Live data from Hacker News

Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

marlerblog.com

271–280 of 283 posts

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#271
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How hard would it be for them to know their immediate supplier?

Just throw it on the pile of 1000 other things that a small business has to keep up with with minimal resources and small margins when all they really absolutely need to adhere to is hygiene. Everything else is a nice to have and shouldn’t be a requirement.

No, I have to push back on this. It should actually be illegal not to know where you're buying ingredients from.

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They manage fine in Europe. It’s a cultural issue. If you can’t be arsed working through the minor administrative hassle once (how often do you change the menu..) to not kill your customers then you shouldn’t be in this business.

They manage fine in China/Japan. It’s a cultural issue. People aren’t dropping dead from not being catered for their allergies. Look, i’m not some sort of a devil that hates people with allergies. Roughly 15% of my closest friends have dietary restrictions. But we kinda understand the problem and navigate it ourselves, rather than making it someone else’s problem. Really not a big deal.

> People aren’t dropping dead from not being catered for their allergies.

They literally are, though.

Restaurants have a choice of refusing service to people with allergies (not allowed in many places; not a great idea anywhere), allowing those with restrictions to bring their own food, or just putting the bloody 2-minute effort of writing on the menu which ingredients they use.

Yes, people have died from restaurants doing the last option improperly.

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They manage fine in Europe. It’s a cultural issue. If you can’t be arsed working through the minor administrative hassle once (how often do you change the menu..) to not kill your customers then you shouldn’t be in this business.

I would rather food vendors have the right to refuse service than be subjected to laws that effectively squeeze out smaller operators.

I don't see how it's such a big barrier to business for a food place to have to make sure their staff can answer the question "do you use ingredient X in dish Y?", which, at least in Europe, is sufficient. It's barely a step above asking them to know if the ingredients they use are even safe for consumption, and I'm all for that barrier being held up.

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but going by that 5% of the population have severe food allergies and only ~1% use wheelchairs, so if we accept wheelchair ramps etc. as being a worthwhile investment (which I do) then proper labeling and disclosure of allergens seems reasonable as well?

The labeling and disclosure is pretty much solved. The killer and the cost monster is the handling. That's why you see that "Processed in a facility that also processes XYZ" label on some foods. I had an old coworker with a severe milk protein allergy. So bad that he would get a reaction if he (lip) kissed his wife after she drank milk or had ice cream. So eating out was basically impossible, because his food would p…

Did the goalposts move? I thought the discussion was about restaurants being required to declare allergens, not that they have to be able to accomodate every allergy under the sun and be able to offer a meal for everyone. I don't think that's the law anywhere, either. It's a perfectly fine response to say, sorry, all our ice cream is made with milk so I can't offer you an alternative. It's only about requiring them to be able to answer the question.

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#275
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Explosive diarrhea doesn’t take long to show up, and it may be hard to identify which company or who’s responsible when you fired all of the people from the department that it’s supposed to police those type of things.

Isn't the "explosive" superfluous? Isn't all diarrhea explosive? Has anyone had "unexplosive" diarrhea? Or what aspect of the ordinance renders it "explosive"? And the cause is essentially exposure of the foodstuffs (in this case, likely leafy greens) to feces? So poop causes poop. Who pooped in my salad :(

"I just know it gives you really, really bad diarrhea." -- "As opposed to really, really good diarrhea?"

(Bob's Burgers)

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#276
post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is a benefit in itself, it adds texture and is inoffensively flavoured (hell on the right day or if I haven't drank enough water yet it can taste great). All without adding many calories to the meal. It's also a much cheaper alternative than ozempic for those of us who don't have the consistent willpower to not treat ourselves to more food when we're hungry even if we know we have all the calories we need.

You will never lose weight by eating more calories. If you're going to consume extra calories, there are much more nutritious things than lettuce.

You are much more likely to gain weight if you eat biscuits until you feel full versus eating lettuce to feel full. I.e. if you eat the same volume of BLT vs bacon sandwhich without the lettuce and tommato you will have consumed less calories with the one that is less calorie dense.

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#277
post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather food vendors have the right to refuse service than be subjected to laws that effectively squeeze out smaller operators.

I don't see how it's such a big barrier to business for a food place to have to make sure their staff can answer the question "do you use ingredient X in dish Y?", which, at least in Europe, is sufficient. It's barely a step above asking them to know if the ingredients they use are even safe for consumption, and I'm all for that barrier being held up.

When I make, say, meat loaf, at home, I know that I use ground beef, Panko, egg, onion, ketchup, vinegar, oregano, and garlic. If somebody asks whether there's ground beef, wheat, onion, tomato, vinegar, oregano, or garlic in the food, I believe a waiter could give a correct answer. But if somebody asks about yeast, or high fructose corn syrup, the waiter might have to ask the cook, and the cook might need to look at the label for the Panko or ketchup (surprise! packaging for restaurants may not have the same information as consumer packaging).

If somebody orders, say, ribs, and mentions they are allergic to spices that are found in some barbecue sauces or spice rubs, the waiter isn't going to know (and the cook might not know) if those spices are in the dish, and especially won't know if they're present in a large enough amount to cause a reaction.

The FDA does require manufacturers to keep track of the most common allergens ( https://www.fda.gov/food/nutrition-food-labeling-and-critica... ), but if somebody has an uncommon allergy, they're on their own. Restaurants are regulated by state health departments instead of the USDA. California, I believe, has some allergen labeling requirements for its restaurants. Most large restaurants worry enough about liability that they disclose the information (for common allergens) voluntarily.

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#278
post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They manage fine in China/Japan. It’s a cultural issue. People aren’t dropping dead from not being catered for their allergies. Look, i’m not some sort of a devil that hates people with allergies. Roughly 15% of my closest friends have dietary restrictions. But we kinda understand the problem and navigate it ourselves, rather than making it someone else’s problem. Really not a big deal.

> People aren’t dropping dead from not being catered for their allergies. They literally are, though. Restaurants have a choice of refusing service to people with allergies (not allowed in many places; not a great idea anywhere), allowing those with restrictions to bring their own food, or just putting the bloody 2-minute effort of writing on the menu which ingredients they use. Yes, people have died from restaurants…

I don't agree with that - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S132389302.... It's really not that big of a problem here.

"In Japan, according to the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare's vital statistics, about 50 cases of fatal anaphylaxis are reported each year.4,5 In 2020, the most frequent cause of fatal anaphylaxis was bee or wasp stings (13 cases), followed by drugs (8 cases) and foods (2 cases)".

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Web devs aren't forced to deal with accessibility either, unless they choose to work with or for an entity that requires it. No one is coming for your self-hosted blog because its not ADA-compliant. But if you want every restaurant to be forced into labeling, you will see the small restaurants claim all the allergens are used and they cannot protect against cross contamination.

The FDA prohibits blanket labeling of allergens. They might be able to get away with it but it wouldn’t be legal.

I've seen plenty of restaurants with a disclaimer that they have (often unspecified) allergens in the kitchen, and even if the allergen isn't in the ingredient list, it's possible they came in contact with anything in the restaurant. Most people wouldn't have a problem with peanut dust floating through the store, but apparently some people are sensitive enough that trace contamination like that can be a problem.

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's crazy how nothing has been done in the US about this. I got an egg allergy in my late 20s, I had never thought about it before and now eating at restaurants is such a hassle. Even the delivery apps seem to have zero affordances for food allergies, at least with a restaurant you can get some assurance by asking the staff.

I’m very sorry to hear that, but I don’t think restaurants have to be forced to deal with that. The only thing I could support is “if revenue >X then allergen disclosure is mandatory”. I know personally multiple little shops that had to refuse customers, because that’s extra hassle and responsibility that they can’t afford to deal with.

The problem is now they add may contains milk on every item :/
Post reply on HN