3 ms·

The driver should be to give people with allergies the information they need to know whether they can eat something safely. Allowing companies to list every po

The driver should be to give people with allergies the information they need to know whether they can eat something safely. Allowing companies to list every possible contaminant regardless of how likely it is to be in a product doesn't help anyone. It just leads to the "contents may be hot" problem on a coffee.

tracker1 2y ago
Well... the FDA won't allow companies to just list "may contain" for sesame, they have to have effectively multiple plants in complete isolation, or... add a tiny bit of sesame to everything and affirmatively state so. In this case, I prefer the "may contain" verbiage... saying something "does not contain" is a practical minefield. If you're that sensitive to something, find a producer that makes what you're asking for, or if you can tolerate a small amount, or make your own food from basic ingredients.
- VBprogrammer 2y ago
  > If you're that sensitive to something, find a producer that makes what you're asking for, or if you can tolerate a small amount, or make your own food from basic ingredients. The group of people for whom "we take proper control of allergens" is a selling point is a very small one. One of the reasons government exist is to protect people who's interests would not be commercially viable - regulating that building are accessible with a wheelchair etc. Proper allergen control is the cost of doing business in that industry, attempting to blatantly side step regulation should be met with investigation and fines which make doing the right thing the cheaper option. The idea that someone with an allergy should make all of their own food from basic ingredients is comically naive. Essentially ostracizing them from all social events where food is involved.
  - tracker1 2y ago
    Would you rather have nobody able to buy bread? Regulation can make entire industries unviable too.. then nobody gets any. I say this as someone allergic to soy/legumes... It's in everything. I don't expect all food suppliers to stop using or handling it. I'm also willing to forgo bread because of my allergies. Much like people with gluten allergies shouldn't expect the govt to force everyone to stop producing bread with gluten. Every plant has someone allergic to it. At some point you have to be responsible for yourself. "May contain" means may contain, or: processed or stored near... That should have been good enough.
s1gsegv 2y ago
I think they are now giving people with allergies the correct information… the unfortunate answer is “we are unable/unwilling to control for these allergens, so you can not safely eat it” (whether this is genuinely not economical, or there is simply greed) The FDA pushes back, as people with allergies shouldn’t be completely shut out from all baked goods. But I suspect they’ll have to tackle the root of the problem and better economically incentivize the control of the allergens if this is the desired outcome, since it seems the market is speaking and it’s saying there’s a problem with just saying “label the food better.” All of that said, I don’t quite see the answer if the cause is just greed. Maybe in that case the bigger stick is warranted.

tracker1 2y ago

Well... the FDA won't allow companies to just list "may contain" for sesame, they have to have effectively multiple plants in complete isolation, or... add a tiny bit of sesame to everything and affirmatively state so. In this case, I prefer the "may contain" verbiage... saying something "does not contain" is a practical minefield. If you're that sensitive to something, find a producer that makes what you're asking for, or if you can tolerate a small amount, or make your own food from basic ingredients.

VBprogrammer 2y ago
> If you're that sensitive to something, find a producer that makes what you're asking for, or if you can tolerate a small amount, or make your own food from basic ingredients. The group of people for whom "we take proper control of allergens" is a selling point is a very small one. One of the reasons government exist is to protect people who's interests would not be commercially viable - regulating that building are accessible with a wheelchair etc. Proper allergen control is the cost of doing business in that industry, attempting to blatantly side step regulation should be met with investigation and fines which make doing the right thing the cheaper option. The idea that someone with an allergy should make all of their own food from basic ingredients is comically naive. Essentially ostracizing them from all social events where food is involved.
- tracker1 2y ago
  Would you rather have nobody able to buy bread? Regulation can make entire industries unviable too.. then nobody gets any. I say this as someone allergic to soy/legumes... It's in everything. I don't expect all food suppliers to stop using or handling it. I'm also willing to forgo bread because of my allergies. Much like people with gluten allergies shouldn't expect the govt to force everyone to stop producing bread with gluten. Every plant has someone allergic to it. At some point you have to be responsible for yourself. "May contain" means may contain, or: processed or stored near... That should have been good enough.

s1gsegv 2y ago

I think they are now giving people with allergies the correct information… the unfortunate answer is “we are unable/unwilling to control for these allergens, so you can not safely eat it” (whether this is genuinely not economical, or there is simply greed) The FDA pushes back, as people with allergies shouldn’t be completely shut out from all baked goods. But I suspect they’ll have to tackle the root of the problem and better economically incentivize the control of the allergens if this is the desired outcome, since it seems the market is speaking and it’s saying there’s a problem with just saying “label the food better.” All of that said, I don’t quite see the answer if the cause is just greed. Maybe in that case the bigger stick is warranted.