Comment by rewgs
4 years ago
When you have life-threatening food allergies, "may contain" is the same as "does contain."
I suddenly developed two dozen food allergies at age 30 after a lifetime of eating whatever I wanted. I wouldn't wish this on my worst enemy. Out of all the numerous ways in which it's horrible, seeing "may contain" on the ingredients list of a food that, based on the ingredients I can confirm it has would otherwise be fine, is one of the most soul-killing.
But there are also those of us whose issues aren't life threatening.
Something like sesame should be labeled, but they should permit the "made in a facility that uses <x>" type labeling. I'll take a chance on such things because I know that at worst I'm in for an unpleasant day and it's very unlikely to even do that--my reactions are dependent both on dose and frequency. "Contains sesame"--I'm not touching it. "Made in a facility that uses sesame"--I wouldn't care.
Besides, their definition of "contains" is flawed, anyway. They're obsessed about what the manufacturer puts in, but as far as I can tell there are no rules at all about listing what they fail to take out. Occasionally you see the origin of certain materials listed but that's rare. I've had several encounters with situations where the failed-to-remove ingredient has been an issue for me, but the only cross-contamination I've ever had an issue with was pretty blatant (Chinese wok cooking typically does not wash between dishes. It's hot enough that this isn't a disease threat and such cooking is active enough that there will be no issue of stuck-on food--thus for most purposes this is fine. However, it's just asking for cross contamination between dishes.)
They also permit my #1 nemesis: "artificial flavors". I have no idea which ones I'm sensitive to because they're not individually listed. (Lest you think I'm one of the chemical-phobic nuts, my #2 nemesis is "natural flavors".)
> But there are also those of us whose issues aren't life threatening.
...yet.
My allergy to mustard used to barely register. It still scores near the bottom on my skin prick and IgE blood tests. And yet, over the past few months, it's evolved where if I'm even in the same room as someone eating mustard, I begin to go into anaphylaxis. Food allergies are absolutely absurd and you can't trust them to stay the same.
My reaction doesn't class as an allergy. There's no danger of anaphylaxis, the only way it could be life-threatening is if I had no choice of food (and that would be because of malabsorption, not the reaction itself.)
1 reply →
What we’re talking about is erasing the granularity between “sometimes contains” and “does contain”. “Sometimes” doesn’t necessarily tell you anything about dosage or frequency. It just means sometimes.
What do you mean you can confirm it? What if it's made in a factory with various conveyor belts, and some dust from one could get into another?
I just mean that the ingredient list is otherwise fine. It's completely ruined by "may contain something that you're allergic to."
Yeah, I've been seeing "this product was manufactured in a facility that processes food containing tree nuts" for over a decade now.
That doesn't bother me, even with a severe almond allergy I've rolled that dice many a time and it's been fine. The problem is "may contain tree nuts." Like, okay, does it or doesn't it?
What's even worse is the ingredient "spices." Which spices? Even smelling mustard can send me to the ER, but basil is one of my favorite foods.
How these kinds of not-even-half measures are legal is beyond me.
"spices" is the worst. are they worried that someone is going to steal their recipe if they happen to list all the ingredients?
[dead]