Not just for the Aussies, and it very likely applies globally...
Listened to a podcast today, and learnt something...
Australia has pretty strict labelling laws, we also have a low gluten ppm level for gluten free products. Albeit there is still a 5% loophole....
if an ingredient added to a product is less than 5% of the total, the manufacturer does not have to declare it on the label.
This mainly applies to MSG, preservatives etc, but it got me thinking about us super sensitive MC types and people reacting /having flares even though according to the label they believe they are consuming 'safe food'. My first thought was soy.
And the other tricky part, 'no added soy' could still mean there is soy in the original manufacturing process of an ingredient. No added soy just means in the final process there was no soy added...
Another reason to avoid processed foods or items that have more than a few ingredients, especially when there is inflammation/health issues/external triggers making us more likely to react.
5% loophole -product labels.
Moderators: Rosie, Stanz, Jean, CAMary, moremuscle, JFR, Dee, xet, Peggy, Matthew, Gabes-Apg, grannyh, Gloria, Mars, starfire, Polly, Joefnh
-
Gabes-Apg
- Emperor Penguin
- Posts: 8332
- Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:12 pm
- Location: Hunter Valley NSW Australia
5% loophole -product labels.
Gabes Ryan
"Anything that contradicts experience and logic should be abandoned"
Dalai Lama
"Anything that contradicts experience and logic should be abandoned"
Dalai Lama
Specifying a minimum percentage as a threshold for required inclusion on a label may only be true in Australia, but it's just one of several reasons why anyone who has food sensitivities should avoid processed foods.
In the U. S. for example, "trace amounts" are not defined in the regulations, so no percentage level is specified for the minimum amount of an ingredient that must be included on a label. And in addition, allergens are specifically prohibited from bring omitted from a label due to "trace amount" exemptions:
But of course the term "allergens" only applies to the 8 "officially-defined" allergens, namely, milk, eggs, fish, Crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat, and soybeans. Trace amounts of other food sensitivities are not required to be listed.
Tex
In the U. S. for example, "trace amounts" are not defined in the regulations, so no percentage level is specified for the minimum amount of an ingredient that must be included on a label. And in addition, allergens are specifically prohibited from bring omitted from a label due to "trace amount" exemptions:
Guidance for Industry: A Food Labeling Guide (6. Ingredient Lists)7. Is it necessary to declare ingredients in “trace”, i.e., incidental amounts? Can sulfites be considered incidental additives?
Answer: FDA does not define “trace amounts”; however, there are some exemptions for declaring ingredients present in “incidental” amounts in a finished food. If an ingredient is present at an incidental level and has no functional or technical effect in the finished product, then it need not be declared on the label. An incidental additive is usually present because it is an ingredient of another ingredient. Note that major food allergens (as discussed under Food Allergen Labeling), regardless of whether they are present in the food in trace amounts, must be declared.
Sulfites added to any food or to any ingredient in any food and that has no technical effect in that food are considered to be incidental only if present at less than 10 ppm. 21 CFR 101.100(a)(3) & (4)
But of course the term "allergens" only applies to the 8 "officially-defined" allergens, namely, milk, eggs, fish, Crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat, and soybeans. Trace amounts of other food sensitivities are not required to be listed.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
I also listened to a podcast the other day, regarding food and pesticides/labelling.
When the authorities or the industry itself want to find out whether a pesticide is poisonous they investigate the pesticides one by one, not the cocktail effect all the pesticides have together.
For instance, the most common pesticide product Roundup is 125 times more poisonous than it's main ingredient, Glyphosate.
Why: Because producers all over the world don't have to inform of any "helping ingredients" in a product. It's kind of an unwritten law.
(I'm Sorry, but I don't know a better English word for "helping ingredients")
Lilja
When the authorities or the industry itself want to find out whether a pesticide is poisonous they investigate the pesticides one by one, not the cocktail effect all the pesticides have together.
For instance, the most common pesticide product Roundup is 125 times more poisonous than it's main ingredient, Glyphosate.
Why: Because producers all over the world don't have to inform of any "helping ingredients" in a product. It's kind of an unwritten law.
(I'm Sorry, but I don't know a better English word for "helping ingredients")
Lilja
Collagenous Colitis diagnosis in 2010
Psoriasis in 1973, symptom free in 2014
GF, CF and SF free since April, 2013
Psoriasis in 1973, symptom free in 2014
GF, CF and SF free since April, 2013
That is a little bit of what I'm working on, trying to be extra careful to avoid hidden sources of soy. I'm even going so far as to avoid live stock items were the animal had been fed soy meal. I'm guessing with this idea. Part of the puzzle for me is I've figured out that eating pork will cause great amounts of gum swelling. The swelling is painful and to the point where teeth become loose and wiggle. The reaction is consistent. It takes around 10 days for it to happen, eating pork for at least one meal during the day. It occurs whether the pork is organic, bought from the store, or from processed sliced packets.
I was hoping it was only pork that caused the gum swelling problem. When I only ate a grass fed beef, most of the times my gums did great, and the stomach was in good shape. But every once in awhile the gum swelling would make an appearance. The last time it occurred after eating a new grass fed cheese.
Most chicken and turkey seem to be problem foods for me. I know the gut tends to reject them, most of the time. I'm less certain about the gum swelling. I tend to avoid bird items.
I probably could figure this out once and for all if I bought some tofu and ate that to see what happens. It might come to that eventually. I suspect it will be a long night too if I did that. It might be relevant or not, but my father recently attended a party where tofu was served. After the meal he thought he was "going to die". He was violently ill to his stomach. He blamed the sicknesses on something else other than the tofu and he may be right about that, but with allergies running in families it raised red flags for me, particularly since avoiding soy to an extreme is something I've been working on.
For about a week I've been eating a wild caught fish diet. Figure it would be unlikely that soy would find its way into a wild fishes diet. I'm about a week into the diet, and so far my gums are feeling better than they have in a good long while. My appearance is healthier looking also. I have good hopes for the diet, but it is one of those time will tell scenarios.
I'm hoping that time is on my side as I have a dentist appointment in 8 days for a teeth cleaning. The wonderful way my gums are today, I'm liable to hear heaps of praises from the dentist at how well i've been brushing and flossing - which I always a bit irritating. I have brushed and flossed religiously for decades! but it hasn't made a significant difference for my gum or dental health.
I was hoping it was only pork that caused the gum swelling problem. When I only ate a grass fed beef, most of the times my gums did great, and the stomach was in good shape. But every once in awhile the gum swelling would make an appearance. The last time it occurred after eating a new grass fed cheese.
Most chicken and turkey seem to be problem foods for me. I know the gut tends to reject them, most of the time. I'm less certain about the gum swelling. I tend to avoid bird items.
I probably could figure this out once and for all if I bought some tofu and ate that to see what happens. It might come to that eventually. I suspect it will be a long night too if I did that. It might be relevant or not, but my father recently attended a party where tofu was served. After the meal he thought he was "going to die". He was violently ill to his stomach. He blamed the sicknesses on something else other than the tofu and he may be right about that, but with allergies running in families it raised red flags for me, particularly since avoiding soy to an extreme is something I've been working on.
For about a week I've been eating a wild caught fish diet. Figure it would be unlikely that soy would find its way into a wild fishes diet. I'm about a week into the diet, and so far my gums are feeling better than they have in a good long while. My appearance is healthier looking also. I have good hopes for the diet, but it is one of those time will tell scenarios.
I'm hoping that time is on my side as I have a dentist appointment in 8 days for a teeth cleaning. The wonderful way my gums are today, I'm liable to hear heaps of praises from the dentist at how well i've been brushing and flossing - which I always a bit irritating. I have brushed and flossed religiously for decades! but it hasn't made a significant difference for my gum or dental health.
-
twirlitgirl
- Adélie Penguin
- Posts: 181
- Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 5:46 am
- Location: Canada
It sure makes you wonder about what you are eating when it is not prepared freshly in its original form by you, we have put our lives in the hands of food manufactures for years, adding many chemicals that we can't pronounce and we have eaten them , become addicted to their flavours and
not known what in the world of food additives and chemicals we were eating. I am done giving them that power over me, I have cut way back on eating any processed foods because of the question , can I trust them and what they put on the label? I have a choice to buy or not buy and eat
what I think is safe, every day we eat anything or do anything it is putting trust in others. I realize some things are out of our control while others aren't.
I was going to have some packaged minced ginger from a sushi establishment I didn't eat the sushi, take-out for my family, just thought okay I can sprinkle this over my safe foods and give it a different flavour, when looked at the ingredients, it wasn't just minced ginger, it was flavoured with other ingredients to inhance the taste, chemicals, I couldnt' pronounce and don't remember right now, threw the package out, disgusted, so I thought to myself I will just mince my own fresh ginger and I did knowing the only thing in it was ginger. all I wanted was the ginger. sorry for the rant. I think I went way off the topic, oops.
not known what in the world of food additives and chemicals we were eating. I am done giving them that power over me, I have cut way back on eating any processed foods because of the question , can I trust them and what they put on the label? I have a choice to buy or not buy and eat
what I think is safe, every day we eat anything or do anything it is putting trust in others. I realize some things are out of our control while others aren't.
I was going to have some packaged minced ginger from a sushi establishment I didn't eat the sushi, take-out for my family, just thought okay I can sprinkle this over my safe foods and give it a different flavour, when looked at the ingredients, it wasn't just minced ginger, it was flavoured with other ingredients to inhance the taste, chemicals, I couldnt' pronounce and don't remember right now, threw the package out, disgusted, so I thought to myself I will just mince my own fresh ginger and I did knowing the only thing in it was ginger. all I wanted was the ginger. sorry for the rant. I think I went way off the topic, oops.
diagnosed with LC by biopsy
in May 2013 , supplements B complex, Vit C ,Vit D3 Zinc, with a multivitamin, and magnesium to round out the pack.
in May 2013 , supplements B complex, Vit C ,Vit D3 Zinc, with a multivitamin, and magnesium to round out the pack.
I did use a water pick for awhile. It didn't help me unfortunately. I tried a number of ideas over the years for the gum problem - water pick, special electric tooth brush recommended by my dentist, prescription anti gum inflammatory that I wiped on, different mouth washes, but nothing helped. As mentioned I'm not completely sure why the problem happens, but suspect today that I'm having a contact allergy reaction in the mouth. Hopefully the fish diet I'm on will take care of the problem. It can be painful when the swelling happens.dfpowell wrote:Blueberry,
Have you tried a waterpik for your gums. I have had lots of problems with my gums, but after I started using a waterpik several times a day they cleared up.
Lilja,
It's a rather common practice for some of the people who produce blogs, podcasts, etc. for the purpose of promoting their own agenda, to play fast and loose with the truth by stating half-truths and insinuations that lead viewers or listeners to believe that something is true when in fact it is only speculation or even fabrication in a few cases. Some of what they say is true, and that gains viewer's or listener's confidence, and then they slip the half-truths (and in some cases, outright lies) into the conversation and most people don't know the difference, so they tend to believe it.
I believe the word you are seeking (for "helping ingredients") is "adjuvants". But in the U. S., chemical adjuvants are always listed on the label, and I believe that's true in Europe as well. The chemical adjuvant most commonly used in Roundup is a surfactant designed to break down the surface tension of the spray droplets so that instead of beading up on a plant's leaf, the active ingredient, salt of glyphosate, will soak in. A surfactant is nothing more than a detergent. I'm not aware of any other adjuvants that are commonly used with glyphosate, but I suppose it would be possible to use what's known as a chemical penetration enhancer (CPE).
CPES are designed to open the pores between the cells of the skin or other surface layer of an organism to enhance absorption. But these chemicals are typically far too expensive to use in a product as cheap as Roundup. Instead, they are used in body lotions and similar cosmetic products to enhance absorption. They create the same effect on the skin as gluten does in the intestines — they increase epithelial permeability (aka leaky gut). And yes, I have wondered if some of these products might actually cause leaky gut for the people who use them, opening the door to food sensitivities and the development of MC.
Roundup was originally developed in 1974. I have no idea if any of the claims made against it (by people who have never used any of it) are true or false. Time will tell. The people who actually use this product are exposed to hundreds or thousands of times as much of the chemical as the minuscule amounts that might end up in food I would point out though that whenever a truly harmful product is discovered in the marketplace, most of the claims against it are typically made by those who actually use the product, and who have suffered obvious harm. Right? That hasn't happened with Roundup.
I have used the product since it was first sold — IOW for almost 40 years. It should have "got" me by now, but I'm still kickin'.
Now I'll admit that I'm not kicking as high as I was 40 years ago, but I suspect that ageing might have something to do with that. In actual use, I haven't found the use of surfactants or other adjuvants in Roundup to increase the effectiveness of the glyphosate salts by much more than a factor of roughly 2 or 3. It helps, but it certainly doesn't make the product anywhere near 125 times more potent. Where do people get stuff like that? Monsanto could make another fortune if they could figure out a way to actually do that.
Tex
It's a rather common practice for some of the people who produce blogs, podcasts, etc. for the purpose of promoting their own agenda, to play fast and loose with the truth by stating half-truths and insinuations that lead viewers or listeners to believe that something is true when in fact it is only speculation or even fabrication in a few cases. Some of what they say is true, and that gains viewer's or listener's confidence, and then they slip the half-truths (and in some cases, outright lies) into the conversation and most people don't know the difference, so they tend to believe it.
I believe the word you are seeking (for "helping ingredients") is "adjuvants". But in the U. S., chemical adjuvants are always listed on the label, and I believe that's true in Europe as well. The chemical adjuvant most commonly used in Roundup is a surfactant designed to break down the surface tension of the spray droplets so that instead of beading up on a plant's leaf, the active ingredient, salt of glyphosate, will soak in. A surfactant is nothing more than a detergent. I'm not aware of any other adjuvants that are commonly used with glyphosate, but I suppose it would be possible to use what's known as a chemical penetration enhancer (CPE).
CPES are designed to open the pores between the cells of the skin or other surface layer of an organism to enhance absorption. But these chemicals are typically far too expensive to use in a product as cheap as Roundup. Instead, they are used in body lotions and similar cosmetic products to enhance absorption. They create the same effect on the skin as gluten does in the intestines — they increase epithelial permeability (aka leaky gut). And yes, I have wondered if some of these products might actually cause leaky gut for the people who use them, opening the door to food sensitivities and the development of MC.
Roundup was originally developed in 1974. I have no idea if any of the claims made against it (by people who have never used any of it) are true or false. Time will tell. The people who actually use this product are exposed to hundreds or thousands of times as much of the chemical as the minuscule amounts that might end up in food I would point out though that whenever a truly harmful product is discovered in the marketplace, most of the claims against it are typically made by those who actually use the product, and who have suffered obvious harm. Right? That hasn't happened with Roundup.
I have used the product since it was first sold — IOW for almost 40 years. It should have "got" me by now, but I'm still kickin'.
Now I'll admit that I'm not kicking as high as I was 40 years ago, but I suspect that ageing might have something to do with that. In actual use, I haven't found the use of surfactants or other adjuvants in Roundup to increase the effectiveness of the glyphosate salts by much more than a factor of roughly 2 or 3. It helps, but it certainly doesn't make the product anywhere near 125 times more potent. Where do people get stuff like that? Monsanto could make another fortune if they could figure out a way to actually do that. Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
Hi Tex,
I have investigated the fellow's background, he is a journalist. He has written two books "The Truth On The Table", about our food industry, and "The Truth In The Glass", about what we drink. He has a lot of good arguments, but maybe he was wrong about the Roundup.
He is the only lay person in my country who has bothered to look into the Norwegian equivalent of FDA, and published it in his books.
Lilja
I have investigated the fellow's background, he is a journalist. He has written two books "The Truth On The Table", about our food industry, and "The Truth In The Glass", about what we drink. He has a lot of good arguments, but maybe he was wrong about the Roundup.
He is the only lay person in my country who has bothered to look into the Norwegian equivalent of FDA, and published it in his books.
Lilja
Collagenous Colitis diagnosis in 2010
Psoriasis in 1973, symptom free in 2014
GF, CF and SF free since April, 2013
Psoriasis in 1973, symptom free in 2014
GF, CF and SF free since April, 2013