Is Glyphosate Making Its Way Into Our Honey?
We recently ran our first round of independent testing on seven New Zealand honey samples. Why? Because if we don’t test, we don’t know. And if we don’t know, we can’t make informed decisions.
This wasn’t about proving a point. It wasn’t about calling anyone out. These honeys weren’t chosen because we suspected them of anything — they were selected because they’re popular sellers. And because consumers deserve to know what’s actually in the products we reach for every day.
What did we find?
The Results
All seven honey samples were tested by Hill Laboratories, one of New Zealand’s leading commercial testing laboratories. Known for their ISO-accredited and internationally recognised testing services.
Each sample was analysed for:
- Glyphosate (the world’s most widely used herbicide)
- AMPA (a breakdown product of glyphosate)
- Glufosinate (another commonly used herbicide)
Here’s what came back:
| Sample | Glyphosate (mg/kg) | AMPA (mg/kg) | Glufosinate (mg/kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | <0.010 | <0.010 | <0.010 |
| B | <0.010 | <0.010 | <0.010 |
| C | 0.023 | <0.010 | <0.010 |
| D | 0.025 | <0.010 | <0.010 |
| E | <0.010 | <0.010 | <0.010 |
| F | <0.010 | <0.010 | <0.010 |
| G | 0.026 | <0.010 | <0.010 |
A) Arataki Clover Honey
B) Woolworths Liquid Honey
C) Egmont Mānuka Honey MGO 50+
D) Airborne Clover Honey Creamed (Blend)
E) Mother Earth Multifloral Mānuka Honey MGO30+
F) Northcote Point, Auckland, local beekeeper
G) Buckwheat Creamed Honey
What Does That Mean?
First, the good news: all samples came in well below New Zealand’s current legal limit (called the Maximum Residue Limit, or MRL) for glyphosate in honey, which is 0.1 mg/kg.
But here’s the thing: the absence of a legal breach is not the same as the absence of a problem.
Three of the seven honeys — nearly half — showed measurable levels of glyphosate, between 0.023 and 0.026 mg/kg. While that may sound small, these numbers matter. Especially when you consider that:
- Glyphosate has been found in breast milk, rainwater, and human urine in multiple studies.
- There is no known “safe” level of glyphosate for vulnerable populations like infants or pregnant women.
- This herbicide was never designed to be eaten — let alone appear in something as natural as honey.
As for AMPA and Glufosinate — none of the samples contained detectable levels above the reporting threshold. That’s encouraging. But glyphosate alone still raises concern.
And if you’re wondering just how strong the case has become, we broke down a new study in plain English here: A groundbreaking study has just shown glyphosate causes cancer at low doses — across 14 different tumour types. The evidence is in. So why are we still using it?
Why These Honeys?
We’ve had a few people ask how we chose the honeys we tested. Fair question — and as we mentioned earlier, these honeys weren’t selected because we suspected them of anything. They were chosen because they’re widely available, frequently purchased, or personally relevant to the people behind this project.
- Five of the samples were chosen because they’re popular, widely available brands.
- One sample came from a brand that’s marketed as coming from a spray-free environment (and happened to be from our own pantry). Donations did not cover the cost of this test—it was privately funded.
- The seventh sample was provided by a local beekeeper, who paid for testing themselves and generously allowed us to include the result.
We also included a honey from a small producer who grows spray-free buckwheat. They regularly test their grain through Assure Quality, and it consistently comes back clear for multiple chemical residues, including glyphosate. However, as this result reminded us, just because the crop is spray-free, it doesn’t mean the honey will be. Bees can travel up to 1.5 km from their hive — and what they bring back reflects the wider environment, not just the farm they started from.
It’s not a scientific study. It’s a snapshot. But as snapshots go, it tells a story — and it’s only the beginning.
It’s Not About Blame — It’s About Awareness
Let’s be clear: this is not a blame-and-shame campaign. We’re not pointing fingers at brands, beekeepers, or honey producers.
In fact, one of the great ironies here is that the “culprit” is… the bee.
Bees don’t read spray notices.
They forage freely—up to 1.5 kilometres from their hive in every direction. That’s nearly 700 hectares of land they might collect nectar or pollen from. So even if a beekeeper never touches glyphosate, their bees may still bring it back in tiny traces from sprayed farmland, roadside vegetation, or even council-controlled riverbeds.
One producer we contacted put it plainly:
“You can’t contain a bee… even hives in remote high country still show traces of glyphosate.”
That’s the core problem. The presence of glyphosate in honey isn’t necessarily a reflection of how the honey is made—but how widespread glyphosate use is in our environment.
So no, it’s not about blame. It’s about awareness, transparency, and asking whether we want this chemical so deeply embedded in our ecosystems that not even the bees can avoid it.
Why It Matters
This is a grassroots testing initiative. We’re not scientists. We’re not regulators.
We’re just everyday people trying to answer the question: what’s in our food?
Because here’s what we know:
- Regulatory agencies aren’t routinely testing for glyphosate in most food products.*
- Most food labels give us no clue about pesticide residues.
- The public is left to either trust the system — or challenge it.
We choose to challenge it.
* Note: Export-grade honey is tested for glyphosate residues under an MPI-managed surveillance programme funded by honey producers operating under Risk Management Programmes (RMPs). However, this testing applies only to honey intended for export — not to honey sold domestically — and the results are not publicly available.
What’s Next?
We plan to continue testing. Not to cause alarm — but to raise awareness. We’ll test other products. We’ll test again. Because this isn’t the end of the story. It’s just the beginning.
If you care about what’s in your food, your environment, and your body — stay with us. Ask questions. Share the data. Support the work.
Let’s Keep Testing
Want to help us test more products?
Support independent testing by donating or joining our mailing list. Together, we can demand transparency — one test at a time.
Now available as a PDF
Would you like to print, save, or share it with others?
Download the full honey test summary as a print-ready PDF — perfect for sharing with schools, councils, or anyone who still thinks glyphosate doesn’t end up in honey.
Resources & References
Knowledge is power—but only if we ask the right questions.
The resources below aren’t here to overwhelm you with data. They’re here to spark curiosity, encourage skepticism, and deepen our collective understanding of a system that often leaves too much unquestioned. From global studies to official regulatory limits, these references form the backbone of why this test—and the ones still to come—matter.
Because when it comes to glyphosate in our food, what we don’t know can hurt us.
New Zealand MRL Database
Official government site listing maximum residue limits (MRLs) for agricultural compounds in food, including glyphosate.
https://www.mpi.govt.nz/agriculture/agricultural-compounds-vet-medicines/maximum-residue-levels-agricultural-compounds/
EFSA Glyphosate Peer Review (2023)
The European Food Safety Authority concluded there were no “critical areas of concern” for glyphosate under approved uses—but highlighted key data gaps on impurities, consumer exposure, and environmental impact that require further attention.
Link: Glyphosate: no critical areas of concern; data gaps identified
Global Glyphosate in Honey Study (2023)
A large peer-reviewed analysis of 1,965 honey samples from around the world found glyphosate in nearly one-third of them. Contamination was detected across the U.S., Europe, Asia, and Oceania—prompting global calls for stricter oversight.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10048440/
Whitewash: The Story of a Weed Killer, Cancer, and the Corruption of Science
By Carey Gillam (2017, Island Press)
An investigative dive into glyphosate’s health and regulatory controversies, exposing industry influence and scientific suppression. Award-winning and especially relevant for framing narratives about corporate power over public health science.
Whitewash – [our review]
How Glyphosate Gets Into Our Food
Explains the pre-harvest use of glyphosate on crops like wheat, oats, and barley. Useful background for understanding how herbicide residues can end up in food products like honey.
https://nomoreglyphosate.nz/how-glyphosate-gets-into-our-food/
This isn’t about cherry-picking studies. It’s about connecting the dots.
Science isn’t static. Neither is regulation. And certainly not public awareness. As new data emerges and old assumptions are challenged, it’s up to us to keep paying attention—and to keep asking: if this is what a small group of volunteers can uncover… what else is slipping through the cracks?
Hill Laboratories
Hill Labs provides independent analysis across a wide range of industries—including food safety, agriculture, and environmental monitoring.
https://www.hill-laboratories.com
The original donation page: Help Us Test Honey for Glyphosate Residues!
Image Source & Attribution
We’re grateful to the talented photographers and designers whose work enhances our content. The feature image on this page is by marketing.lasers@ya.ru.
