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

451–460 of 605 posts

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

#451

Post by b_t_s »

mrweasel wrote: post #427
crote wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > Because it can be difficult and expensive to keep sesame in one part of a baking plant out of another, some companies began adding small amounts of sesame to products that didn't previously contain the ingredient to avoid liability and cost. So yes, to avoid having to prevent cross-contamination, they started intentionally introducing trace amounts of allergens.

That seems like the actions of a psychopath to be honest. I struggle to comprehend that someone would care that much about profit that they would intentionally introduce a "contamination", rather than ensuring a correct labeling and clean environment, making their product safe to consume to those with certain allergies.

Sociopathy is probably a more accurate diagnosis than psychopathy. And corporations are inherently sociopathic. By definition their primary motive is profit and there are often strong incentives on those in charge to ignore ethical considerations. It's probably the #1 reason we have consumer protection, and environmental protection laws.

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

#452

Post by b_t_s »

RenThraysk wrote: post #437
mrweasel wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like the actions of a psychopath to be honest. I struggle to comprehend that someone would care that much about profit that they would intentionally introduce a "contamination", rather than ensuring a correct labeling and clean environment, making their product safe to consume to those with certain allergies.

It has nothing to do with profit, as it'll just increase the price of the goods to the consumer.

and lose profit. If they spend the money to run a safe production line and pass the cost on the the consumer they will loose market share to the company that runs an unsafe production line & keeps the price the same. It's also especially expensive if the do it quickly. It's been a few years, so fortunately some of them have actually gotten around to updating their production lines by now. T hey just did it slowly in the cheapest, least disruptive way possible.

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

#453

Post by flyinprogrammer »

russdill wrote: post #222
flyinprogrammer wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When companies install a handicap ramp in their business, it also incurs a cost. I don't blame the bread companies for their choice, and I'm in the minority now left with no choice but to boycott, and that's fine, their finance team likely said my dollars don't impact their bottomline, and they're likely correct. I also understand that a handicap ramp is likely considerably cheaper than retrofitting a manufacturing f…

You're not going to get anywhere with boycotts. Write and contact decision makers/representatives, on a fairly regular basis. You might end up just screaming into the wind, but you might also make a difference. A boycott by sesame allergy suffers of companies that aren't mindful will always have zero impact.

I think I can do both? Especially because I have no choice but to boycott or risk killing my kid? But also, YOU should boycott too, why are you eating food with crap in it?

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

#454

Post by kragen »

lukan wrote: post #323
kragen wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well, until now, bimbo's breads were sesame-free, and now they'll presumably have sesame in them. so people in the usa with sesame allergies will have to cook their own bread at home now, unless they're lucky enough to have access to a small artisanal bakery

"will have to cook their own bread at home now" Serious question as a non native english speaker, is this a correct way of saying it? I think bread is usually baked in an oven ..

as a native english speaker, i should have said 'bake their own bread'. it sounds wrong the way i wrote it

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

#455

Post by [deleted] »

nindalf wrote: post #331
aiauthoritydev wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The safest thing to do is to actually add the allergens to some degree and then warn people.

The article says that is precisely what they did and the FDA found that it violated the spirit of the law.

[deleted]

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

#456

Post by s1artibartfast »

treflop wrote: post #440
s1artibartfast wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's kind of the point. There very well could be nothing wrong with that food bowl and someone slapped a label on it for no reason at all. Literally without meaning.

Except because of prop 65, I learned that some bowls actually do have some lead in them due to their glazes or coloring… And that the label was probably correct.

You say probably and I guess that guesswork is what it comes down to.

I think that p65 warnings are only slightly better than random in terms of identifying risky objects. I would guess they are only applied half the time if the item contains a known chemical, and half the time it contains a chemical, it has no label.

Also, the threshold is so poor, you have no idea if an item is actually dangerous even if it is correctly used.

Last, it is pretty unclear what they mean. When I walk into a p65 building, does that mean I am taking a real risk, or that I shouldn't eat the building because the paint contains lead. Same for the bowl.

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

#457

Post by sroussey »

mgkimsal wrote: post #395
konschubert wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know what the margins on bread are, but I would bet that they are tiny since this is a competitive market. Meaning that this kind of medical-lab-style cross contamination protocol will either raise the cost of the product or reduce the variety and choice.

> Meaning that this kind of medical-lab-style cross contamination protocol will either raise the cost of the product or reduce the variety and choice. If the result is a safer population, why wouldn't we want this?

> If the result is a safer population, why wouldn't we want this?

The best way to a safer population is making cars illegal. So many deaths.

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

#458

Post by treflop »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #456
treflop wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except because of prop 65, I learned that some bowls actually do have some lead in them due to their glazes or coloring… And that the label was probably correct.

You say probably and I guess that guesswork is what it comes down to. I think that p65 warnings are only slightly better than random in terms of identifying risky objects. I would guess they are only applied half the time if the item contains a known chemical, and half the time it contains a chemical, it has no label. Also, the threshold is so poor, you have no idea if an item is actually dangerous even if it is corr…

But isn’t that the case with everything? You can’t take anything at face value and never in history have you ever been able to.

When you read a news article, you have to know about the publication before you can contextualize the article.

When you read a restaurant movie review or rating, you have to know what the general average is and trends of the source before you can interpret the rating.

When you read about some food being healthy, you need to know if they mean nutrient wise or calorie wise to contextualize “healthy.”

Just reading hackernews, you know how people on here swing about different issues so when an article comes up on one of those issues, you know how the comment section may perceive the issue.

To me, prop 65 is just another thing that provides a signal if you want to contextualize it.

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

#459

Post by dehugger »

demondemidi wrote: post #415
gumby wrote: post #24

FWIW Bimbo (a Mexican company) is the largest baking company in north america -- when you go to the typical grocery store almost all the baked goods will be from Bimbo regardless of the label ( https://bimbobakeriesusa.com/our-brands )

Dave’s killer Bread and Franz are both made in Portland Oregon are not part of Bimbo. I love my city.

Dave's Killer Bread is out favorite :)

The one time I've been in Portland we were drunkenly stumbling back to our hotel when we came across the Franz factory. We spent so long watching the production through the windows that security came and told us to move along! it was absolutely fascinating.

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

#460

Post by buildbot »

shiroiushi wrote: post #276
buildbot wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s likely a USA cultulareism that was imported? Or did english steal that word?

It's had that meaning in the USA for decades, so Finnish probably borrowed it. The US doesn't get much exposure to Finnish media.

Yeah that's what I figured too.

Anyone have recommendations for Finnish media? Haha

Post reply on HN