How Sidr compares with Manuka in the laboratory
5–10%
the concentration Yemeni Sidr needed
Yemeni Sidr needed the smallest amount of any honey tested to stop Gram-positive bacteria growing — a group that includes Staphylococcus aureus.
What they did
Researchers put nine honeys — including Yemeni Sidr and New Zealand Manuka — against nine kinds of bacteria in a laboratory, and measured how little of each honey was needed to stop the bacteria growing.
What they found
Yemeni Sidr needed the smallest amount of any honey tested to stop Gram-positive bacteria growing — a group that includes Staphylococcus aureus.
% honey by weight — lower is stronger
Manuka honey is the benchmark most people know, and it is priced accordingly. This study is one of the few that puts Yemeni Sidr and Manuka side by side under the same laboratory conditions.
The measure used is called the minimum inhibitory concentration — the smallest amount of honey, as a percentage of the growth medium, that stops bacteria multiplying. A lower number means the honey did more with less.
Against Gram-positive bacteria, Yemeni Sidr recorded the lowest figures of all nine honeys: 5–10%. Across every honey tested the range was 5–20%. The authors named Yemeni Sidr, Taify Sidr, Shaoka and Manuka as the four strongest overall.
What this study does not show
- This happened in a dish, not in a person. It is a measurement of the honey, not a health claim about eating it.
- Sidr did not win everything. Shaoka honey performed better against Gram-negative bacteria.
- The concentrations here — 5–20% honey by weight in a laboratory medium — are nothing like eating a spoonful.
- It is one study, from one set of samples, in 2011.