Honey: Ancient Remedy or Modern Sugar?

Honey: Ancient Remedy or Modern Sugar?

by Laurent Glatz – for Athletic Carnivore

Honey is one of those foods that rarely escapes indulgence. It crosses eras cloaked in a special prestige, as if its natural origin placed it above ordinary categories. In the collective imagination, it is not just a sweetener: it is a living substance, a product of the hive, a traditional medicine in a jar. White sugar, on the other hand, carries the mark of the factory. Honey, that of flowers.

Yet, if we take the trouble to move beyond symbolism and return to biology, one question arises: are we talking about a beneficial food, or a sugar tolerated because it is “more noble”? The answer is not a slogan. It depends on a point often missing from discussions: the metabolic state of the consumer.

Honey is above all a concentrated carbohydrate source. Its composition varies depending on the type of honey, but the essentials remain stable: it is mostly fructose and glucose, with a small fraction of water, traces of minerals, enzymes, organic acids, aromatic compounds, and polyphenols. It is precisely this minor fraction, rich in bioactive compounds, that underpins its image as a superior food compared to sugar. This fraction exists and is real, but it should not overshadow the major element: honey remains a dense and fast source of simple sugars.

Regarding benefits, rigor is necessary: honey has interesting properties in specific contexts, and some uses are better supported than others. Its antibacterial capacity is among the most credible. Several honeys, especially when minimally processed, exhibit antimicrobial activity linked to several combined factors: low water activity limiting bacterial growth, natural acidity, and production of oxidizing compounds like hydrogen peroxide. In some specific honeys, such as Manuka, particular compounds associated with antimicrobial activity are also described. This reality explains why, in clinical settings, there are medically sterilized honey dressings used for certain wounds. This point is crucial: external and medical uses have little to do with putting a spoonful in a bowl.

Honey can also soothe certain ENT irritations, notably cough, partly through a mechanical and soothing effect on the mucous membrane, and possibly through some bioactive compounds. Again, the effect is not magical, but there is a consistent body of observations, especially compared to no treatment. Its appeal is also pragmatic: it is easy to consume, well tolerated, and acts quickly on the sensation of a “burning” throat.

Finally, honey deserves recognition for its real energy value. It provides fuel quickly. For a highly active athlete, during prolonged effort or in a context of significant glycogen expenditure, honey can serve as a practical carbohydrate source, sometimes better tolerated digestively than other sugars. This very concrete use is one of the few cases where the argument of “clean energy” makes sense—not morally, but physiologically: when glucose is immediately used, it is less likely to be stored.

All this, however, does not answer the essential question. Is honey overall positive? This question implies a second: positive compared to what, and for whom?

The problem in modern daily consumption is not the existence of a more or less “noble” sugar. It is the frequency, the dose, and the metabolic state of an organism already continuously exposed to carbohydrate stimuli. Honey does not escape the fundamental rule: glucose raises blood sugar, and fructose burdens the liver.

The glucose in honey causes a more or less rapid rise in blood sugar depending on the amount ingested, the presence of other foods, physical activity level, and insulin sensitivity. In a metabolically healthy individual, the pancreas responds efficiently, insulin rises, glucose is taken up by tissues, and blood sugar quickly returns to normal. In an insulin-resistant individual, the same scenario becomes less clean: insulin rises higher and longer, and glucose circulates more. Repeatedly, this mechanism sustains hyperinsulinemia, promotes storage, and worsens insulin resistance.

Fructose is the most frequent blind spot in “pro-honey” discourse. Because it often raises blood sugar less abruptly, it is imagined as “gentler.” But its peculiarity lies elsewhere: it is primarily metabolized by the liver. In excess or repeated use, it promotes triglyceride production and can contribute to hepatic fat accumulation, in other words, fatty liver. This is not a scenario reserved for sodas: it is a general biological mechanism. Honey, because it combines fructose and glucose, can be particularly effective at fueling this circuit when spoonfuls follow one another and the overall diet remains rich.

This leads to a rarely stated blunt conclusion: if the goal is to improve a degraded metabolic terrain, honey is not a solution, even if it is “natural.” For a reader seeking clear understanding, the rule is simple: honey can be compatible with good metabolic health, but it is not a metabolic repair tool. In some cases, it even becomes a hindrance.

There is also a neurological and behavioral dimension, often minimized because it disrupts the “ancestral” image. Sweet taste is not just pleasure: it is a signal. It activates reward circuits, reinforces habits, and in some people sustains a recurring craving cycle. Whether the sugar is white, brown, or “from the hive” does not change this fact. For individuals prone to compulsions, cravings, or sweet obsession, honey is no exception: it can maintain sugar dependence under the guise of virtue. This is one reason why some people “eat healthy” but never free themselves from the need to sweeten.

It is sometimes said that honey is “better” for blood sugar than sugar. This is sometimes true regarding glycemic index, depending on the variety, but such comparisons are often misleading. First, because real portions are not neutral: a spoonful of honey is poured more generously than a sugar packet. Second, because the glycemic index is only a partial indicator: it says nothing about fructose’s hepatic effect, the total glycemic load of a meal, or individual insulin response. One can have “not so high” blood sugar yet maintain, over months, excess insulin and metabolic drift.

Honey also raises a less glamorous but very concrete oral health issue. Its sticky texture, fermentable sugar content, and prolonged contact with teeth make it potentially cariogenic if hygiene is not impeccable. Again, “natural” does not mean “harmless.”

It is also necessary to recall, without sensationalism, a known but too often forgotten warning: honey must not be given to infants under one year old due to the risk of infant botulism linked to possible spore presence. This is a basic health safety point but illustrates a broader idea: honey is not a neutral product. It is a biological food, with its properties… and its risks.

Another rarely discussed angle concerns the real quality of the product. Between raw local honey and industrial honey that is heated, filtered, sometimes mixed, the gap can be large. Heating and some treatments can reduce some enzymes and fragile compounds. This does not turn honey into poison but reduces precisely what justifies its reputation. Under these conditions, many consumers pay a premium for a diminished “living” promise while retaining the product’s core: sugar.

So, in the end, is honey positive or not?

It is positive in three situations. When used as a punctual tool and not a daily ritual, especially in an active and metabolically healthy individual. When employed for targeted uses where its properties are relevant, notably certain ENT soothings or external uses in medically adapted forms. When it truly replaces a more problematic alternative, not absolutely, but within a coherent strategy to reduce ultra-processed products, accepting that it remains sugar.

It is rather negative in four situations. When it adds day after day to an already carbohydrate-rich diet, or when it becomes a psychological “right” granted in the name of naturalness. When it fuels cravings and an addictive relationship to sweetness. When consumed by insulin-resistant profiles, with abdominal overweight, elevated triglycerides, fatty liver, post-meal fatigue, or glycemic dysregulation. Finally, when brandished as a health food in significant quantity, confusing the presence of bioactive compounds with overall metabolic impact.

The conclusion, if one wants to be honest, is not a universal yes or no. Honey is neither a superfood nor an enemy. It is a complex sugar endowed with real biological particularities but remains sugar. Its status depends less on its legends than on the terrain on which it falls.

The real intellectual reversal may be this: we should not ask if honey is “good,” but what we seek to do with it. Soothe a throat, provide fuel for effort, or simply preserve a socially acceptable link to sweetness. Honey does not lie. It does what sugars do: it nourishes, stimulates, sometimes soothes, and also disrupts, depending on dose and frequency. The rest is just a story.

#honey #fructose #glucose #liver #fattyliver #bloodsugar #insulin #naturalsugar