Our fifth round of honey testing continues to show the variability of glyphosate residues in New Zealand honey, with low levels detected in two of the five products tested.
The five samples were tested for glyphosate, AMPA and glufosinate.
Glyphosate was detected in two samples. AMPA, the main breakdown product of glyphosate, was not detected in any of the samples. Glufosinate was also not detected.
The Latest Results
| Honey Sample | Glyphosate Level |
|---|---|
| Airborne Mānuka Honey MGO 50+ Batch 261721 | 0.014 mg/kg (14.0 ppb) |
| Arataki Honey Multi-Flora with Mānuka Batch R7814 | 0.015 mg/kg (15.0 ppb) |
| Pams Mānuka Honey Multifloral Batch PMMF500600003 | <0.010 mg/kg (<10.0 ppb) |
| Arataki Honey Clover Blend Batch R7826 | <0.010 mg/kg (<10.0 ppb) |
| Arataki Honey Squeeze Me Batch R7840 | <0.010 mg/kg (<10.0 ppb) |
Testing was performed by Hill Laboratories using LC-MS/MS analysis with a glyphosate reporting limit of 0.010 mg/kg.
Results reported as <0.010 mg/kg indicate that glyphosate was not detected above the laboratory reporting limit.
Two Samples Contained Detectable Glyphosate
The two positive results were:
- Airborne Mānuka Honey MGO 50+ — 0.014 mg/kg
- Arataki Honey Multi-Flora with Mānuka — 0.015 mg/kg
These are low-level detections. Both are below New Zealand’s current Maximum Residue Limit (MRL) for glyphosate in honey of 0.1 mg/kg (100 ppb).
Maximum residue limits are the legal limits permitted for pesticide residues in food. They do not indicate that a food is free of pesticide residues; rather, they define the maximum level permitted under New Zealand’s food standards.
That means the two positive samples complied with New Zealand’s legal residue limit. But they were not glyphosate-free.
This distinction matters.
A product can comply with New Zealand’s legal residue limit and still contain a measurable amount of glyphosate.
Our testing is not simply about whether products breach the law. It is about finding out what is actually present in foods New Zealanders buy and eat.
Three Samples Were Below the Reporting Limit
Three of the five samples returned results of <0.010 mg/kg, meaning glyphosate was not detected above the laboratory’s reporting limit.
Those products were:
- Pams Mānuka Multifloral
- Arataki Honey Clover Blend
- Arataki Honey Squeeze Me
A result reported as <0.010 mg/kg does not necessarily mean glyphosate was completely absent. It means that, if present, it was below the laboratory’s reporting limit using the analytical method employed.
No AMPA or Glufosinate Detected
All five samples were also tested for AMPA and glufosinate.
AMPA is the principal breakdown product of glyphosate. Glufosinate is a different herbicide used in some agricultural and horticultural settings.
Neither compound was detected above the laboratory’s reporting limit in any of the five samples.
How Do These Results Compare?
This is the fifth round of independent honey testing commissioned by No More Glyphosate NZ. Across those five rounds, we have tested an increasing range of New Zealand honey products, including repeat testing of some brands and different honey varieties.
The latest results continue a pattern we have observed from the beginning: glyphosate residues vary between products. Some batches contain detectable residues, while others test below the laboratory reporting limit.
Several brands have now appeared in more than one round of testing.
Airborne has now returned detectable glyphosate results in two different honey products.
Arataki has now had four honey products independently tested. Three have returned non-detect results, while one contained a low detectable glyphosate residue.
Pams has now had two different honey products tested. One returned a detectable result, while the latest sample was below the reporting limit.
These are different honey products and different production batches, so they should not be interpreted as direct comparisons. However, they demonstrate why repeat testing over time is valuable. A single laboratory result provides a snapshot. Multiple rounds of testing begin to build a much clearer picture.
One final point is worth making. Our testing looks specifically for glyphosate, its primary breakdown product (AMPA), and glufosinate. It does not test for other herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, heavy metals, antibiotics, PFAS, microplastics, or any of the many other substances that may be present in honey. These results should not be interpreted as meaning a product is free from all contaminants.
Why NMGNZ Tests Food
No More Glyphosate NZ commissions independent testing because consumers are often left in the dark about pesticide residues in everyday foods.
Glyphosate is widely used in New Zealand agriculture, horticulture, public spaces and land management. Yet consumers usually have no practical way of knowing whether residues are present in the foods they buy.
Testing does not answer every question. It cannot tell us exactly where a residue came from, when exposure occurred, or whether bees encountered glyphosate through nearby land use, agricultural spraying, roadside spraying, pasture management or other environmental routes.
But testing can answer one basic and important question:
Is glyphosate present in this food sample?
In two of these five honey samples, the answer was yes.
The Bigger Question
After five rounds of independent honey testing, these results raise a familiar question.
If glyphosate can be detected in honey—a food produced by bees foraging across the wider landscape—what does that tell us about the chemical footprint surrounding our food system?
The latest results do not suggest that all honey contains glyphosate. They also do not suggest that all tested products exceeded legal limits. They show something more specific, and perhaps more useful. Some honey samples contained measurable glyphosate. Others did not.
For consumers who want fewer pesticide residues in their food, that difference matters. For producers, it demonstrates that low—or non-detect—results are achievable. And for regulators, it raises a simple question:
If some products can test below the laboratory reporting limit, what would it take to make that the norm?
Previous Honey Testing
This is the fifth round of independent honey testing commissioned by No More Glyphosate NZ.
Each round adds to a growing body of independently obtained laboratory data, helping build a clearer picture of glyphosate residues in honey sold in New Zealand. While individual results can vary between products, batches, seasons and floral sources, repeat testing provides valuable context over time.
You can read our previous honey testing reports here:
- Glyphosate in New Zealand Honey? First Test Results Revealed (June 2025) — Our first independent honey testing project examined seven popular New Zealand honey products and found detectable glyphosate residues in three samples. Read the article
- Glyphosate in New Zealand Honey — Test Results: Batch 2 (August 2025) — Our second round expanded the testing programme with a further selection of mānuka and blended honeys available to New Zealand consumers. Read the article
- Glyphosate in New Zealand Honey — Test Results: Batch 3 (August 2025) — Seven more retail honey products were independently tested, including the first Wrights Mānuka sample, which recorded the highest glyphosate level seen at that time. Read the article
- Glyphosate in Honey Test Results — Batch 4 (September 2025) — Our fourth round included the highest glyphosate result we have recorded in honey to date, with one sample exceeding New Zealand’s current Maximum Residue Limit (MRL). Read the article
As our independent testing programme continues, we intend to revisit brands, test new products, and monitor changes over time. Our goal is simple: to provide consumers with transparent, independent information about the foods they buy and eat.
Related Reading
Here are further articles from No More Glyphosate NZ that explore why glyphosate shows up in honey, what it means for “healthy” honey claims, and how bees are affected:
How Does Glyphosate End Up in Honey Without Killing the Bees?
Explains how bee foraging, crop spraying, and contaminated landscapes lead to glyphosate showing up in honey.
Even the Beekeepers Know: Glyphosate Is Everywhere
Looks at the marketing of honey as pure and health-giving, and the contradiction posed by glyphosate residues.
Where Have All the Pollinators Gone? Glyphosate’s Impact on Bees
Summarises the research on how glyphosate affects bee navigation, gut health, and colony strength.
Testing Costs & Transparency
| Item | Cost |
|---|---|
| Airborne Mānuka Honey MGO 50+ | $13.49 |
| Arataki Multi-Flora with Mānuka | $10.39 |
| Pams Mānuka Multifloral Honey | $7.59 |
| Arataki Clover Blend | $10.39 |
| Arataki Squeeze Me | $12.39 |
| Hill Laboratories testing | $521.64 |
| Courier costs | $13.30 |
| Total Cost | $589.19 |
One advantage of honey testing is cost. Glyphosate analysis of honey typically costs around $104 per sample, compared with approximately $400 per sample for many more complex food products. When we first launched our independent testing programme, a number of supporters chose to make regular monthly donations specifically to fund honey testing. Combined with the lower cost of analysis, their ongoing support has enabled us to complete five rounds of testing and build one of New Zealand’s largest independent datasets on glyphosate residues in retail honey.
Image Source & Attribution
The feature image on this page was created by No More Glyphosate NZ using licensed stock photography and additional graphic elements, which were combined and edited in Canva for publication.
