The wonderful Roald Dahl once wrote a wonderful bee-story: Royal Jelly.
I have always thought this story is an unsettling mix between fact and fiction. Is the crazy beekeeper Albert Taylor for real? Is he serious about feeding his malnourished daughter tons and tons of royal jelly to make her nice and plump?
Eccentric character Albert Tayler refers to beekeeping magazines and scientific research discussing the great benefits of the magical royal substance. He tries to convince his wife with the “scientific facts”. For a long time I have wondered whether these scientific articles were real, or whether the amazing imagination of Roald Dahl had exceeded to the next level. Today, I want to find out.
First a few examples from the text –
In an article called “The Latest on Royal Jelly” Albert reads: “Royal jelly is fed in concentrated form to all bee larvae for the first three days after hatching from the egg; but beyond that point, for all those who are destined to become drones or workers, this precious food is greatly diluted with honey and pollen. On the other hand, the larvae which are destined to become queens are fed throughout the whole of their larval period on a concentrated diet of pure royal jelly. Hence the name.”
He explains in quite a blunt way to his wife where it comes from: “They get this stuff out of a gland in their heads and they start pumping it into the cell to feed the larva” (…) “The nurse bees simply pour it into the cell, so much so in fact that the little larva is literally floating in it”
All right. That sounds all pretty true to me.
And then this: “Royal jelly must be a substance of tremendous nourishing power, for on this diet alone, the honey-bee larva increases in weight fifteen hundred times in five days. (…) This is as if a seven-and-half pound baby should increase in that time to five tons”
This is the sentence that basically drives him to a hysterical rage about the miracle of royal jelly.
And then some concrete names fly over the pages. The British Bee Journal, the American Bee Journal, and a few scientists: Frederick A. Banting, Heyl, Still and Burdett. Real scientists or not? I put the names through the google filter and I found interesting results: Roald Dahl has ever so slightly changed their names. They are fictional characters, yet based on real scientists. Frederick A. Banting is in fact Frederick G. Banting, and Still and Burdett are actually Hill and Burdett.
Also, even though it was true that many of these scientist experimented with royal jelly on rats; it is not clear that they discovered exactly the stuff Dahl writes about. From what I have been able to find, it seems that Hill and Burdett’s research made claims about rat fertility and royal jelly (in relation to vitamin E) but later research has shown that their experiments weren’t set up in a proper way to obtain reliable data, so their conclusions were misrepresentations.
It seems ironical that Albert Taylor’s gets so excited about these scientists specifically. The cool thing is that it actually supports the story: it makes Albert even more of a crazy, ranting beekeeper (that furiously believes in “dodgy science”.)
The most impressive story he puts forward about the fertility powers of royal jelly is that a ninety-year old guy sired a healthy boy after taking minute doses of royal jelly in capsule form.
Whether this is all true or not, the big question of the story remains: Is it a good idea to feed royal jelly to malnourished human babies?
And this is one remarkable answer I found:
According to research conducted by R. Krell at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, royal jelly will help underfed children to gain in weight, more hemoglobin and red blood cells . (http://oregan.co.nz)
So, besides from being a crazy beekeeper, perhaps Albert Taylor had a good point after all?
Image: Wikimedia Commons