Consequences of Additives in Food - What's Your Take?
Hey forum folks -
I want to know how all of you feel about the consequences of newly developed additives in food. My question stems from a new article about a large company marketing an acrylamide-reducing yeast in foods. For those of you that don't know, acrylamide has been the subject of a lot of talks in the industry because of Prop 65 and EU Regulations. Acrylamide is naturally produced by heating starchy foods and is found in several categories; including roasted coffee, fried foods, and sugar refining. It has been suspected to be a carcinogen.
This new yeast is considered to be a processing aid, and doesn't require labeling. If added to the label, it would be identified as "yeast". I can't speak to how this was properly vetted, but it took years before anyone identified acrylamide in foods and further to identify it as a possible hazard. Do you all ever wonder what the consequences of adding newly developed additives to products will be in the long-term? We don't know what hazards this new yeast will bring or how it will affect our bodies by consuming over time. Every action has a reaction, so I have to wonder if sometimes what we identify as "solutions" will end up as larger problems down the road.
What's your take?
I beleive that many so called solutions have become major problems for Americans and everywhere else where processed foods heavy on unknown additives and veiled additives are allowed to be marketed.
Long time ago as a family we started taking a close look at what we consume and went to clean foods with no more than 5 ingredients and all that we could pronounce. In business I have been blessed with clients that do not partake in adulterating food (adding anything to me that can be ommited from labeling is adulterating), offer clean foods, many times single ingredients - truly I am blessed, becuase it is difficult for many in the consulting profession to turn-down business because of what the prospective client manufacturers or packs - I am fortunate that all that I want comes to me, sans the heavy chemical ladden processors.
The public is quite aware of the garbage that is going into various types of so called food and they get to pick and choose too.
I beleive that many so called solutions have become major problems for Americans and everywhere else where processed foods heavy on unknown additives and veiled additives are allowed to be marketed.
Long time ago as a family we started taking a close look at what we consume and went to clean foods with no more than 5 ingredients and all that we could pronounce. In business I have been blessed with clients that do not partake in adulterating food (adding anything to me that can be ommited from labeling is adulterating), offer clean foods, many times single ingredients - truly I am blessed, becuase it is difficult for many in the consulting profession to turn-down business because of what the prospective client manufacturers or packs - I am fortunate that all that I want comes to me, sans the heavy chemical ladden processors.
The public is quite aware of the garbage that is going into various types of so called food and they get to pick and choose too.
I agree with you, and I find it scary that ingredients can be omitted from labeling (no matter how small). When I was in manufacturing and controlled labeling, I always made sure all ingredients were on my labels. I wanted the consumers to know what they were getting, and didn't want to discern what ingredients could be omitted by processing aid standards.
Regarding adding newly developed ingredients, I don't see how this is a safer alternative if we don't have years of data to support the evidence. I have seen all too many times in manufacturing where people have jumped to try and solve a problem without understanding the consequences.
Speaking of labeling, I heard from some US customers before that an ingredient of less than 2% (or 0.2%, I can't recall) is not required to be labelled in the US. However I checked FDA website and couldn't find a statement like that.
Speaking of labeling, I heard from some US customers before that an ingredient of less than 2% (or 0.2%, I can't recall) is not required to be labelled in the US. However I checked FDA website and couldn't find a statement like that.
That is a misinterpretation actually. There is no such regulation, but ingredients that are less than 2% of total are not required to be in descending order by quantity % in product. There is a separate regulation for processing aids, but there are specific qualifications an ingredient must meet to be a processing aid.
Speaking of labeling, I heard from some US customers before that an ingredient of less than 2% (or 0.2%, I can't recall) is not required to be labelled in the US. However I checked FDA website and couldn't find a statement like that.
I think this comes from 21 CFR 101.100(a)(3) regarding incidental additives that are present in food at insignificant levels and do not have any technical or functional effect in that food.
I think this comes from 21 CFR 101.100(a)(3) regarding incidental additives that are present in food at insignificant levels and do not have any technical or functional effect in that food.
There is no quantification for incidental additives to my knowledge (or what is considered to be insignificant). There have been at least a couple recent topics on processing aids/incidental additives/minute quantities. The only reference to 2% that I can recall is based on how the ingredients are listed on a label.
https://www.ifsqn.co...ing#entry149012