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

461–470 of 605 posts

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

#461

Post by weberer »

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?

Would you like a law that says everyone must wear a helmet when going outside?

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

#462

Post by sangnoir »

robertlagrant wrote: post #347
sangnoir wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are your thoughts on mandatory wheelchair ramps, fire extinguishers or AED machines? Most of society won't make use of those either.

> What are your thoughts on mandatory wheelchair ramps, fire extinguishers or AED machines? Most of society won't make use of those either. Are you saying these are examples of over-regulation?

No.

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

#463

Post by sureglymop »

kgwgk wrote: post #259
Tomte wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in German, Bimbo is a very racist and insulting word for people with darker skin. Pretty close to the n-word in America.

Swiss court bans ‘racist’ Mexican food brand ‘Bimbo’ https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/multinational-companies/swiss-c...

The headline is definitely clickbaity. It's just that the trademark “Bimbo QSR” was not approved to be registered. They probably have a blocklist for certain words or such.

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

#464

Post by daemin »

int3 wrote: post #417
daemin wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sort of thought implies not believing in insurance of any kind. Why should people pay into a common fund when only a small percentage of them will ever use it.

People generally don't develop allergies randomly in life. There's no insurance value here.

People can develop allergies during their lifetime, it's not just something that you're born with. There's also ongoing studies trying to desensitise people's allergies so that they can deal with foods more easily. So a person's allergy status can and does change during their lifetime.

But my message was about the general principle of insurance being the very thing your comment was against. The situation where the vast majority of people pay some cost of which only a few need to utilise.

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

#465

Post by robertlagrant »

sangnoir wrote: post #462
robertlagrant wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What are your thoughts on mandatory wheelchair ramps, fire extinguishers or AED machines? Most of society won't make use of those either. Are you saying these are examples of over-regulation?

No.

Why are you mentioning them, in that case?

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

#466

Post by Atotalnoob »

StableAlkyne wrote: post #401
postmodest wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the same issue as Prop 65, and while we can all say "oh the law is bad" the real problem is _corporations are lazy_. Instead of making sure their products are safe, they just say everything is unsafe, because they know consumers will become numb to it. Our food shouldn't contain allergens, and our computer mice shouldn't give us cancer, but instead of taking the time to make sure of that, companies just tell…

> Our food shouldn't contain allergens You can pry my gluten-laden, peanut-oil containing, dairy-filled pizza from my cold dead hands! (The problem isn't allergens, many of which are delicious. The problem is not correctly labeling allergens - I think that's the point you wanted to make at least!)

I have a food allergy (gluten, celiacs).

It’s ridiculous to make everything allergen free. It’s also gross, I hate those products that I dubbed “everything free” that are free from the top N allergens.

They have a place in the market, but they aren’t that good

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

#467

Post by BobbyJo »

postmodest wrote: post #384
lpolovets wrote: post #117

My understanding is this allergen over-labeling was inspired by the FDA in the first place. https://www.fastcompany.com/90830854/sesame-seed-allergen-fd... From the linked article (from Jan 2023): But sesame does differ in one distinct way from eggs, peanuts, shellfish, milk, and soy: The seeds are teeny tiny and hard to keep track of. This means they’re prone to “cross-contamination,” in food-allergy terms. If you o…

This is the same issue as Prop 65, and while we can all say "oh the law is bad" the real problem is _corporations are lazy_. Instead of making sure their products are safe, they just say everything is unsafe, because they know consumers will become numb to it. Our food shouldn't contain allergens, and our computer mice shouldn't give us cancer, but instead of taking the time to make sure of that, companies just tell…

> _corporations are lazy_

In market terms: "corporations try to be capital-efficient because they are competing with each other over price-sensitive consumers."

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

#468

Post by wnevets »

postmodest wrote: post #384
lpolovets wrote: post #117

My understanding is this allergen over-labeling was inspired by the FDA in the first place. https://www.fastcompany.com/90830854/sesame-seed-allergen-fd... From the linked article (from Jan 2023): But sesame does differ in one distinct way from eggs, peanuts, shellfish, milk, and soy: The seeds are teeny tiny and hard to keep track of. This means they’re prone to “cross-contamination,” in food-allergy terms. If you o…

This is the same issue as Prop 65, and while we can all say "oh the law is bad" the real problem is _corporations are lazy_. Instead of making sure their products are safe, they just say everything is unsafe, because they know consumers will become numb to it. Our food shouldn't contain allergens, and our computer mice shouldn't give us cancer, but instead of taking the time to make sure of that, companies just tell…

> the real problem is _corporations are lazy_.

But we knew that already. The people coming up with the rules must take that into account otherwise you get prop 65 warnings and cookie banners everywhere.

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

#469

Post by Jiro »

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.

Ensuring a "correct labeling and clean environment" is really expensive. I mean, really expensive. It's not going to be practical.

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

#470

Post by pwg »

bigyikes wrote: post #447
postmodest wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the same issue as Prop 65, and while we can all say "oh the law is bad" the real problem is _corporations are lazy_. Instead of making sure their products are safe, they just say everything is unsafe, because they know consumers will become numb to it. Our food shouldn't contain allergens, and our computer mice shouldn't give us cancer, but instead of taking the time to make sure of that, companies just tell…

If the law doesn’t take into account human and corporate behavior, it’s not a good law. It may ultimately be the corporation’s “fault” but that doesn’t change the fact that the law created perverse incentives. I hear the same argument for the GDPR laws that have resulted in annoying cookie banners everywhere. Sure, it’s technically the website owner’s fault for spying and adding a shitty banner, but… those banners di…

The politicians writing the law were likely unaware (or ignored) the Cobra Effect:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect#The_original_cobr...

Post reply on HN