Honey is kind of a weird food for paleo.  Hunter gatherers get up to 20% of their caloric intake from honey, including some of the hunter gatherers with the least contact with civilization (the Ache).  Yet, honey is 95% identical to high fructose corn syrup, which is about as nonpaleo as we can get.

This thread is for research on honey and whether it has a place in the paleo diet.

The paper that prompted me to post this is here:

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/132/11/3379.full

This paper is a rat experiment, so the results may not be fully applicable to humans; in particular, there's reason to believe that rats tolerate starch much better than humans, since rats can produce vitamin C from glucose and humans cannot.  However, the fact that honey isn't the equivalent of high fructose corn syrup in rats strongly suggests that in humans, we shouldn't be extrapolating high fructose corn syrup results to honey and other whole foods containing fructose, either.

The experiment shows that various blood markers - in particular, vitamin E and triglycerides - in honey fed rats is closer to those in starch fed rats than they are to those in rats fed a mixture of glucose and fructose.  In particular, triglyceride levels in starch fed rats and honey fed rats were statistically indistinguishable, and both were statistically distinguishable from the higher levels in the glucose/fructose rats.

The glucose/fructose mixture is essentially high fructose corn syrup.  This experiment shows that the problems with high fructose corn syrup are not just a result of its macronutrient mix, and in particular aren't just because it includes fructose.  Something else is at work here.

I would point out that the highly pasturised version sold on the shelves may be like HFCS but the raw version does hold some amazing properties to heal cuts and abrasions and will never taint. Also will help with allergies if procured froma local Apiary.
HG's most likely would have taken advantage of such a source IMHO.

Evidence?