cummiskey

Brian Cummiskey

It's sad that you can't even trust going to the grocey store without risk of lead, or e.coli, or some other buboic plague infested food item possibly being in your cart.
On the other hand, it's good, because it's been giving way the push back to buying locally, growing gardens, supporting local farmers markets, and a reduction in waste as a byproduct (shipping, packaging, etc etc)
    avatar for Pangolin

    Pangolin

    @Brian Cummiskey Actually you have to look at the stuff at the farmer's market with as much of a suspicious eye as the stuff at the store. More than a few farmer's market vendors have been caught loading up on produce at the regional wholesale market and then repacking it and falsely labeling it as "organic." This goes for spice mixes, baked goods and yes honey. I saw one guy locally selling sorghum syrup as "oak honey" which is pure fiction since oaks are wind pollinated and don't produce nectar. 

    If the stuff at the farmers market looks exactly like the stuff at the supermarket it probably came from that same source; big agriculture. Know your farmers and if a farmer won't let you visit their farm don't buy from them.
      avatar for jeik

      jeik

      @Pangolin

      Certainly there are trust issues with local producers, but real honey tastes like real honey. Honey from the grocery store tastes uniformly bland, and you certainly can't taste trace amounts of lead and antibiotics.

      I get my honey from a family friend who invited us to see her hives. Her motto is, literally on her jars, "If you don't know your beekeeper, how do you know it's real honey?" My answer--because it tastes phenomenal!
        avatar for nativerportlander

        nativerportlander

        So why can't company names EVER be named? How can we have an informed "free market" where the customers (or 'consumers', if you must) can actually choose a product based on more than its name and its package? We are constantly fed doom and corruption about one can't-live-without industry after another but never the names of those companies. The result? Apathy, not action.
          avatar for fagandvm

          fagandvm

          @nativerportlander
          That was my first thought as well. If these accusations are substantiated, then NAME the offending companies and any processors they sell to so consumer and/or shareholder action can actually effect change.
            avatar for charina2

            charina2

            @fagandvm
            I would assume that Grist and other publications don't name names ofter so that they are less of a litigation target for industries that want to claim defamation, ala Oprah and the Texas cattlemen lawsuit. I would like to see more names named, but if a publication names a business that is innocent or the claims are unprovable, the publication can lose it's shirt.
              avatar for Joseph B. Barrett

              Joseph B. Barrett

              Tom, Great story. Hard hitting. For another food chain related topic, please consider doing one on the effects of the ice boom on the Lower Great Lakes. It's huge and only getting bigger. Visit my site, www.bantheboom.com for the details. You could knock this out of the park. Joe Barrett
                avatar for FixedGearRick

                FixedGearRick

                The FDA or any credible independent lab should do testing on major brands of honey. The brands that have anything other than honey should be listed for the public to see. They'll probably come up with some lame excuse to pass the responsibility to someone else, but the truth is the truth.
                Sometimes I wish I was rich enough to do this stuff myself and start bowing whistles. I'd probably end up "having an accident".
                  avatar for gropp

                  gropp

                  Excellent story and yet another reason why we should purchase only local product.
                    avatar for Clifford Wells

                    Clifford Wells

                    I guess it is to be expected these days, a reason we use Agave nectar quite a bit, and buy only local honey from a known beekeeper. The wild weather, rampant development, Africanized bees, colony collapse disorder, and an aging group of elderly honey processors sent US production way down. The crop bee contractors would fertilize fields from Texas up into Canada and the bees all had to be killed before coming back into the US - any honey was dumped. One old boy sold me 10 gallons of honey cheap (I was a brewer and interested in mead) because it wasn't "grade A" and he said he was getting out of the business for good. This is a common story and while extremely anecdotal, I don't doubt the importance or the trend.
                      avatar for KLake

                      KLake

                      @Clifford Wells
                      Sorry to stir the pot, I have recently been reading about Agave nectar and how it has become highly processed (in a method similar to the production of high fructose corn syrup, of all things). Has anyone else been reading about this lately? Is Agave just another industry/advertising phenomenon that is overhyped?

                      I do appreciate that it has a low glycemic index, perhaps it is a good choice for diabetics- but for the rest of us... are we being duped?
                        avatar for Clifford Wells

                        Clifford Wells

                        @KLake

                        Hey you got me there - I thought it was just squeezings from a cactus-like plant we have growing down by the border and Mexico here. It turns out that like most, I was duped! It's sad because I had a giant green agave and a century plant, was really was able to extract "nectar" from the blooming stalk (I had visions of tequila and ended up with horrible tasting beer). That was remarkable because the stalk could grow 1-2 feet per day ... but back to this highly refined fructose crap ... thanks for letting me know.

                          No comments:

                          Post a Comment