Independent Honey Testing Continues to Build the Picture

Our sixth round of independent honey testing found glyphosate at low levels in one of the five products tested.

Every round of testing adds another piece to the puzzle.

Honey is a natural product. No two harvests are exactly the same, and even the same brand can produce different results from one batch to the next. That’s why No More Glyphosate NZ continues to purchase products anonymously online or from normal retail outlets and submit them for independent laboratory analysis.

Our sixth round of testing included five premium New Zealand honey products, four of which have been tested previously. Rather than looking for a single “good” or “bad” result, our aim is to build a long-term picture of glyphosate residues across New Zealand’s retail honey market.

This latest round found glyphosate at a detectable level in one of the five products tested. The remaining four were below the laboratory’s reporting limit.

The Latest Results

No detectable residues of AMPA or glufosinate were found in any of the five samples.

One Detect, Four Below the Reporting Limit

Only one product returned a detectable glyphosate result.

Aotea Mānuka Honey MGO 125+ contained 0.013 mg/kg (13 parts per billion) of glyphosate.

While detectable, this remains a relatively low concentration and is well below New Zealand’s current maximum residue limit (MRL) of 0.1 mg/kg for honey.

The remaining four products all tested below the laboratory’s reporting limit of 0.010 mg/kg.

As always, a result below the reporting limit should not be interpreted as proving glyphosate is completely absent. It simply means that, if present, any residue was below the level the laboratory method can reliably quantify.

Why Repeat Testing Matters

One of the most valuable aspects of this round is that four of the five products have now been tested previously.

That allows us to begin comparing different production batches over time and reinforces something we have consistently said throughout this programme: a single laboratory result represents a snapshot in time, not a permanent characteristic of a product.

The most notable difference was Aotea Mānuka Honey MGO 125+, which previously returned a glyphosate result of 0.0028 mg/kg. This latest batch measured 0.013 mg/kg—still a low level and well below New Zealand’s maximum residue limit, but noticeably different from the earlier sample.

The remaining repeat-tested products were all below the laboratory’s reporting limit, consistent with previous testing.

Together, these results illustrate why repeated testing over time is valuable. Honey is a natural product, and residues can vary from season to season, harvest to harvest and batch to batch. Building a larger dataset over many years provides a much more meaningful picture than any single laboratory result ever could.

A Premium Honey Raises an Interesting Question

Among this round’s results, Aotea Mānuka Honey MGO 125+ is perhaps the most thought-provoking.

Marketed as sustainably sourced from Aotea – Great Barrier Island, the honey comes from an environment dominated by mānuka and kānuka forest and is positioned as a premium product. At around $25 for an 80-gram jar, it reflects the quality and uniqueness associated with New Zealand mānuka honey.

The result does not suggest anything improper by the producer, nor does it indicate a food safety issue.

It does, however, raise a broader environmental question.

If low levels of glyphosate can be detected in honey produced from one of New Zealand’s more remote and naturally forested landscapes, what does that tell us about the wider presence of glyphosate in the environments our bees forage?

That is one of the reasons No More Glyphosate NZ continues to repeat these tests. Our goal is not simply to identify residues in individual products, but to better understand what they may tell us about the environment over time.

What These Results Show — and What They Don’t

Our independent testing focuses specifically on glyphosate, its primary breakdown product AMPA, and glufosinate.

These tests do not screen for other herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, heavy metals, PFAS, antibiotics, microplastics, or any of the many other substances that may be present in food.

Likewise, a single round of testing should not be interpreted as representing every batch of a product. Honey is a natural product, and residues can vary between seasons, harvests and production batches.

That is precisely why independent repeat testing matters.

Testing Costs & Transparency

The products tested in this round were purchased anonymously through normal retail and online channels before being coded and submitted to Hill Laboratories for independent LC-MS/MS analysis.

Testing costs are funded entirely through public support. We receive no funding from government, the honey industry, or chemical manufacturers.

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 six rounds of testing and build one of New Zealand’s largest independent datasets on glyphosate residues in retail honey.

The Bigger Picture

Six rounds of testing are beginning to reveal something that a single survey never could.

Not every honey contains detectable glyphosate. Those that do have generally been found at relatively low levels, while many products continue to test below the laboratory’s reporting limit. Perhaps most importantly, the same product can produce different results from one batch to the next, reminding us that natural products—and the environments they come from—are constantly changing.

Independent testing isn’t about proving a point or targeting individual brands.

It’s about collecting reliable, real-world data, asking better questions, and building the evidence needed to better understand glyphosate residues in New Zealand’s food supply.

Previous Glyphosate Honey Test Results

This article reports the sixth round of independent glyphosate testing of retail honey commissioned by No More Glyphosate NZ.

Since June 2025, we have been purchasing honey products from normal retail outlets and submitting them for independent laboratory analysis at Hill Laboratories. Together, these reports are building one of New Zealand’s largest independent datasets on glyphosate residues in retail honey.

Each round provides another snapshot in time. While results can vary between brands, batches, seasons and floral sources, repeat testing helps build a clearer picture of how glyphosate residues appear across New Zealand’s honey supply over time.

Read our previous honey testing reports:

Glyphosate in New Zealand Honey? First Test Results Revealed (June 2025) — Seven popular New Zealand honey products were independently tested, with detectable glyphosate found in three samples.

Glyphosate in New Zealand Honey — Test Results: Batch 2 (August 2025) — The second round expanded the programme with additional mānuka and blended honey products available to New Zealand consumers.

Glyphosate in New Zealand Honey — Test Results: Batch 3 (August 2025) — Seven more retail honey products were tested, including the first Wrights Mānuka sample, which recorded the highest glyphosate result observed at that time.

Glyphosate in Honey Test Results — Batch 4 (September 2025) — One sample exceeded New Zealand’s current Maximum Residue Limit (MRL), making it the highest glyphosate result recorded in our honey testing programme to date.

Glyphosate in Honey Test Results — Batch 5 (July 2026) — Five further retail honey products were independently tested, with low levels of glyphosate detected in two samples while the remaining three were below the laboratory reporting limit.

As our independent testing programme continues, we intend to revisit previously tested brands, analyse new products, and monitor how results change over time. Our aim is to provide consumers with transparent, independently obtained information about glyphosate residues in the foods they buy and eat.

Related Articles About Glyphosate and Honey

If you’d like to explore this topic further, these related articles explain how glyphosate can end up in honey, what current research says about bees, and how our independent laboratory testing programme works.

How Does Glyphosate End Up in Honey Without Killing the Bees?
Explores how bee foraging behaviour and environmental exposure can result in glyphosate residues being detected in honey.

Even the Beekeepers Know: Glyphosate Is Everywhere
Examines the relationship between honey’s natural image and the reality that glyphosate residues can be detected across a wide range of environments.

Where Have All the Pollinators Gone? Glyphosate’s Impact on Bees
Reviews research into how glyphosate may affect bee navigation, gut microbiomes, foraging behaviour and overall colony health.

Why We Use Hill Laboratories — And What “IANZ Accredited” Actually Means
Explains why No More Glyphosate NZ uses an independent IANZ-accredited laboratory, how LC-MS/MS testing works, and what laboratory results can—and cannot—tell us about glyphosate residues in food.

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.