Could the blue honey trick be dangerous or constitute false advertising under consumer protection laws?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The “blue honey” trick can mean very different things: decorative blue honey colored with spirulina or similar additives, psychedelic “blue honey” made with psilocybin, or other novelty products — each carries distinct safety and legal questions (e.g., spirulina‑colored blue honey is a marketed Greek product; psilocybin‑infused honey is an illicit drug product and behaves differently) [1] [2]. Food‑safety reporting shows pure honey is generally safe for adults but can harbor risks in special cases (infant botulism; fermented or contaminated bitter honey), and regulators have repeatedly allowed or dismissed false‑label claims when evidence of consumer deception is weak [3] [4] [5] [6] [7].
1. What “blue honey” actually refers to — three versions to watch
“Blue honey” in recent press most commonly refers to a spirulina‑fortified, vividly blue honey marketed from Greece that claims added nutrients and preserved taste — a legal, commercial novelty product [1]. Separately, “blue honey” is used online to describe honey infused with psychedelic mushrooms; that product’s blueing is an oxidation artifact of psilocybin and implies the presence of a controlled substance rather than a harmless colorant [2]. Available sources do not mention other specific “blue honey” marketing campaigns beyond these examples [1] [2].
2. Consumer safety: ordinary honey is safe — but exceptions matter
Major consumer‑facing reporting and extension services say pure honey is generally safe for adults and that crystallization is not spoilage [5] [8]. But all honey products carry two recurring safety caveats in reporting: infants under 12 months should not be given honey because of C. botulinum spore risk [3] [9], and some honey may be bitter, fermented, or contaminated depending on floral source or storage, in which case it should be avoided [4] [10]. For novel formulations, like spirulina‑colored honey, available reporting describes preserved taste and nutrient claims but does not supply independent safety testing details [1].
3. Psychedelic “blue honey” changes the legal and safety calculus entirely
Reporting on mushroom‑infused honey makes clear that that product is effectively a delivery vehicle for psilocybin: the blue color is linked to mushroom oxidation and potency can change over time. That turns a food product into an illegal (or highly regulated) psychoactive substance in many jurisdictions and carries health risks not present in ordinary honey [2]. Available sources do not provide a regulatory ruling on mushroom honey in the Greek product story; they do, however, treat the two things as distinct [1] [2].
4. False‑advertising risk — what courts have said about honey claims
A string of cases shows courts scrutinize whether a reasonable consumer would be deceived and often dismiss lawsuits where plaintiffs rely on speculative testing or ignore ingredient lists. The Seventh Circuit rejected a “raw honey” suit as too speculative because alternate explanations for lab findings existed [6]. Similarly, Ninth Circuit and other appeals courts have dismissed claims over “Manuka” or “100% honey” labels where labeling complied with FDA guidance or plaintiffs failed to plead deception [7] [11] [12]. Those precedents mean a consumer claim will likely succeed only when there is clear mislabeling or an objective violation of food‑law standards [6] [7].
5. When blue honey could be legally actionable or dangerous
- If a producer markets spirulina‑colored honey with truthful ingredient labeling and no unsafe additives, regulators and courts are less likely to find false advertising, though independent safety testing would strengthen the claim [1] [5].
- If a product misstates ingredients, omits psychoactive additives, or sells psilocybin‑infused honey as ordinary honey, it creates consumer‑protection and criminal issues: psilocybin presence converts the product into a controlled‑substance matter and is not covered by ordinary food‑safety guidance [2].
- If consumers suffer harm tied to undeclared drugs or fermentation/contamination, that provides a much stronger basis for enforcement or litigation than a novelty color alone [4] [2].
6. Practical advice for consumers and regulators
Buyers should read ingredient lists and check for explicit additive disclosures; spirulina/seaweed colorants appear in reporting of the Greek product but independent lab data are not cited in that coverage [1]. For sellers, courts show the evidentiary bar for false‑ad claims: be transparent about sources and processes, keep documentation showing chief floral source if claiming single‑source honey, and avoid health claims not supported by law [6] [7]. For regulators and journalists, the mushroom‑infused variety warrants separate treatment and labeling because it implicates controlled‑substance law and different safety standards [2].
Limitations: this analysis is limited to the supplied reporting; available sources do not contain independent lab test results for the Greek blue honey nor do they report any specific enforcement action tied to that product [1].