3 ms·
> Because that's how things work?? You misspelled "because the US has stupid regulations that are more concerned with covering the asses of the regulators than
by pdonis 5y ago
> Because that's how things work??
You misspelled "because the US has stupid regulations that are more concerned with covering the asses of the regulators than with actually protecting consumers".
> American chicken is perfectly safe to consume, but you would not be allowed to sell it in the European market.
As I understand it, the reason US chicken is not saleable in European markets is that European countries do not agree that US chicken is "perfectly safe to consume" because of the way it is produced (IIRC chemical washing in the US was a key issue).
There is no such disagreement about the infant formula that is the subject of this article; the FDA is not saying it's not safe, just that it's not labeled the way the FDA wants it to be labeled--even though everybody knows it meets safety standards at least as stringent as the FDAs and nobody needs the labels to tell them that.
- devman0 5y agoIs this something that the FDA even has discretion of or are there statutory requirements for labeling infant formula in the US? EDIT: In response to my own question there are statutory requirements listed in 21 USC 350a.
- hackernewds 5y agoif you review, you have refuted your first response with your second response.
- pdonis 5y agoHow so?
- bumby 5y agoCan you provide where the FDA has said European formulas are perfectly adequate? A cursory search showed instances where European formulas were pulled because they were nutritionally deficient by FDA standards. Also keep in mind that while on its surface "nutritional labels" may seem like like superficial reason to ban something, it's the same rational for banning formula from China. Labeling is important for quality control and verification. ("Verification" defined in the quality engineering sense of "it is what it says it is".)
- pdonis 5y ago> Can you provide where the FDA has said European formulas are perfectly adequate? I didn't claim that the FDA said that. All I said was that the FDA's stated reason for prohibiting European formulas in the US has nothing to do with safety standards, only with labeling. The FDA, as far as I know, has not made any statement one way or the other about the safety standards themselves, but as the article notes, the European ones in this respect are at least as stringent as the FDA's.
- daenz 5y ago>only with labeling Not according to the OP's link though: >the FDA will not let you have it because it has not reviewed and approved the label or inspected the production facilities overseas. Emphasis mine.
- bumby 5y agoThe point being made was that the labelling and content are not distinct issues. As an example, some banned European formulas do not contain the necessary nutrients and thus require a label denoting that additional nutrition is necessary.[1] Often, when people look at quality issues as purely non-essential "paperwork", they are missing the intent of the requirement. In this case, labelling something as "infant formula" connotates a precise nutritional meaning. Such oversight provides arbitrary rules-lawyering. [1] https://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls-market-withdrawals-safety-alerts/able-groupe-recalling-products-labeled-infant-formula-formulas-have-insufficient-iron-levels https://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls-market-withdrawals-safety...
- DiogenesKynikos 5y agoNote that "only labeling" means, among other things, that the labels are not written in English. That's a big problem for a product that's going to be sold in the US (with the obvious exception of Spanish labeling in some communities in the US).