Misconceptions and Truths About Propolis Quality Evaluation
In Korea, propolis first entered the national regulatory framework in 1995 when it was listed as a health supplement in the Korean Food Code. Later, with the enactment of the Health Functional Foods Act in 2002 and subsequent announcements of related enforcement ordinances and detailed regulations, the official standards and testing methods for propolis as a functional food were finalized in 2008.
In contrast, Japan began actively researching and promoting propolis as early as 1985, when it hosted the 30th Apimondia International Apicultural Congress in Nagoya. Since then, Japan has led global propolis research and the industry itself. Korea, by comparison, held its first Apimondia congress only in 2015—thirty years later. As a result, Korea’s propolis industry and academic research are still in their infancy. Even many of the so-called "experts" in Korea have relied heavily on Japanese publications and company materials. However, by broadening our international perspective and conducting our own verifications, we can uncover many misconceptions. Below are some key truths we should be aware of:
1. What is the Truth About Propolis Content?
The most common question from consumers and even manufacturers is:
“What percentage of propolis does this product contain?”
Some claim concentrations ranging from 20% to even 100%.
However, the true propolis content should be calculated based on the solid residue left after completely evaporating the solvent (typically ethanol or water). This "pure solid" is what determines actual content. Unfortunately, the concept of "propolis extract" as used in Korea's official health food standards causes confusion. Some claim their extract is “100% propolis,” regardless of whether it's diluted 2-fold or 10-fold—an unscientific and misleading assertion.
Moreover, some use Brix (°Bx) measured with a Reflektometer to represent propolis content. While Brix indicates dissolved solids, it does not accurately reflect propolis concentration. It may serve as a relative comparison under controlled conditions, but using it as a pricing or quality standard is misleading and deceives consumers.
2. What is the Truth About Flavonoid Content?
Flavonoids extracted with ethanol typically do not exceed 2–3% in content. To increase flavonoid levels, alcohol must be evaporated, concentrating the extract—but this often results in a paste-like material unsuitable for commercial use.
Therefore, claims of 5–10% flavonoid content are highly dubious. Experts familiar with processing know such claims are unrealistic. Furthermore, flavonoids are just one component of over 300 active substances found in propolis. Even Japan's Ministry of Health does not include total flavonoid content in its official standards, acknowledging that:
Despite this, the Korean market often overemphasizes flavonoid levels as the ultimate sign of quality.
In fact, Korea’s Health Functional Food Code, updated in 2008 and re-evaluated in 2022, strictly limits daily flavonoid intake to 20–40 mg/day. Therefore, even if a product contains a high flavonoid concentration, the effective intake is regulated—rendering "flavonoid competition" among companies pointless.
3. Is Aged Propolis Better?
Propolis extracted with ethanol usually contains over 70% alcohol, which can irritate the stomach and be unpleasant due to its strong aroma. Japan developed a culture of aging propolis to naturally reduce ethanol content over time.
However, beyond the mild evaporation of ethanol, aging does not significantly improve quality. Some Japanese companies market aged propolis as premium, but this is more about marketing than scientific benefit. Propolis is not a fine wine—it does not mature in taste or health benefits over time. Therefore, we should not blindly follow such marketing logic.
4. Are Japanese Methods for Identifying Good Propolis Reliable?
Japanese publications commonly suggest that good propolis:
These phenomena are more reflective of ethanol dispersion and wax content than actual quality. The circular spread indicates good solubility in ethanol (a result of long aging), while the shine comes from waxes—not health-promoting ingredients. In fact, these waxes can cause discomfort during intake and are typically removed in higher-quality extracts.
Such criteria are only relevant to ethanol-based propolis, yet many Korean companies have adopted them uncritically, reflecting a lack of innovation and independent research.
Conclusion
There are many methods for extracting and processing propolis. Historically, most products were ethanol-based, and Japan—having pioneered the global market—also led the creation of marketing narratives. However, it's time for Korea’s propolis industry to adopt a more scientific and internationally credible approach, grounded in independent verification, standardized quality metrics, and consumer health outcomes.
Written by Yongkap Hur
Propolis Specialist
CEO, Unique Biotech Co., Ltd.
Misconceptions and Truths About Propolis Quality Evaluation
In Korea, propolis first entered the national regulatory framework in 1995 when it was listed as a health supplement in the Korean Food Code. Later, with the enactment of the Health Functional Foods Act in 2002 and subsequent announcements of related enforcement ordinances and detailed regulations, the official standards and testing methods for propolis as a functional food were finalized in 2008.
In contrast, Japan began actively researching and promoting propolis as early as 1985, when it hosted the 30th Apimondia International Apicultural Congress in Nagoya. Since then, Japan has led global propolis research and the industry itself. Korea, by comparison, held its first Apimondia congress only in 2015—thirty years later. As a result, Korea’s propolis industry and academic research are still in their infancy. Even many of the so-called "experts" in Korea have relied heavily on Japanese publications and company materials. However, by broadening our international perspective and conducting our own verifications, we can uncover many misconceptions. Below are some key truths we should be aware of:
1. What is the Truth About Propolis Content?
The most common question from consumers and even manufacturers is:
“What percentage of propolis does this product contain?”
Some claim concentrations ranging from 20% to even 100%.
However, the true propolis content should be calculated based on the solid residue left after completely evaporating the solvent (typically ethanol or water). This "pure solid" is what determines actual content. Unfortunately, the concept of "propolis extract" as used in Korea's official health food standards causes confusion. Some claim their extract is “100% propolis,” regardless of whether it's diluted 2-fold or 10-fold—an unscientific and misleading assertion.
Moreover, some use Brix (°Bx) measured with a Reflektometer to represent propolis content. While Brix indicates dissolved solids, it does not accurately reflect propolis concentration. It may serve as a relative comparison under controlled conditions, but using it as a pricing or quality standard is misleading and deceives consumers.
2. What is the Truth About Flavonoid Content?
Flavonoids extracted with ethanol typically do not exceed 2–3% in content. To increase flavonoid levels, alcohol must be evaporated, concentrating the extract—but this often results in a paste-like material unsuitable for commercial use.
Therefore, claims of 5–10% flavonoid content are highly dubious. Experts familiar with processing know such claims are unrealistic. Furthermore, flavonoids are just one component of over 300 active substances found in propolis. Even Japan's Ministry of Health does not include total flavonoid content in its official standards, acknowledging that:
Flavonoid content is not a reliable quality indicator
Existing measurement methods are not scientifically standardized
Despite this, the Korean market often overemphasizes flavonoid levels as the ultimate sign of quality.
In fact, Korea’s Health Functional Food Code, updated in 2008 and re-evaluated in 2022, strictly limits daily flavonoid intake to 20–40 mg/day. Therefore, even if a product contains a high flavonoid concentration, the effective intake is regulated—rendering "flavonoid competition" among companies pointless.
3. Is Aged Propolis Better?
Propolis extracted with ethanol usually contains over 70% alcohol, which can irritate the stomach and be unpleasant due to its strong aroma. Japan developed a culture of aging propolis to naturally reduce ethanol content over time.
However, beyond the mild evaporation of ethanol, aging does not significantly improve quality. Some Japanese companies market aged propolis as premium, but this is more about marketing than scientific benefit. Propolis is not a fine wine—it does not mature in taste or health benefits over time. Therefore, we should not blindly follow such marketing logic.
4. Are Japanese Methods for Identifying Good Propolis Reliable?
Japanese publications commonly suggest that good propolis:
Forms a perfect circle when dropped on paper
Displays a glossy sheen under sunlight when dried
These phenomena are more reflective of ethanol dispersion and wax content than actual quality. The circular spread indicates good solubility in ethanol (a result of long aging), while the shine comes from waxes—not health-promoting ingredients. In fact, these waxes can cause discomfort during intake and are typically removed in higher-quality extracts.
Such criteria are only relevant to ethanol-based propolis, yet many Korean companies have adopted them uncritically, reflecting a lack of innovation and independent research.
Conclusion
There are many methods for extracting and processing propolis. Historically, most products were ethanol-based, and Japan—having pioneered the global market—also led the creation of marketing narratives. However, it's time for Korea’s propolis industry to adopt a more scientific and internationally credible approach, grounded in independent verification, standardized quality metrics, and consumer health outcomes.
Written by Yongkap Hur
Propolis Specialist
CEO, Unique Biotech Co., Ltd.