3 ms·

It’s not but they should list country of origin for the ingredients

by bushbaba 2mo ago

pc86 2mo ago
"Should" or "are required to?"
- tyre 2mo ago
  Depends on the thing. Olive oil, for example, is required to list its country/countries of origin
- sgc 2mo ago
  Regulations are minimal compared to what most consumers would want and expect. https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/cool https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/cool
  - lostlogin 2mo ago
    Is that true though? Trump was very clear about what he would do, and was voted in. And here we are.
- ssl-3 2mo ago
  For some things like meat, eggs, and milk: The USDA-inspected processing facility is required to be listed on the package. It is usually not very far-removed from the farm. It's coded, and these days it's usually printed near the sell-by date. They (the USDA) publish cross-references betwixt the codes and the processing plants. It's been kind of a pain in the ass when I've looked this stuff up in the past and I wish someone would take it upon themselves to make it easier, but it's do-able.
sgc 2mo ago
In the US I also want to know State of Origin. Not all state food and agricultural department regulations and inspections are the same.
- ndsipa_pomu 2mo ago
  That sounds like a bad idea if produce can be freely sold across state lines even when it doesn't meet the standards required in a particular state. It's the right conditions to promote a race to the bottom with the states that have the most lax regulations would be more attractive to food companies with the worst standards (production that meets high standards wouldn't benefit from the extra quality unless they can market that specifically).
  - estearum 2mo ago
    Aren't you describing the current state of affairs, and GP's suggestion would enable the ideal state (i.e. food products can compete on implied quality based on state of origin)?
    - ndsipa_pomu 2mo ago
      You're right, I thought I was replying to a different comment somehow.

It’s not but they should list country of origin for the ingredients

pc86 2mo ago

"Should" or "are required to?"

tyre 2mo ago
Depends on the thing. Olive oil, for example, is required to list its country/countries of origin
sgc 2mo ago
Regulations are minimal compared to what most consumers would want and expect. https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/cool https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/cool
- lostlogin 2mo ago
  Is that true though? Trump was very clear about what he would do, and was voted in. And here we are.
ssl-3 2mo ago
For some things like meat, eggs, and milk: The USDA-inspected processing facility is required to be listed on the package. It is usually not very far-removed from the farm. It's coded, and these days it's usually printed near the sell-by date. They (the USDA) publish cross-references betwixt the codes and the processing plants. It's been kind of a pain in the ass when I've looked this stuff up in the past and I wish someone would take it upon themselves to make it easier, but it's do-able.

sgc 2mo ago

In the US I also want to know State of Origin. Not all state food and agricultural department regulations and inspections are the same.

ndsipa_pomu 2mo ago
That sounds like a bad idea if produce can be freely sold across state lines even when it doesn't meet the standards required in a particular state. It's the right conditions to promote a race to the bottom with the states that have the most lax regulations would be more attractive to food companies with the worst standards (production that meets high standards wouldn't benefit from the extra quality unless they can market that specifically).
- estearum 2mo ago
  Aren't you describing the current state of affairs, and GP's suggestion would enable the ideal state (i.e. food products can compete on implied quality based on state of origin)?
  - ndsipa_pomu 2mo ago
    You're right, I thought I was replying to a different comment somehow.