It's only "Natural" and the FDA wants your opinion!
Replies
-
BecomingBane wrote: »anewstart22 wrote: »anewstart22 wrote: »catscats222 wrote: »i don't care about studies - why is careegenan in my cluck cluck chicken ????
so i don't have to shake it?
sick of getting sick when i am not reading every single label.
I know, it's ridiculous, on the other hand Horizon products will be removing carageenan from their products by the end of 2016. Some here in 2015. I'll look for that info.
bevnet.com/news/2014/whitewave-to-remove-carrageenan-from-silk-horizon
I've met the CEO of Whitewave. The reason they are doing this is public pressure, true... but not for health reasons... for profit reasons. If the public wants something, they are more than happy to comply because that's where they get their profits from. Greg Engles and Whitewave have strong ties to my previous employer and he is one of Dean Food's (parent company of WhiteWave) biggest financial backers. As far as those two are concerned... it's only profits that drive decision making.
Thank God they are relenting to public pressure, after all there is only one milk I can buy at the grocery store because theirs at the moment has carageenan in it. The proof for me is that there are enough people with problems regarding it, that they are listening to consumers. After all, they lose my purchase every week at the grocery store because carageenan is listed on the carton.0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »anewstart22 wrote: »catscats222 wrote: »i have learned so much today - thanx everyone
i wonder if these chicken products are making it to the cafeterias of our public school systems
msg type products http://www.truthinlabeling.org/hiddensources.html
I would not doubt our children are eating these hidden additives, we just have lost control of our food and have only our voices to make changes.
We haven't lost our voices. You speak with your money. If you don't agree wth adding carrageenan to your food, but products without it. If there is a demand for products it's free of it, they will produce it.
Agreed in full, there is a problem with this for me though. I am in rural america, so a whole plethora of products are not available to me without the additive, and those products that don't list it make me sick, and I have to personally call the company and ask them what is in the product. I shouldn't have to do that, I should be able to read a package and for 100% positive know that carageenan is not contained in it. For my absolute health safety.0 -
anewstart22 wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »anewstart22 wrote: »catscats222 wrote: »i have learned so much today - thanx everyone
i wonder if these chicken products are making it to the cafeterias of our public school systems
msg type products http://www.truthinlabeling.org/hiddensources.html
I would not doubt our children are eating these hidden additives, we just have lost control of our food and have only our voices to make changes.
We haven't lost our voices. You speak with your money. If you don't agree wth adding carrageenan to your food, but products without it. If there is a demand for products it's free of it, they will produce it.
Agreed in full, there is a problem with this for me though. I am in rural america, so a whole plethora of products are not available to me without the additive, and those products that don't list it make me sick, and I have to personally call the company and ask them what is in the product. I shouldn't have to do that, I should be able to read a package and for 100% positive know that carageenan is not contained in it. For my absolute health safety.
I agreed from the beginning about labelling. It is banning it completely I disagree with.0 -
"anewstart22 wrote: »Carageenan is used as a thickener, and it keeps products from separating. Why can't we just go back to the label saying, "Shake well before use? That would take the carageenan completely out of the dairy products.
This actually makes sense. I wonder how many people think they're lactose intolerant when it's really the carageenan in the dairy products that's causing symptoms.0 -
anewstart22 wrote: »http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1242073/pdf/ehp0109-000983.pdf
Above is a PDF of different studies made on carageenan and the effects caused by it. Peer reviewed studies are not out there that I can find, and why would they be? The FDA claims that there is no problem using the additive, why would anyone do a peer review on it if the FDA says it's ok?
Studies on the effects of the additive are there and the FDA is now recognizing there may be problems for people consuming additives and proper labeling. This is so that we as consumers can make informed decisions on what we are buying for our families and selves.
Anyone who doesn't have a problem with ER visits or any other problems regarding additives in food will never understand what we go through and no-one should have to give you a peer review backing up our claims to what we go through and the pain we suffer. It is just not going to happen until these additives are truly recognized for what they are.
Did you read all the way through the pdf you posted? Do you understand everything it says? There are over 9,000 peer reviewed articles on www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov which contains 22 databases if you search "carrageenan"
You need to understand that when you post a rant villifying an additive that is in almost everything we consume, you're going to get backlash, and the community expects (especially those of us who study processes of the body) hard evidence to back up your claims, not a blog. It's not personal, and it's not discounting your pain.
Carrageenan can cause an inflammation response because of certain binding cascades which will activate an increased production of interleukin-8, which is part of the immune response. It seems that in some people there is a decreased threshold of tolerance to the additive. Exposure to it, for some, causes an overproduction of IL-8 through that binding cascade. IL-8 is basically a chemical signal to specific types of white bloods cells and it tells them there is a foreign substance that needs to be elimintaed. The attack that insues causes inflammation and some damage to the GI tract, this is the cause of your pain and problems. It's really similar to an allergy. That does not mean that it is bad and dangerous for all people. There is no proof of that. Yes, there is evidence that in some individuals carrageenan can cause problems, but your blanket statement isn't really appropriate.
+10 -
"anewstart22 wrote: »Carageenan is used as a thickener, and it keeps products from separating. Why can't we just go back to the label saying, "Shake well before use? That would take the carageenan completely out of the dairy products.
This actually makes sense. I wonder how many people think they're lactose intolerant when it's really the carageenan in the dairy products that's causing symptoms.
Exactly, for me it was the intense immediate pain after drinking milk. I also stopped using coffemate in my coffee because it caused me problems as soon as I took a sip of coffee. I was on the email list for coupons and unsubscribed, when they asked why I was unsubscribing I told them their ingredient list was nothing but a chemical laden coctail and I was tired of hurting after using their product. It wasn't long after that they came out with Natural Bliss and I read the ingredient label on it. It has carageenan listed but at the time I didn't know that was my problem. I bought the Natural Bliss and immediately had the intense pain from my coffee. This led me into my descent of the whirlpool called carageenan, and have since been able to rid myself of most problems, until I eat something that is not labeled correctly.0 -
"anewstart22 wrote: »Carageenan is used as a thickener, and it keeps products from separating. Why can't we just go back to the label saying, "Shake well before use? That would take the carageenan completely out of the dairy products.
This actually makes sense. I wonder how many people think they're lactose intolerant when it's really the carageenan in the dairy products that's causing symptoms.
A quick google search makes it seems like a lot of regular milk doesn't have this. Some organic brands do.
Lactaid does. So for someone who is lactose intolerant still experiencing issues when drinking lactose free milk, that should be an indicator.
A lot of milk alternatives contains it. Seems like avoiding milk would cause more problems than plain milk if that were the case.0 -
To the OP, there is a brand of milk called Fairlife that doesn't have carageenan in it (except their chocolate milk). Just an FYI.
0 -
To the OP, there is a brand of milk called Fairlife that doesn't have carageenan in it (except their chocolate milk). Just an FYI.
Yes, thank you, it's not available in my area. The only one I can get without carageenan is Central Market "Organics" Brand. I'm rural so there aren't a lot of choices for me out here. I don't even have a Central Market here in my area but my local HEB carries it, the brand is their own offshoot from HEB. Unfortunately a lot of the products that HEB carries has carageenan in it, including their own branded products. It's very difficult to shop around here. I've even done online searches to find a company that would ship to me and none of them do because I am either in a different state or they can't sell in my area. Thanks, I appreciate your help.0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »"anewstart22 wrote: »Carageenan is used as a thickener, and it keeps products from separating. Why can't we just go back to the label saying, "Shake well before use? That would take the carageenan completely out of the dairy products.
This actually makes sense. I wonder how many people think they're lactose intolerant when it's really the carageenan in the dairy products that's causing symptoms.
A quick google search makes it seems like a lot of regular milk doesn't have this. Some organic brands do.
Lactaid does. So for someone who is lactose intolerant still experiencing issues when drinking lactose free milk, that should be an indicator.
A lot of milk alternatives contains it. Seems like avoiding milk would cause more problems than plain milk if that were the case.
I believe that to be a case for a lot of people who avoid milk.0 -
anewstart22 wrote: »To the OP, there is a brand of milk called Fairlife that doesn't have carageenan in it (except their chocolate milk). Just an FYI.
Yes, thank you, it's not available in my area. The only one I can get without carageenan is Central Market "Organics" Brand. I'm rural so there aren't a lot of choices for me out here. I don't even have a Central Market here in my area but my local HEB carries it, the brand is their own offshoot from HEB. Unfortunately a lot of the products that HEB carries has carageenan in it, including their own branded products. It's very difficult to shop around here. I've even done online searches to find a company that would ship to me and none of them do because I am either in a different state or they can't sell in my area. Thanks, I appreciate your help.
That sucks. Thought you would be able to get it near you since it's available everywhere around me.0 -
anewstart22 wrote: »To the OP, there is a brand of milk called Fairlife that doesn't have carageenan in it (except their chocolate milk). Just an FYI.
Yes, thank you, it's not available in my area. The only one I can get without carageenan is Central Market "Organics" Brand. I'm rural so there aren't a lot of choices for me out here. I don't even have a Central Market here in my area but my local HEB carries it, the brand is their own offshoot from HEB. Unfortunately a lot of the products that HEB carries has carageenan in it, including their own branded products. It's very difficult to shop around here. I've even done online searches to find a company that would ship to me and none of them do because I am either in a different state or they can't sell in my area. Thanks, I appreciate your help.
That sucks. Thought you would be able to get it near you since it's available everywhere around me.
LOL, yeah the problems with rural america.0 -
where are you located, anewstart?0
-
South Texas, San Pat County, Ingleside. If you are doing a search please know that a website might say a store near me carries the product. Only the actual store near me doesn't really carry it, like Walmart or HEB, the only two grocery stores I have near me, unless I want to drive into the big town called Corpus Christi, which is way too far away to go shopping. Even then you can only add a Sprouts Farmers Market to the list for shopping.0
-
anewstart22 wrote: »
Too long, did not read. Do you have a truncated version?0 -
This is so true. Nothing is good or bad, you just have to find type of food that gives with you personally.0 -
.
0 -
You could ask HEB if they could get some. They might not, but their customer service is generally pretty excellent.anewstart22 wrote: »South Texas, San Pat County, Ingleside. If you are doing a search please know that a website might say a store near me carries the product. Only the actual store near me doesn't really carry it, like Walmart or HEB, the only two grocery stores I have near me, unless I want to drive into the big town called Corpus Christi, which is way too far away to go shopping. Even then you can only add a Sprouts Farmers Market to the list for shopping.
If you have an HEB, you have a better grocery store than most people in urban America.0 -
I don't see any current FDA public inquiries on GRAS (of which carrageenan is one). This post did inspire me to check out the news at the FDA and I see it is cracking down on the dietary supplement industry. It is coming down especially hard on products containing powdered caffeine.
As for the OP's quoting of random "science" to justify her fears, I'm giving my now standard reply.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/jgnatca/view/finding-truth-in-fitness-claims-7767370 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
You could ask HEB if they could get some. They might not, but their customer service is generally pretty excellent.anewstart22 wrote: »South Texas, San Pat County, Ingleside. If you are doing a search please know that a website might say a store near me carries the product. Only the actual store near me doesn't really carry it, like Walmart or HEB, the only two grocery stores I have near me, unless I want to drive into the big town called Corpus Christi, which is way too far away to go shopping. Even then you can only add a Sprouts Farmers Market to the list for shopping.
If you have an HEB, you have a better grocery store than most people in urban America.
Yes, thank you, I have asked before and there are just not enough HEB's around me that will carry the product, so they will only order it if they have multiple requests. I have a few times asked and been told it wasn't on the warehouse list so they won't order that specific item at all. I try for sure though, sometimes I am successful on shelf items like low salt chicken bouillon. I think it really just depends how many HEB stores are around you, and what the majority buys in your area. But yes, the customer service is usually pretty good. I have three stores near me, well one is only two miles away and a very small convenience store kind. The next closest 10 miles and the next closest is 18 miles from home. The one furthest from home ordered the bouillon for me but the other two wouldn't so I had to drive 18 miles to get it. Aye Aye Aye!0 -
Is there a TL:DR version?
The word natural doesn't have any legal definition according to the FDA, which is now taking comments from people about what, if anything, the term should mean when used in marketing food.
Then something, something additives are bad. Didn't read anything to see if our great grandparents who had half our life expectancy and far lower food security didn't need any stinking additives.0 -
Labeling, yes. Banning, no.
I have a gazillion issues with the FDA and with the USDA and with the lack of appropriate funding for them to do a better job. The supplement industry in the USA gets away with outrageously dangerous claims under the standard warning "these statements have not been evaluated etc...". I remember a particularly bad outbreak of E. coli connected to baby spinach in which the source of the bacteria was the water they were washing the spinach with - now, that is not only dumb, it is scary.
When it comes to food intolerances and sensitivities, however, the burden has to be on the consumer.
When it comes to cancers, lots of things can and do increase the odds that an individual will develop it (Sun exposure, processed red meats, obesity, to name a few) - but at some point running those risks are an individual choice. Making the public aware of those risks might be (I think it is) the government's job- stopping an individual from running those risks (which ultimately affects not society but the self) it's not.
Philosophically there is always a tension between freedom and safety. There is no perfect balance (we have daily reminders).
In my opinion, even if there were studies confirming a link between carrageenan and cancer that - in and on itself - would not be reason to ban it. You would have to analyze the data and come up with a significant risk to do it.0 -
Oooooohhhhhh.
http://www.fda.gov/Food/NewsEvents/ConstituentUpdates/ucm471919.htm
Too bad as a Canadian I can't throw in my two cents. I suggest the FDA use the same definition already developed by the Brazilian food guide.
"Natural foods are those obtained directly from plants or
animals (such as green leaves and fruits, or eggs and milk)
and purchased for consumption without having undergone
any alteration following their removal from nature.
Minimally processed foods are natural foods which have
been somewhat altered before being purchased. Examples
include grains that are dried, polished, or ground as grits or
are cooled or frozen; and pasteurised milk."
http://www.foodpolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/Brazilian-Dietary-Guidelines-2014.pdf0 -
eugenia94102 wrote: »Labeling, yes. Banning, no.
I have a gazillion issues with the FDA and with the USDA and with the lack of appropriate funding for them to do a better job. The supplement industry in the USA gets away with outrageously dangerous claims under the standard warning "these statements have not been evaluated etc...". I remember a particularly bad outbreak of E. coli connected to baby spinach in which the source of the bacteria was the water they were washing the spinach with - now, that is not only dumb, it is scary.
When it comes to food intolerances and sensitivities, however, the burden has to be on the consumer.
When it comes to cancers, lots of things can and do increase the odds that an individual will develop it (Sun exposure, processed red meats, obesity, to name a few) - but at some point running those risks are an individual choice. Making the public aware of those risks might be (I think it is) the government's job- stopping an individual from running those risks (which ultimately affects not society but the self) it's not.
Philosophically there is always a tension between freedom and safety. There is no perfect balance (we have daily reminders).
In my opinion, even if there were studies confirming a link between carrageenan and cancer that - in and on itself - would not be reason to ban it. You would have to analyze the data and come up with a significant risk to do it.
Consumers can not make the distinction as to what is in the food if it is not labeled properly. We will have to disagree about banning carageenan, there is no true use for it. It's useless and provides nothing to benefit the human body.0 -
anewstart22 wrote: »eugenia94102 wrote: »Labeling, yes. Banning, no.
I have a gazillion issues with the FDA and with the USDA and with the lack of appropriate funding for them to do a better job. The supplement industry in the USA gets away with outrageously dangerous claims under the standard warning "these statements have not been evaluated etc...". I remember a particularly bad outbreak of E. coli connected to baby spinach in which the source of the bacteria was the water they were washing the spinach with - now, that is not only dumb, it is scary.
When it comes to food intolerances and sensitivities, however, the burden has to be on the consumer.
When it comes to cancers, lots of things can and do increase the odds that an individual will develop it (Sun exposure, processed red meats, obesity, to name a few) - but at some point running those risks are an individual choice. Making the public aware of those risks might be (I think it is) the government's job- stopping an individual from running those risks (which ultimately affects not society but the self) it's not.
Philosophically there is always a tension between freedom and safety. There is no perfect balance (we have daily reminders).
In my opinion, even if there were studies confirming a link between carrageenan and cancer that - in and on itself - would not be reason to ban it. You would have to analyze the data and come up with a significant risk to do it.
Consumers can not make the distinction as to what is in the food if it is not labeled properly. We will have to disagree about banning carageenan, there is no true use for it. In My Opinion It's useless and provides nothing to benefit the human body.
fixed it for you0 -
Actually, it has pretty decent macros and nutrients so I wouldn't say "it provides nothing to the human body".0 -
Which is the very definition of GRAS under FDA. One could say the same of fiber. Or pepper.... there is no true use for it. It's useless and provides nothing to benefit the human body.0 -
Oooooohhhhhh.
http://www.fda.gov/Food/NewsEvents/ConstituentUpdates/ucm471919.htm
Too bad as a Canadian I can't throw in my two cents. I suggest the FDA use the same definition already developed by the Brazilian food guide.
"Natural foods are those obtained directly from plants or
animals (such as green leaves and fruits, or eggs and milk)
and purchased for consumption without having undergone
any alteration following their removal from nature.
Minimally processed foods are natural foods which have
been somewhat altered before being purchased. Examples
include grains that are dried, polished, or ground as grits or
are cooled or frozen; and pasteurised milk."
http://www.foodpolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/Brazilian-Dietary-Guidelines-2014.pdf
Thank you, that is all I ask, to know what is in the product. If it is truly natural, and not derived of something to get something else, just so they can plump it up, or make it a thicker consistency, well then I'm game. Carageenan may come from red seaweed, but it is no longer a complete food when they separate it from the seaweed. Then they add it to foods and use it without acknowledging it on the packaging, this is what causes me and many others to become ill.
Your link is the one included in my links above, I have already printed it and will take my time to answer all of their questions so they can take it with a grain of salt, I believe we will all be a grain of salt but maybe if enough people respond to their request it can add up to a huge truck load of salt. Maybe they will take more consideration on making these producers be more forth coming in telling of all ingredients in their foods. One can only hope for that.
Here is a portion of what they are asking for, I have copied and pasted it below and it directly relates to what I am asking for regarding allergens being noted on labels.
======================================================================
"advises that the issue of declaring allergenic ingredients in food is being discussed on an international level. Several individual governments and the Codex Alimentarius Commission have begun to formulate policy for the labeling of foods containing allergenic ingredients to ensure that consumers are provided sufficient information to avoid substances to which they are allergic. While packaged foods sold in the U.S. are among the most comprehensively labeled foods in the world (some countries provide broader exemptions from ingredient declaration), FDA is studying its labeling requirements, and considering whether rulemaking is necessary, for the labeling of allergenic ingredients.
While the agency does so, FDA asks manufacturers to examine their product formulations for ingredients and processing aids that contain known allergens that they may have considered to be exempt from declaration as incidental additives under 101.100(a)(3), and to declare the presence of such ingredients in the ingredient statement. Where appropriate, the name of the ingredient may be accompanied by a parenthetical statement such as "(processing aid)" for clarity."
======================================================================
My HEB has cookies my husband likes, I don't generally eat store bought cookies but wanted to know why he always came home with them, so I tried one. The cookie is named, "The Big Chip" and the package shows a picture of chocolate chips along side the cookies. By looking at the package you would not have a clue that there is coconut in them. When I tried the cookie I told him it had coconut in it and he told me it did not. I tasted it again, then I read the package ingredients again and found "unsweetened coconut". That's an allergen and many people have reactions to coconut, but the package doesn't say, "Chocolate Chip Coconut Cookies". It shouldn't be that way, the allergens should be right there for people to see. I never thought they would have coconut and only the one time I ate one I noticed it. I had read over the list of ingredients, but I was intently looking for carageenan before I ate one. I'm not allergic to coconut so it wouldn't be an ingredient I would look for. So, the problem for us that need to know what's in our food need the ingredients to be forth coming, and someone looking at a chocolate chip cookie wouldn't expect coconut in it without it in the name of the cookie. Would you not think? I don't know, it's how I think anyway, truth in labeling.
Here is the ingredient list,-you would never know by the picture unless you read the entire ingredient list.
Ingredients: Chocolate Chips (Chocolate Liquor, Sugar, Anhydrous Dextrose, Soy Lecithin [Emulsifier], Artificial Flavor), Enriched Bleached Flour (Wheat Flour, Niacin, Iron, Thiamine Mononitrate, Riboflavin, Folic Acid), Butter, Brown Sugar, Sugar, Liquid Whole Eggs, Dried Unsweetened Coconut, Whey Powder, Sodium Bicarbonate, Baking Powder (Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate, Sodium Bicarbonate, Corn Starch, Monocalcium Phosphate, Calcium Sulfate), Natural Flavor.0 -
Oooooohhhhhh.
http://www.fda.gov/Food/NewsEvents/ConstituentUpdates/ucm471919.htm
Too bad as a Canadian I can't throw in my two cents. I suggest the FDA use the same definition already developed by the Brazilian food guide.
"Natural foods are those obtained directly from plants or
animals (such as green leaves and fruits, or eggs and milk)
and purchased for consumption without having undergone
any alteration following their removal from nature.
Minimally processed foods are natural foods which have
been somewhat altered before being purchased. Examples
include grains that are dried, polished, or ground as grits or
are cooled or frozen; and pasteurised milk."
http://www.foodpolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/Brazilian-Dietary-Guidelines-2014.pdf
I'm not sure what this would add for the consumer's benefit that we don't already know.
I think it's been long understood that "natural" as used on US food products means basically nothing and I'd be just as happy for it to be removed as a marketing term. I don't need "natural" stamped on my potato or carton of eggs or even my pasta, which has a list of ingredients (usually extremely short, of course).
It seems like what OP is really upset about is "[c]arrageenan may be present in the final product but not listed on the ingredients label when it is used as a 'processing aid,' for example in cream."
(Also, apparently: "The law does not require ingredients to be listed on alcoholic beverages, and carrageenan is commonly used to clarify beer.")
http://www.cornucopia.org/shopping-guide-to-avoiding-organic-foods-with-carrageenan/
I have not looked at the evidence for why it wouldn't be listed if used as a "processing aid," so have no opinion yet on that.0 -
anewstart22 wrote: »eugenia94102 wrote: »Labeling, yes. Banning, no.
I have a gazillion issues with the FDA and with the USDA and with the lack of appropriate funding for them to do a better job. The supplement industry in the USA gets away with outrageously dangerous claims under the standard warning "these statements have not been evaluated etc...". I remember a particularly bad outbreak of E. coli connected to baby spinach in which the source of the bacteria was the water they were washing the spinach with - now, that is not only dumb, it is scary.
When it comes to food intolerances and sensitivities, however, the burden has to be on the consumer.
When it comes to cancers, lots of things can and do increase the odds that an individual will develop it (Sun exposure, processed red meats, obesity, to name a few) - but at some point running those risks are an individual choice. Making the public aware of those risks might be (I think it is) the government's job- stopping an individual from running those risks (which ultimately affects not society but the self) it's not.
Philosophically there is always a tension between freedom and safety. There is no perfect balance (we have daily reminders).
In my opinion, even if there were studies confirming a link between carrageenan and cancer that - in and on itself - would not be reason to ban it. You would have to analyze the data and come up with a significant risk to do it.
Consumers can not make the distinction as to what is in the food if it is not labeled properly. We will have to disagree about banning carageenan, there is no true use for it. In My Opinion It's useless and provides nothing to benefit the human body.
fixed it for you
Yeah, thanks, aren't we all providing our opinions without having to note it? LOL
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions