1 reply to this topic

[Plastic Ducky]

 Hello everybody,

 

I am trying to solve a dispute between myself and a coworker.

 

 

 

The dispute is in regards to the  generic Ingredient statement / allergen declaration below (sold in USA only)

 

 

 

INGREDIENTS: RICE FLOUR, EDAMAME

(SOY), POTATO STARCH, SAFFLOWER OIL,

EDAMAME SEASONING (GREEN PEA POWDER, SALT,

NATURAL FLAVORS, AUTOLYZED YEAST EXTRACT), SALT,

NATURAL FLAVOR.

 

 

 

Ok, so my argument is this;

 

I don't think this declaration is sufficient because the regulations state that the allergen declaration must receive be displayed (through typeset that clearly distinguishes it from the rest of the list of ingredients.) My Coworker states this is sufficient because the allergen "(SOY)" is immediately after "EDAMAME".

My argument is basically that even though "(SOY)"  immediately following "EDAMAME" would suffice this requirement, the section just underneath where the breakdown of "EDAMAME SEASONING" is presented  in the same format "(GREEN PEA POWDER, SALT, NATURAL FLAVORS, AUTOLYZED YEAST EXTRACT)" it negates the attempt to differentiate the declaration. My argument could also be represented by the following exercise; Consider the above allergen statement  with the "(SOY)" in bold and italics. Sounds great right? Ok but if the whole entire ingredient listing is in bold and italics then it doesn't count because the allergen is not receiving special representation.

 

Anyway I am not totally sure if I am right but I would greatly appreciate everyone's professional opinion.

 

 

 

Sincerely,

Plastic Ducky

[MWidra]

The name of the allergen does not have to receive any special treatment as long as it either is placed after the ingredient list with a Contains statement (the "C" must be uppercase) OR it is included in the list of ingredients.  If the name of the ingredient is not the common allergen designation (as in your example of the edamame and soy), soy should be the initial name in the list with edamame in parenthesis.  The type only has to be at least the same size as the ingredient list type face.

 

Your example has them reversed, IMO. As for putting in a Contains statement, it is never wrong to add more information, but it is not required.

 

The law says that a food is misbranded if:

(w)

(1) If it is not a raw agricultural commodity and it is, or it contains an ingredient that bears or contains, a major food allergen, unless either--

1. ``(A) the word `Contains', followed by the name of the food source from which the major food allergen is derived, is printed immediately after or is adjacent to the list of ingredients (in a type size no smaller than the type size used in the list of ingredients) required under subsections (g) and (i); or
2. ``(B) the common or usual name of the major food allergen in the list of ingredients required under subsections (g) and (i) is followed in parentheses by the name of the food source from which the major food allergen is derived, except that the name of the food source is not required when--
   1. ``(i) the common or usual name of the ingredient uses the name of the food source from which the major food allergen is derived; or
   2. ``(ii) the name of the food source from which the major food allergen is derived appears elsewhere in the ingredient list, unless the name of the food source that appears elsewhere in the ingredient list appears as part of the name of a food ingredient that is not a major food allergen under section 201(qq)(2)(A) or (B).

21 USC §343

 

Clear as mud, as the saying goes?