• chuckleslord@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Couple of reasons. One, honey is made not from local pollinators but from European honey bees. Two, European honey bees are really good at producing honey, which means they’re more efficient at removing pollen and nectar from flowers, denying food for native pollinators. Three, while only a few bees are directly harmed during honey harvesting, the need for their honey to be harvested means that they’ve been bred to make big, uniform honeycombs and a glut of excess honey. This makes them more susceptible to diseases, even before you factor in the monoculture nature of their existence.

    Essentially, it’s not that eating honey is harmful to bees. It’s that the creation of honey at scale is cruel both to the bees producing the honey and the native pollinators who get pushed out by them. We (my household) do have honey on occasion, but only from local, small scale honey producers.

        • blaue_Fledermaus@mstdn.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          Depends on the species, but in general the honeys have variation in the nutrients, some considered even more medicinal than that of European Honey Bees.
          They usually also have more water content, so unlike “regular” honey, they can more easily spoil.

      • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        Probably yeah. But also the European honeybee is not the only European bee nor pollinator so the argument holds true to some extent.

        However I’m not convinced the impact is worse than the monocultures which makes up the majority of our calorie intake. Thousands of hectares of nothing but beets or corn probably does more for killing insect diversity than a handful of beehives, but what do I know.