Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 605 posts

Re: FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't

#81

Post by inferiorhuman »

starttoaster wrote: post #53
Detrytus wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does harm consumers by severely limiting their choices, especially if companies start putting the warning on every product by default, instead of actually making reasonable effort to prevent contamination.

You couldn't write a more perfect allegory for what has already happened due to California's Proposition 65. The common denominator here is that the government gives companies new rules to follow, and enforces severe penalties for breaking them, and so the companies minimized their risk by following them to the extreme. It's almost like if you want a different outcome, the government agencies involved need to step up…

  The common denominator here is that the government gives companies new rules
  to follow, and enforces severe penalties for breaking them, and so the
  companies minimized their risk by following them to the extreme.
Hardly. Prop 65 initially contained minimal guidance and essentially no teeth. So rather than identify problematic chemicals companies just slapped generic Prop 65 warnings on everything.

  architecting these policies in a way where the companies are forced to
  follow the "spirit" of them.
Prop 65 was updated so that companies were required to put specifics on the warning label. The state even went so far as to start enforcing the requirements, and then…

  I can't be mad if I create a policy, and someone follows it.
And then the state got sued because apparently labeling your products is simply more difficult than legal action.

Re: FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't

#82

Post by autoexec »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #77
autoexec wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is one reason why some people will be tempted to roll the dice and end up dead or in the ER. It's much better to just know if something is in your food that will kill you. It doesn't help that repeated exposure to an allergen can cause a person's sensitivity to that allergen and the severity of their reaction to increase. Companies who want to sell their products to people with allergies should be required to a…

This is a very odd take to me given the focus of the article is that companies are explicitly saying "If you have severe allergies, don't buy this product", but the FDA is saying this isn't good enough. That is, the whole focus of the article is that these companies don't want to sell to consumers who may have severe allergies. Honestly, I side with the companies on this one. It's just a matter of incentives - if the…

I agree that the FDA got this one wrong and it's just better to have companies add the allergen than just put on a "maybe" label.

The problem with making it okay to just put a "this may or may not kill you" label on products is that more and more companies will do it just to shield themselves from liability regardless of what is in their foods (it's cheaper to add a label and not add an unnecessary ingredient than to add the ingredient and also label your product) so we seem to agree there. When every company has a "this might kill you, but maybe not" label just to cover their asses, large amounts of products are then made off limits to people who don't want to take the risk. When every company is using the "may contain" label as a shield and people start to think "Every company just puts that label on everything even when it's perfectly safe" they will take more chances too.

> Every single person I've ever known that has a severe allergy never "rolls the dice",...I've known people that have mild allergies to products (e.g. symptoms are on the level of lactose intolerance) who don't worry about avoiding trace amounts of allergens.

Again, the problem is that when people with mild allergies to products keep eating them it can cause them to have a severe allergic reaction and that leads to deaths and ER visits. It's not hyperbole, it's fact. Repeated exposure can increase severity and sensitivity and so people who feel safe with trace amounts because they have "always" only had a mild reaction in the past do roll the dice and some of them lose. Those people are also less likely to have epi pens to save them when they finally do run into trouble.

All the people you've known are welcome to keep playing that game, but generally the smart thing is to always avoid foods that you know cause your immune system to react no matter how mildly unless you're doing it under care of a doctor.

Re: FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't

#83

Post by jurassicfoxy »

infecto wrote: post #73

I think this is a sham and the FDA is overstepping. 0.2% of the population have sesame allergies. Maybe its higher the recent numbers I saw from a government study gave this number.

Isn't it about establishing a framework that people can trust, and closing loopholes? Just because the specifics are about sesame seeds, isn't that how the law works? Some stupid specific case forms the groundwork for the entire system?

Re: FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't

#84

Post by antiquark »

FDA is talking out of both sides of their mouth. From their own website:

> Consumers may also see advisory statements such as “may contain [allergen] or “produced in a facility that also uses [allergen].” Such statements are not required by law and can be used to address unavoidable “cross-contact,” only if manufacturers have incorporated good manufacturing processes in their facility and have taken every precaution to avoid cross-contact that can occur when multiple foods with different allergen profiles are produced in the same facility using shared equipment or on the same production line, as the result of ineffective cleaning, or from the generation of dust or aerosols containing an allergen.

https://www.fda.gov/food/food-labeling-nutrition/food-allerg...

Re: FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't

#85

Post by starttoaster »

heavyset_go wrote: post #64
starttoaster wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It was a clear and flagrant abuse of the "may contain traces" mechanism. The bakeries caused harm for consumers as a way to avoid the coats of doing business safely. In the exact same way that every product ever invented may cause cancer in California, I assume? This is a problem with the FDA, not the companies. Give a dog a long leash, they're going to use the slack.

Companies aren't dogs, companies have obligations that they need to fulfill and they're choosing to neglect them.

> Companies aren't dogs

Metaphor, but sure, quite literally they're not dogs. Very true.

> companies have obligations that they need to fulfill and they're choosing to neglect them.

From our eyes they're neglecting to follow the spirit of a policy. From their eyes, they're following it to the letter of the policy. Perspective.

Re: FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't

#86

Post by thfuran »

Jtsummers wrote: post #78
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are some of their brands just pictures of sandwiches?

They're filling out the grid. There are 31 brands (if I counted correctly) which doesn't fill out any grid other than 1x31 or 31x1. They filled it out to 40 because that gives a nice grid at the larger size (4x10) and smaller windows (2x20) while not leaving any empty spaces. If they kept it with 31 there'd be empty space at any reasonable column count (2, 3, 4, 5, 6). Past 4-6 columns it starts getting too busy acro…

But cropping to circle/hexagon and offsetting alternate rows, with three rows of five between four of four, obviates the need for weird filler sandwiches. Then you can just tell people with other screen sizes to go away to somewhere with less perfection.

Re: FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't

#87

Post by Miner49er »

umvi wrote: post #34

At this point it seems like it might be more effective to mandate the opposite: labels that indicate that the product is allergen free for X class of allergen. That way the default (no label) = might contain allergens, and the presence of the label guarantees your safety. Companies that take allergen cross contamination seriously can tout the label (and win the business of the allergic), companies that don't won't re…

It's an interesting idea, but the end result would probably be less options for people with allergies (unless they risk foods that appear to be safe, but lack the label.)

We already have this type of labelling for gluten free foods, and one common complaint in the celiac community is that gluten should also be a major allergen. This would help greatly in deciding if a product is safe for people with celiac, since many products are but manufacturers don't bother putting GF labels on them.

Re: FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't

#88

Post by Washuu »

orange_fritter wrote: post #76
lotsofpulp wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever the 7th row, 4th column is, it does not look appetizing.

There's probably just some ~Wordpress dev who picked from a selection of B-Roll. The CEO probably marginally understands bread and isn't a raisin french toast peanut butter freak.

> raisin french toast peanut butter freak

I want this so badly right now.

Re: FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't

#89

Post by Miner49er »

Molitor5901 wrote: post #15

This seems like splitting hairs on the part of the FDA. FDA officials acknowledged Tuesday that statements that a product “may contain” certain allergens “could be considered truthful and not misleading.” Bimbo officials have until July 8 to identify steps taken to remedy the issue — or to explain why the labeling doesn't violate FDA standards. So a baker.. who adds (insert allergy ingredient here), in minute quantit…

The food manufacturer is supposed to follow GMP and prevent allergens for being in foods they shouldn't be in.

Re: FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't

#90

Post by floxy »

autoexec wrote: post #82
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very odd take to me given the focus of the article is that companies are explicitly saying "If you have severe allergies, don't buy this product", but the FDA is saying this isn't good enough. That is, the whole focus of the article is that these companies don't want to sell to consumers who may have severe allergies. Honestly, I side with the companies on this one. It's just a matter of incentives - if the…

I agree that the FDA got this one wrong and it's just better to have companies add the allergen than just put on a "maybe" label. The problem with making it okay to just put a "this may or may not kill you" label on products is that more and more companies will do it just to shield themselves from liability regardless of what is in their foods (it's cheaper to add a label and not add an unnecessary ingredient than to…

>Repeated exposure can increase severity and sensitivity

Where can one learn more about this? I thought allergy immunotherapy was about repeated exposure to the allergen. I'm not up to speed on allergies. Does anyone know how many sesame related allergy deaths there are in the U.S.?

https://www.aaaai.org/tools-for-the-public/latest-research-s...

Post reply on HN