Charging apiarist too harsh: victim

Charging apiarist too harsh: victim

There are 12 comments on the Manawatu Evening Standard story from Feb 16, 2009, titled Charging apiarist too harsh: victim. In it, Manawatu Evening Standard reports that:

A victim of last year's Coromandel toxic honey scare says he is "flabbergasted" the Whangamata beekeeper involved has been charged.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Manawatu Evening Standard.

BoB

Invercargill, New Zealand

#1 Mar 23, 2009
Why the surprise that someone who by reason of ignorance or negligence has poisoned at least 22 people is then charged under the appropriate sections of the Food Act? Tutin is a potentially lethal toxin, and had anyone died from consuming the contaminated honey from Progen Apiaries, then all those involved with producing the toxic comb honey would have been facing far more serious criminal charges.

Potential tutin contamination of honey remains a serious issue for the New Zealand bee industry, and constant reminders of the threat posed by toxic honey by means of regulation and education - including prosecutions as appropriate - can only be to the good of consumers and the industry alike.'

Decent people' should never have to be exposed to the serious - or lethal - effects of tutin poisoning, and this prosecution sends a clear message to both professional and amateur beekeepers that any incidences of toxic honey poisoning will incur the appropriate penalties.

Councillor Bartley should count himself fortunate that he experienced only the mild effects of tutin poisoning - those who were hospitalised with severe vomiting and grand mal seizures will likely not share his views.
Beatlesinthebog

New Zealand

#2 Mar 24, 2009
Bee nice!
BoB

Invercargill, New Zealand

#3 Mar 24, 2009
Tutin poisoning is a serious - even lethal - business. I recommend that anyone interested in the topic read the following HortResearch report "Reducing the threat Tutu toxic Tutu honey poses to the New Zealand beekeeping industry and consumers" is essential reading:

http://www.maf.govt.nz/sff/about-projects/sea...

The effects of tutin poisoning on the human body range from unpleasant through to lethal. Nausea and vomiting followed by tremor can be observed as little as three hours after ingestion. Severe (grand mal) seizures may then occur, and in some cases death may result from respiratory arrest.

Other symptoms include tachycarcia, tachypnea, difficulty breathing, delirium, blurred vision, excitement, weakness, dizziness, amnesia, stupor and coma. Mucous membrances may become congested, increased bowel movements and urinary frequency are sometimes seen.

There is no antidote to this toxin, and the symptoms can endure for between 24 hours and 5 days.

(Communicable Disease Bulletin, No. 1, April 2008, Regional Public Health, Hutt Valley DHB, Lower Hutt).
Beatlesinthebog

New Zealand

#4 Mar 25, 2009
BoB wrote:
Tutin poisoning is a serious - even lethal - business. I recommend that anyone interested in the topic read the following HortResearch report "Reducing the threat Tutu toxic Tutu honey poses to the New Zealand beekeeping industry and consumers" is essential reading:
http://www.maf.govt.nz/sff/about-projects/sea...
The effects of tutin poisoning on the human body range from unpleasant through to lethal. Nausea and vomiting followed by tremor can be observed as little as three hours after ingestion. Severe (grand mal) seizures may then occur, and in some cases death may result from respiratory arrest.
Other symptoms include tachycarcia, tachypnea, difficulty breathing, delirium, blurred vision, excitement, weakness, dizziness, amnesia, stupor and coma. Mucous membrances may become congested, increased bowel movements and urinary frequency are sometimes seen.
There is no antidote to this toxin, and the symptoms can endure for between 24 hours and 5 days.
(Communicable Disease Bulletin, No. 1, April 2008, Regional Public Health, Hutt Valley DHB, Lower Hutt).
Darn,seem to have almost all the symptoms!

“"Never say never"”

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#5 Mar 25, 2009
Beatlesinthebog wrote:
Bee nice!
lol. Is there anything you don't find funny?:-D You must be one of those "life of the party" sort..Are you?
Beatlesinthebog

New Zealand

#6 Mar 25, 2009
fapp wrote:
<quoted text>
lol. Is there anything you don't find funny?:-D You must be one of those "life of the party" sort..Are you?
Just a drunk!
Beatlesinthebog

New Zealand

#7 Mar 25, 2009
Seriously now fapp,(love that name)don't you think that life is some form of a joke?
Are we just tractors up a giant's nostril?????

“"Never say never"”

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#8 Mar 26, 2009
Beatlesinthebog wrote:
Seriously now fapp,(love that name)don't you think that life is some form of a joke?
Are we just tractors up a giant's nostril?????
well..lol..yeah...it does seem pointless on some occasions..btw fapp= for all practical purposes
Wonder what's practical about topix though....
BoB

Invercargill, New Zealand

#9 Mar 29, 2009
Beekeeper ordered to pay victims
27 March 2009
A Whangamata beekeeper who admitted selling honeycomb that poisoned 22 people last Easter has been ordered to pay more than $3000 in reparation to victims in a case brought by the New Zealand Food Safety Authority.
Kevin Prout, of Projen Apiaries, had earlier pleaded guilty to four charges under the Food Act. Three related to the sale of contaminated honeycomb, and a fourth covered incorrect labelling of the honey, which was produced and sold on the Coromandel Peninsula.
At Waihi District Court yesterday, Prout was spared a fine for the charges relating to the sale of honeycomb, but told to pay a total of $3,350 reparation to some of the victims plus $750 in laboratory costs and $450 in solicitor's fees. He was convicted and discharged for the labelling offence.
“Some victims in this case were violently sick and taken to hospital suffering seizures. It is fortunate nobody died,” said New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) Assistant Director Compliance and Investigation Justin Rowlands.
He said the verdict was fair and reasonable:“People need to be aware that there are laws governing food businesses, which are there to protect the consumer. If people fall foul of these, they can expect to be prosecuted.”
The court heard that 22 people fell ill after eating Mr Prout’s honeycomb in March last year. NZFSA testing of the leftover honeycomb found the honey, marketed as ‘A Taste of Whangamata Pure Honey’, contained high levels of tutin.
Toxic honey is produced when bees gather honeydew excreted by vine-hopper insects that have fed on the native tutu bush. Although tutin has no ill effects on bees or vine hoppers, it is highly toxic to humans - as little as one teaspoon (10mls) of toxic honey can affect the nervous system.
Under the Food Act, all food sold to the public must be safe to eat and sellers of food must be able to show they have taken all reasonable precautions to ensure the food they sell is safe. At the time of the poisonings, beekeepers were expected to manage the risk of their honey containing tutin either by removing hives and honey frames containing honey for human consumption before the risk period, or by closely monitoring the tutu, vine-hopper and foraging conditions around their apiaries during the honey season.
The Food (Tutin in Honey) Standard 2008 that came into force in January 2009 sets a maximum level of tutin in honey sold for human consumption. It also requires beekeepers in risk areas to ensure their product is safe by complying with at least one of a number of risk management options. These include harvesting honey before the end of December, checking tutu bushes for toxic honeydew or placing hives away from tutu. Honey may also be blended and tested as an alternative.
“Beekeepers that follow the requirements of the food laws that apply to their business, and comply with the standard, are highly unlikely to sell products such as those that caused the tutin poisonings last Easter,” Mr Rowlands said.
Information about the Food (Tutin in Honey) Standard, compliance guide and laws governing bee products are available on NZFSA’s website at www.nzfsa.govt.nz/animalproducts/subject/bee-... . All registered beekeepers have been sent information on the new standard.
Ends

http://www.nzfsa.govt.nz/publications/media-r...
Beatlesinthebog

New Zealand

#10 Mar 29, 2009
fapp wrote:
<quoted text>
well..lol..yeah...it does seem pointless on some occasions..btw fapp= for all practical purposes
Wonder what's practical about topix though....
No,No,No.......never pointless!!!!!
Even if it seems like shit,with the right self-training you can find some form of humour....true!
Having seen quite a bit of death and mayhem it is very true that somewhere in amongst there can be a little (usually dark) laugh.
Except when it applies to children or animals!!!!!
The line must be drawn and adhered to!!!
The almost perfect statement is "Chopper Read's" byline, "Harden up,you bastard"
Beatlesinthebog

New Zealand

#11 Mar 29, 2009
BoB wrote:
Beekeeper ordered to pay victims
27 March 2009
A Whangamata beekeeper who admitted selling honeycomb that poisoned 22 people last Easter has been ordered to pay more than $3000 in reparation to victims in a case brought by the New Zealand Food Safety Authority.
Kevin Prout, of Projen Apiaries, had earlier pleaded guilty to four charges under the Food Act. Three related to the sale of contaminated honeycomb, and a fourth covered incorrect labelling of the honey, which was produced and sold on the Coromandel Peninsula.
At Waihi District Court yesterday, Prout was spared a fine for the charges relating to the sale of honeycomb, but told to pay a total of $3,350 reparation to some of the victims plus $750 in laboratory costs and $450 in solicitor's fees. He was convicted and discharged for the labelling offence.
“Some victims in this case were violently sick and taken to hospital suffering seizures. It is fortunate nobody died,” said New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) Assistant Director Compliance and Investigation Justin Rowlands.
He said the verdict was fair and reasonable:“People need to be aware that there are laws governing food businesses, which are there to protect the consumer. If people fall foul of these, they can expect to be prosecuted.”
The court heard that 22 people fell ill after eating Mr Prout’s honeycomb in March last year. NZFSA testing of the leftover honeycomb found the honey, marketed as ‘A Taste of Whangamata Pure Honey’, contained high levels of tutin.
Toxic honey is produced when bees gather honeydew excreted by vine-hopper insects that have fed on the native tutu bush. Although tutin has no ill effects on bees or vine hoppers, it is highly toxic to humans - as little as one teaspoon (10mls) of toxic honey can affect the nervous system.
Under the Food Act, all food sold to the public must be safe to eat and sellers of food must be able to show they have taken all reasonable precautions to ensure the food they sell is safe. At the time of the poisonings, beekeepers were expected to manage the risk of their honey containing tutin either by removing hives and honey frames containing honey for human consumption before the risk period, or by closely monitoring the tutu, vine-hopper and foraging conditions around their apiaries during the honey season.
The Food (Tutin in Honey) Standard 2008 that came into force in January 2009 sets a maximum level of tutin in honey sold for human consumption. It also requires beekeepers in risk areas to ensure their product is safe by complying with at least one of a number of risk management options. These include harvesting honey before the end of December, checking tutu bushes for toxic honeydew or placing hives away from tutu. Honey may also be blended and tested as an alternative.
“Beekeepers that follow the requirements of the food laws that apply to their business, and comply with the standard, are highly unlikely to sell products such as those that caused the tutin poisonings last Easter,” Mr Rowlands said.
Information about the Food (Tutin in Honey) Standard, compliance guide and laws governing bee products are available on NZFSA’s website at www.nzfsa.govt.nz/animalproducts/subject/bee-... . All registered beekeepers have been sent information on the new standard.
Ends
http://www.nzfsa.govt.nz/publications/media-r...
Beehave..to bee or not to bee,that is the..........
BoB

Invercargill, New Zealand

#12 Mar 29, 2009
Amongst those hospitalised in March 2008 after having consumed tutin-contaminated honey was a three year old boy. His mother described what happened thus: "His whole body was stiff and arching. His teeth were clenched so tight it took some minutes before he could relax them. I think the scariest thing was his eyes were wide open and staring and they rolled up under the lids ... then he went blue and stopped breathing."

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/328449

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Waikato, New Zealand Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
60 Ferrari gathers in Fullerton Hotel Singapore Jun '16 Peter Tan 1
News Great turnout for Volunteer and Business Expo i... Jun '16 Marlene 1
Jeet Kune Do's Wing Chun roots with Guro Dan In... (Mar '16) Mar '16 Goht Goh Yew Seng 1
News Queenstown manager quits, leaves 'ailing city' (Mar '16) Mar '16 BIA 1
News Matamata-Piako District Council flies two flags (Feb '16) Feb '16 shtrailblazer 1
News Wesley College hostel slammed by report (Oct '08) Sep '15 Andymack 39
News Female teacher fired for sex with student (Sep '15) Sep '15 hankypanky3 2
More from around the web