5 ms·

> Food manufacturers use the SRMs to calibrate their test methods and equipment. So we trust them to self-report their nutrition labels, rather than having an

> Food manufacturers use the SRMs to calibrate their test methods and equipment. So we trust them to self-report their nutrition labels, rather than having an unbiased lab perform the test? That seems problematic.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
repeekad 2y ago
If they lie then it’s a lawsuit, and the tax dollars and waste that would go into a centralized solution like you want would be eye watering
- dooglius 2y ago
  How is there going to be a lawsuit if there is no independent test?
  - calmbonsai 2y ago
    If there's sufficient backing and motivation due to say...another impeding lawsuit, there most definitely will be, not just one, but a handful of "independent tests" each backed by the plaintiff and the defendant.
  - extrapickles 2y ago
    In some industries companies regularly test their biggest competitors for compliance, then complain to the government if they don’t meet requirements.
- TimTheTinker 2y ago
  Relying on potential lawsuits alone to ensure compliance with complex requirements is irresponsible. That's like saying that the customers and shareholders of a given company are sufficient because they can sue, and therefore financial audits of the company are unnecessary. The solution doesn't have to be a heavyweight centralized agency, either. Simply requiring periodic tests by an independent, licensed third party (just like financial auditors) should be sufficient.
  - cogman10 2y ago
    We do this for meet and it's done wonders for the quality of products that fall under the USDA. The FDA is technically in charge of the doing these inspections for stuff that doesn't fall under the USDA, but they are fully captured doing the D in FDA and not the F. It'd make sense to move that responsibility out of the FDA and into the USDA to form a new food focused agency. It'd also make sense to regulate supplements, but there's a lot of monied interests that don't want more/better oversight so good luck seeing that happen. At a minimum, consumers should be reasonably confident that what's on the label is in the package. That's not really true for supplements.
    - dylan604 2y ago
      > We do this for meet and it's done wonders for the quality of products that fall under the USDA. Sometimes typos are just fun. Could you imagine if everyone of your meetings had to follow strict FDA guidelines? Not sure if that would improve or worsen the typical meeting experience. Maybe a chart on the meeting invite like calories/sugars/etc that would indicate the type of meeting. If the sugars are too high, it will be one of those meetings where everything is super positive and sickening to sit through. A high protein value could indicate there will be actual useful information in the meeting.
  - coldpie 2y ago
    There's lots of competition in food manufacturing. Your competitors would likely suggest an investigation if your company started selling something like 10cal/Tb butter. If your swindling falls under the threshold of notice, then honestly you're probably within the fairly generous acceptable error bars anyway.
sparky_z 2y ago
I don't know the answer, but this doesn't seem to tell us one way or the other. Even if there is independent lab testing for the final certification, it would be crazy for the company to not perform their own testing many many more times during the R&D process. I have a friend who does mass spectroscopy testing to measure volatile chemical emissions from consumer goods. They don't do final certification testing for the relevant government agency, but they are contracted by the companies themselves to provide continuous testing services as the products are being developed and manufacturing processes are being dialed in. Once they have a finished product, it's sent to a government lab (or independent contractor, I'm not sure) for final certification.
advisedwang 2y ago
Yeah basically. There's pretty wide margins allowed on the accuracy too AND in practice major mistakes in labeling happen. But unlike allergens, even quite significant errors usually don't result in serious consequences, so the cost, development delays and other side effects of really strong enforcement aren't really that worthwhile.
bombcar 2y ago
Wait until you read up how the FAA certifies planes!
beowulfey 2y ago
There are audits, and lying can result in fines. But yes, as with most regulations businesses are expected to follow them but they can not follow them at the risk of repercussions.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

repeekad 2y ago

If they lie then it’s a lawsuit, and the tax dollars and waste that would go into a centralized solution like you want would be eye watering

dooglius 2y ago
How is there going to be a lawsuit if there is no independent test?
- calmbonsai 2y ago
  If there's sufficient backing and motivation due to say...another impeding lawsuit, there most definitely will be, not just one, but a handful of "independent tests" each backed by the plaintiff and the defendant.
- extrapickles 2y ago
  In some industries companies regularly test their biggest competitors for compliance, then complain to the government if they don’t meet requirements.
TimTheTinker 2y ago
Relying on potential lawsuits alone to ensure compliance with complex requirements is irresponsible. That's like saying that the customers and shareholders of a given company are sufficient because they can sue, and therefore financial audits of the company are unnecessary. The solution doesn't have to be a heavyweight centralized agency, either. Simply requiring periodic tests by an independent, licensed third party (just like financial auditors) should be sufficient.
- cogman10 2y ago
  We do this for meet and it's done wonders for the quality of products that fall under the USDA. The FDA is technically in charge of the doing these inspections for stuff that doesn't fall under the USDA, but they are fully captured doing the D in FDA and not the F. It'd make sense to move that responsibility out of the FDA and into the USDA to form a new food focused agency. It'd also make sense to regulate supplements, but there's a lot of monied interests that don't want more/better oversight so good luck seeing that happen. At a minimum, consumers should be reasonably confident that what's on the label is in the package. That's not really true for supplements.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    > We do this for meet and it's done wonders for the quality of products that fall under the USDA. Sometimes typos are just fun. Could you imagine if everyone of your meetings had to follow strict FDA guidelines? Not sure if that would improve or worsen the typical meeting experience. Maybe a chart on the meeting invite like calories/sugars/etc that would indicate the type of meeting. If the sugars are too high, it will be one of those meetings where everything is super positive and sickening to sit through. A high protein value could indicate there will be actual useful information in the meeting.
- coldpie 2y ago
  There's lots of competition in food manufacturing. Your competitors would likely suggest an investigation if your company started selling something like 10cal/Tb butter. If your swindling falls under the threshold of notice, then honestly you're probably within the fairly generous acceptable error bars anyway.

sparky_z 2y ago

I don't know the answer, but this doesn't seem to tell us one way or the other. Even if there is independent lab testing for the final certification, it would be crazy for the company to not perform their own testing many many more times during the R&D process. I have a friend who does mass spectroscopy testing to measure volatile chemical emissions from consumer goods. They don't do final certification testing for the relevant government agency, but they are contracted by the companies themselves to provide continuous testing services as the products are being developed and manufacturing processes are being dialed in. Once they have a finished product, it's sent to a government lab (or independent contractor, I'm not sure) for final certification.

advisedwang 2y ago

Yeah basically. There's pretty wide margins allowed on the accuracy too AND in practice major mistakes in labeling happen. But unlike allergens, even quite significant errors usually don't result in serious consequences, so the cost, development delays and other side effects of really strong enforcement aren't really that worthwhile.

bombcar 2y ago

Wait until you read up how the FAA certifies planes!

beowulfey 2y ago

There are audits, and lying can result in fines. But yes, as with most regulations businesses are expected to follow them but they can not follow them at the risk of repercussions.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]