State The Obvious Food Labelling

Forums › Off topic › State The Obvious Food Labelling

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1267304 25-Mar-2015 08:58

Lias: What annoys me is not the food labelling, but my kids not being allowed nuts, eggs, etc even peanut butter sandwiches at Kindy because someone else's kid is allergic. My son loves peanut butter sandwiches and he can't have them, its retarded.

What happens if you give them to him? Do Black Helicopters come and see you?

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1267306 25-Mar-2015 09:00

Aredwood: What about milk bottles? They list the following ingredients - Milk.

I know Idiocracy was supposed to be entertainment but the longer I live, the more like accurate prediction it becomes...

Lias

5589 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1267392 25-Mar-2015 10:46

KiwiNZ:
Lias:
KiwiNZ:
Lias: What annoys me is not the food labelling, but my kids not being allowed nuts, eggs, etc even peanut butter sandwiches at Kindy because someone else's kid is allergic. My son loves peanut butter sandwiches and he can't have them, its retarded.

Kids share, they also have close contact the risk is real.

Yet unvaccinated kids are allowed to come to Kindy... Not to mention half the food allergies are parents being precious.

I take it you have links to evidence regarding the allergies.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10478614

A substantial number of parents perceive that their children have adverse reactions to food, but it is well documented that objective assessments agree with only one-quarter to one-half of parentally reported reactions.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1425 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1267416 25-Mar-2015 11:27

Lias:
KiwiNZ:
Lias:
KiwiNZ:
Lias: What annoys me is not the food labelling, but my kids not being allowed nuts, eggs, etc even peanut butter sandwiches at Kindy because someone else's kid is allergic. My son loves peanut butter sandwiches and he can't have them, its retarded.

Kids share, they also have close contact the risk is real.

Yet unvaccinated kids are allowed to come to Kindy... Not to mention half the food allergies are parents being precious.

I take it you have links to evidence regarding the allergies.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10478614

A substantial number of parents perceive that their children have adverse reactions to food, but it is well documented that objective assessments agree with only one-quarter to one-half of parentally reported reactions.

I'm surprised is not higher, perhaps the Norwegian parents spend less time on Facebook and in mothers groups than they do here.

Matthew

Geese

1028 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1267417 25-Mar-2015 11:27

KiwiNZ: Kids share, they also have close contact the risk is real.

When I was at primary school, a good friend had some sort of intolerance to wheat and dairy, he had to take pills to deal with it. I can't elaborate more as I was only 8-10 at the time. To make matters worse his parents were vegetarian.

I used to get very plain/bland sandwiches which I didn't like to eat, and he got lots of "sweet things", muffins, slices, biscuits and the like which he didn't enjoy so we regularly traded. In one hit, he was eating wheat, dairy, and meat. Not sure how this affected him physically, but it didn't make him too sick to come to school, or dead. But either way at that age I/we didn't understand why he had an allergy, just accepted it as fact that's the way it was. Unsure if there was any real risk, but certainly unless you keep them under constant surveillance at school, kids will share food even if you explicitly instruct them not to.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1267424 25-Mar-2015 11:45

I applaud schools that ban items that have a known anaphylactic risk. Schools are a place of safety for our children.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1425 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1267432 25-Mar-2015 11:54

KiwiNZ: I applaud schools that ban items that have a known anaphylactic risk. Schools are a place of safety for our children.

I tend to disagree, Children need to lean early on that the world is not a safe or fair place, and that you will not always have someone to fight for you or rescue you from your own stupidity.

Certainly if a child has an allergy that is so serious that they could die then some precautions could be put in place. But banning of the substance from the entire school is not the way to go about it.

Matthew

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1267438 25-Mar-2015 12:05

mdooher:
KiwiNZ: I applaud schools that ban items that have a known anaphylactic risk. Schools are a place of safety for our children.

I tend to disagree, Children need to lean early on that the world is not a safe or fair place, and that you will not always have someone to fight for you or rescue you from your own stupidity.

Certainly if a child has an allergy that is so serious that they could die then some precautions could be put in place. But banning of the substance from the entire school is not the way to go about it.

Yeah, 5 year olds know all about risk management and allergies etc

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1425 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1267450 25-Mar-2015 12:14

KiwiNZ:
mdooher:
KiwiNZ: I applaud schools that ban items that have a known anaphylactic risk. Schools are a place of safety for our children.

I tend to disagree, Children need to lean early on that the world is not a safe or fair place, and that you will not always have someone to fight for you or rescue you from your own stupidity.

Certainly if a child has an allergy that is so serious that they could die then some precautions could be put in place. But banning of the substance from the entire school is not the way to go about it.

Yeah, 5 year olds know all about risk management and allergies etc

Yep they do, comes from experience. The ones that have fallen down the steps are more careful around them, the ones that fall from the monkey bars think before they act next time The ones that have got sick from eating "insert food here" know which foods to avoid.

When I was five I couldn't eat tomatoes or I would come out in hives. Result: I didn't swap sandwiches with other kids. Why? because I knew what could happen.

Matthew

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1267466 25-Mar-2015 12:34

mdooher:
KiwiNZ:
mdooher:
KiwiNZ: I applaud schools that ban items that have a known anaphylactic risk. Schools are a place of safety for our children.

I tend to disagree, Children need to lean early on that the world is not a safe or fair place, and that you will not always have someone to fight for you or rescue you from your own stupidity.

Certainly if a child has an allergy that is so serious that they could die then some precautions could be put in place. But banning of the substance from the entire school is not the way to go about it.

Yeah, 5 year olds know all about risk management and allergies etc

Yep they do, comes from experience. The ones that have fallen down the steps are more careful around them, the ones that fall from the monkey bars think before they act next time The ones that have got sick from eating "insert food here" know which foods to avoid.

When I was five I couldn't eat tomatoes or I would come out in hives. Result: I didn't swap sandwiches with other kids. Why? because I knew what could happen.

I am very aware of the dangers and tradgedy of allergies, with that this discussion is something I don't need nothing personal with you but I am withdrawing just too close to home.

andrew027

1286 posts

Uber Geek

#1268400 26-Mar-2015 13:12

IlDuce: When I was at primary school, a good friend had some sort of intolerance to wheat and dairy, he had to take pills to deal with it... he got lots of "sweet things", muffins, slices, biscuits and the like which he didn't enjoy so we regularly traded.

How long ago were you at primary school? When I was there (40+ years ago) it would have been reasonably difficult to get muffins and biscuits made without wheat flour.

I remember my mother going through a phase of putting lettuce in sandwiches, no matter what other fillings were in there. Cheese and lettuce, marmite and lettuce, peanut butter and lettuce, fish paste and lettuce. I'm sure I had raspberry jam and lettuce once.

reven

3743 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1268428 26-Mar-2015 13:45

mdooher:
KiwiNZ:
mdooher:
KiwiNZ: I applaud schools that ban items that have a known anaphylactic risk. Schools are a place of safety for our children.

I tend to disagree, Children need to lean early on that the world is not a safe or fair place, and that you will not always have someone to fight for you or rescue you from your own stupidity.

Certainly if a child has an allergy that is so serious that they could die then some precautions could be put in place. But banning of the substance from the entire school is not the way to go about it.

Yeah, 5 year olds know all about risk management and allergies etc

Yep they do, comes from experience. The ones that have fallen down the steps are more careful around them, the ones that fall from the monkey bars think before they act next time The ones that have got sick from eating "insert food here" know which foods to avoid.

When I was five I couldn't eat tomatoes or I would come out in hives. Result: I didn't swap sandwiches with other kids. Why? because I knew what could happen.

the kids that die from peanut allergies learn not to eat peanuts again....

seriously, a 5 year old won't know. some foods can have nuts in them that kids dont expect or understand.

theres not all that many food that are banned, its not a big deal, if a kid dies, that is a big deal.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1425 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1268431 26-Mar-2015 13:50

reven:
mdooher:
KiwiNZ:
mdooher:
KiwiNZ: I applaud schools that ban items that have a known anaphylactic risk. Schools are a place of safety for our children.

I tend to disagree, Children need to lean early on that the world is not a safe or fair place, and that you will not always have someone to fight for you or rescue you from your own stupidity.

Certainly if a child has an allergy that is so serious that they could die then some precautions could be put in place. But banning of the substance from the entire school is not the way to go about it.

Yeah, 5 year olds know all about risk management and allergies etc

Yep they do, comes from experience. The ones that have fallen down the steps are more careful around them, the ones that fall from the monkey bars think before they act next time The ones that have got sick from eating "insert food here" know which foods to avoid.

When I was five I couldn't eat tomatoes or I would come out in hives. Result: I didn't swap sandwiches with other kids. Why? because I knew what could happen.

the kids that die from peanut allergies learn not to eat peanuts again....

seriously, a 5 year old won't know. some foods can have nuts in them that kids dont expect or understand.

theres not all that many food that are banned, its not a big deal, if a kid dies, that is a big deal.

I did point out life threating cases had to be managed differently... (Home Schooling if its that bad )

Matthew

robjg63

4099 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1268432 26-Mar-2015 13:51

dclegg:
sbiddle: Fish is an allergen, and the law requires allergens to be clearly identified separately from ingredients.

It's the same reason a pack of peanuts contains nuts.

Does that mean that if a product contains gluten, this needs to always be explicitly stated in the allergen statement?

I've only recently been advised I may have a gluten allergy, so looking out for what's safe and what's not is still a learning experience for me. While I'm aware of the more common sources, there are other more obscure ones that I'm learning about from time to time.

Sadly - not always - but I wish it was.

Some producers will note that a product is processed in the same facility/production line as gluten containing substances - some dont seem to bother with this.

For a Coeliac this is vital - with a 20 part per million tolerance to gluten (thats less than a crumb) and possibly 6 to 12 months of gut repair time I wouldnt willingly buy something that I knew might cause me harm.

There was a brand of cake at one stage 'Loaf' I think - that said 'gluten free' on the top.
I enjoyed it until I read the bottom of the packet which said that it was processed in the same facility as gluten containing products. If think they have since sorted out their production line and have separate facilities now - so good on them.

The gluten side of things is not treated as seriously as nut allergies because the damage is not so immediate and obvious.

I agree that labelling a can of tuna as 'Allergens: Contains fish" might be amusing - but just treat it as that - if this not a problem for you - find something else to fill in your time....

Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself - A. H. Weiler

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1268738 27-Mar-2015 00:19

The simple answer is that the Australian Government determines what constitutes an allergen, and the law says that allergens must always be declared. There is no exemption in law for when the thing itself is the allergen.

See http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/consumer/foodallergies/allergies/Pages/default.aspx for a list of what actually counts as an allergen - not a lot.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4