← All research
2 of 3
head-to-head comparisons that Manuka won
Three laboratory studies · Tested in a dish · Yemeni Sidr honey (2009 and 2022 studies); Sidr honey, origin not stated (2023)
What they did
In 2009, Sidr and Manuka honeys were tested against biofilms grown by 11 methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus, 11 MRSA and 11 Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates. In 2022, Yemeni Sidr and Manuka were tested against Escherichia coli, measuring not only whether the bacteria died but how. In 2023, a third group compared Sidr and Malaysian Tualang with Manuka against S. aureus.
What they found
- 2009, against biofilms — bactericidal rates, Sidr then Manuka: MSSA 63% and 82%, MRSA 73% and 63%, P. aeruginosa 91% and 91%. Against MRSA biofilms Sidr was the stronger of the two; against MSSA it was not; against P. aeruginosa they were level. All were significantly better than the single antibiotics tested alongside them.
- 2022, against E. coli: Manuka worked at 30%, Sidr needed 50%. Manuka was the stronger.
- 2023, against S. aureus: zone of inhibition Manuka 25.1 mm, Sidr 22.2 mm, Tualang 21.3 mm. Minimum inhibitory concentration Manuka 12.5%, Sidr and Tualang 25%.
- The mechanisms differed. Sidr acted on the bacterial membrane, driving potassium and protein leakage; Manuka inhibited protein synthesis. Both damaged bacterial DNA.
What this study does not show
- On the balance of the three, Manuka is the better-performing honey in the dish. We are not going to write that sentence the other way round because one result went our way.
- All three are in glassware, against bacteria on a plate. None says anything about eating honey.
- None used our honey, and the 2023 paper does not say where its Sidr came from.
- A zone of inhibition or a bactericidal rate is a laboratory measurement. It is not a grade, a strength rating, or a reason to choose one honey over another at the table.
- The 2009 study was about chronic sinus infection and applied honey directly to biofilms. It is not a model of eating.
Why we publish it
We are asked whether Sidr beats Manuka more than any other question. Three laboratories have actually checked. The honest answer is that Manuka usually needs less honey to do the same job, that Sidr was ahead against MRSA biofilms in the one study that looked, and that both work differently. That is the whole answer.
The study.Alandejani T, Marsan J, Ferris W, Slinger R, Chan F. Effectiveness of honey on
Staphylococcus aureus and
Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms.
Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, 2009;141(1). · Al-Sayaghi AM, Al-Kabsi AM, Abduh MS, Saghir SAM, Al-Gabri NA. Antibacterial mechanism of action of two types of honey against
Escherichia coli…
Antibiotics, 2022;11(9):1182. · Al-Kafaween MA, Al-Groom RM, Hilmi ABM. Comparison of the antimicrobial and antivirulence activities of Sidr and Tualang honeys with Manuka honey against
Staphylococcus aureus.
Iranian Journal of Microbiology, 2023;15(1).
doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2009.01.005 ·
doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11091182 ·
doi.org/10.18502/ijm.v15i1.11923
What this page is. These are summaries of published research about honey as a substance. They are not claims about DIVINEDROP products. No DIVINEDROP honey diagnoses, treats, cures or prevents any disease. Honey is a sugar-rich food, it is not suitable for infants under 12 months, and anyone managing a health condition should speak to their doctor.
← Back to all research · Our Yemeni honey
