Get email alerts Get Celiac.com E-mail Alerts  




Celiac.com Sponsor:
Celiac.com Sponsor:




Ads by Google:






   Get email alerts  Subscribe to FREE Celiac.com email alerts

Do Not Trust The Trader Joes Labels
0

74 posts in this topic

I almost purchased some baked cheetos at Trader Joes today. The front of the package had the mark indicating it was gluten free. The back, however, indicated that the product had been processed on equipment that also processed wheat products.

I have sent an e-mail to Trader Joes but have not yet heard back from them.

Please be very careful and do not trust their gluten free label on the front of their products.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Ads by Google:

This doesn't seem fair to Trader Joe's to me. I don't believe they are breaking any rules by stating that something is gluten free even though it might be made on equipment that also processes wheat.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand your frustration. :)

In the Unites States, as of yet, there is no standard for labeling a product "gluten free". A company can label a product "gluten free" if there are no gluten ingredients.

More and more, I see companies labeling their products "no gluten ingredients". Rarely a manufactured product can claim to be 100% gluten free. The slightest exposure growing, harvesting and processing can not guarantee 100%.

But a product that is processes at a facility that also produces wheat products, does not make that product non-gluten free, and should be labeled "no gluten ingredients".

Trader Joe's does very well by us and they are very well intended. There may be an occassional product that slips by, but we are lucky to have them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but I have to disagree here.

If it is processed on the same equipment with wheat, then it most likely has wheat in it.

Have you ever eaten something that did not have gluten in it but was process on equipment with wheat? I have and the results were pretty serious.

Cross contamination is serious and should not be underestimated. I still shop at Trader Joes, I just want those of us who cannot eat wheat or gluten to be awawre that the label on the front may have been placed there by someone who does not fully understand celiac sprue disease and gluten intollerance. If something is processed on equipment with wheat, then we cannot eat it. :(

This doesn't seem fair to Trader Joe's to me. I don't believe they are breaking any rules by stating that something is gluten free even though it might be made on equipment that also processes wheat.
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sbj is correct. There is no regulatory definition by the FDA of "gluten-free."

Canada has strict rules about the ingredients in "gluten-free" products, but even those apply only to ingredients intentionally in the product.

In both Canada and the US, labels regarding shared equipment, or shared facilities, are completely voluntary. So, just because you don't see a notice, you can not assume that ether the equipment or the facility is dedicated to gluten-free products. A number of companies will by their own policy always disclose this, but many don't.

It sucks, but that is the way it is.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




A product that is labeled "Gluten Free" should not contain any gluten-- even if there isnt a law enforcing it. It should mean exactly what it says. If they mean that there arent ingredients in the product-- fine-- say tno gluten ingredients. But I do not think it is fair or safe to consumers to say something is gluten free, when there is gluten in it, regardless of how the gluten found its way into the product.

I have fell victim to Trader Joes too many times to count and I think they're a great store in general, but very unsafe for anyone with food allergies or reactions. I will not shop there anymore.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A product that is labeled "Gluten Free" should not contain any gluten

The test does not exist that can show something contains no gluten. No test is that sensitive - it's not possible. Gluten is virtually unavoidable in microscopic amounts - it's everywhere, even in 'gluten-free' flours.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plates in my kitchen are, by default, equipment that has wheat made on it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what is right or wrong or possible or not possible regarding gluten labeling and testing, but I do know that I just glutened my daughter by the Trader Joe's Cheese Puffs. I knew the back said shared "equipment" and it was our first try at that. I thought it would be OK since she has done fine with shared "facility". She was sick within 10 minutes :(

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trader Joe's, in my experience, discriminated between "No gluten ingredients," which means they don't have gluten ingredients but you need to read the processing statement on the back, and gluten-free which hasn't been processed on shared equipment.

I've noticed over the last few years their labeling has gotten better. But, like anything else you should always read the WHOLE label.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everyone is going to react differently. I will not eat anything that says made on shared equipment with wheat. I will eat if it says made in a facility that also processes wheat. It's a personal choice.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who don't yet know this, "Gluten-Free" in the US does not mean gluten-free. It means that it may contain up to 200 ppm (parts per million) gluten.

Rice Dream rice milk, for example, is processed with barley enzymes, and contains residual gluten, but they are allowed to call it "gluten-free" as long as it tests as 200 ppm or less.

200 ppm is more than enough for most celiacs to react, BTW.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For those who don't yet know this, "Gluten-Free" in the US does not mean gluten-free. It means that it may contain up to 200 ppm (parts per million) gluten.

Can you provide your source for this, please. Although directed by law to develop a definition for "gluten-free" the last I knew the FDA had not yet done so, so "gluten-free" meant whatever the company using the term wanted it to mean. Various levels have been talked about.

A limit level will be necessary, because to enforce a rule there must be a way to test for compliance. No test can ever prove total absence of anything, so the detection level will always be more than zero parts per million. It does not follow that just because the test used for enforcement detects 200 ppm, that every product with a gluten-free label contains 199 ppm. Less than 200 ppm also includes 0 ppm--there is just no way to verify that with a test.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I understand what you're asking me. I didn't say that "gluten-free" means that it DOES contain 200ppm, just that it may contain UP TO 200 ppm.

According to Kikkoman, their soy sauce can be listed as safe, too, even though wheat is the second ingredient on the label. See: http://surefoodsliving.com/wp-content/uplo...ment_2_4_05.pdf That letter is dated 2005, so if it's no longer accurate information, I do apologize. They listed the Codex standard as 200 ppm. (And I'm not saying I agree with Kikkoman, either, I just thought it was interesting. Sorry if this isn't the right thing to post here--I'm very tired!)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for editing your earlier post for clarification, FF.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for editing your earlier post for clarification, FF.

I did not edit the original post, for clarification or anything else! I didn't edit it at all--that was how I wrote it the first time. You can tell, because it appears in psawyer's post as a quote.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must have misread it, then. I thought you had corrected it to update it regarding gluten free labeling. My mistake!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fiddle-Faddle, you state that, in the US, gluten-free means less than 200 ppm.

My question was about the basis of that statement. As far as I know, the FDA has yet to establish a regulation about the designation "gluten-free," so how are we to know that the limit is 200 ppm. Maybe there is no established limit yet (my understanding). It could end up at 200 ppm, or a different number. Until the FDA makes and publishes a rule, we just don't know.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting to me that Europe uses a standard of 200 ppm. I often read on this forum about how Europe is so far advanced compared to the US when it comes to gluten free testing, products, labeling, medical profession, and so on. We are so backward in the USA, they are so much better, blah blah. So it strikes me as strange that Europe seem to be getting by quite successfully using a standard of 200 ppm. Many on this forum seem to feel that even a standard of 5 ppm will not be good enough. In fact, from what I can glean, many here actually feel that no product should be labeled gluten free, ever, because you can actually never certify that a product is gluten free. They also seem upset with products that contain no gluten ingredients if they are made on shared equipment or in shared facilities. They don't seem to realize that such labeling is voluntary and much of the gluten free foods that they do eat are probably produced in shared facilities - they simply aren't labeled that way! Gluten is everywhere. Studies show that those with celiac disease can probably handle up to 6 mg of gluten daily without intestinal damage.

Aren't we asking for some impossible to reach standard regarding labeling? As customers it is up to us to take some responsibility for what we put in our bodies - we shouldn't blame these companies that produce products especially for us. If you can't handle food made on lines that also process wheat then do your best to establish which companies are doing that and avoid that food. But I don't think it is unreasonable for a company to say their food is gluten free if they test it to be below 20 ppm and use good practices.

The FDA study linked below is titled, "Approaches to Establish Thresholds for Major Food Allergens and for Gluten in Food":

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/alrgn.html#table-iii-1

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the standand in the EU was just set this week to 20ppm to be 'gluten-free' and 100ppm for 'very low gluten'. The compliance date is 2012 for manufacturing and labeling changes. I believe wheat starch is still allowed. Here is a link. If you Google it you can find a few more on the subject.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe the standand in the EU was just set this week to 20ppm to be 'gluten-free' and 100ppm for 'very low gluten'. The compliance date is 2012 for manufacturing and labeling changes. I believe wheat starch is still allowed. Here is a link. If you Google it you can find a few more on the subject.

So can gluten-free or very low gluten products be made on lines that also process wheat, or be made on machinery that also processes wheat? Would very low gluten products be suitable for someone with celiac disease (or who is the target, I wonder?)

The FDA article I linked to mentioned that 20 ppm for 'naturally' gluten free products and 100 pmm for other gluten free products was a good target so it sounds like the EU standard is reasonable.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From traderjoes.com:

In addition, we have voluntarily included information about the manufacturing process of our products ("Made on shared equipment..." and "Made in a facility that processes..."). What these statements don't include (there is only so much room on the label) is that all Trader Joe's private label suppliers follow Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP's). We work closely with all of the companies that manufacture our products and require that they are vigilant about minimizing and monitoring any potential cross contamination risk. Some of the steps taken to prevent cross contamination include education and training of employees about allergens, careful labeling and segregation of allergen ingredients, cleaning of lines between production runs and stringent scheduling of product runs. Manufacturers may even use alternate days to process products that contain allergens from those products that do not.

We provide you with all of this information so you can feel confident that you are making informed buying decisions. We want you to feel safe, comfortable and thrilled by with the food choices you are making.

As manufacturers and ingredients can change, we strongly encourage our customers to read ingredient information every time they buy a Trader Joe's brand product (or any product, for that matter).

Clearly, everyone needs to evaluate his or her own needs and decide whether they are willing to consume products manufactured on the same equipment, or in the same facility, or only from dedicated facilities. As for me, this statement is good enough. If the equipment is cleaned between runs, and the product I'm eating doesn't contain gluten ingredients, I will eat it. I won't necessarily do the same with other brands, but I haven't had any problem with TJ's stuff so far.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an article in I believe the NY Times? a couple months ago ( I can't find the link, but its somewhere on this board) where they tested out these so-called "good manufacturing practices" which do have an FDA standard in regard to allergens because some children had gotten allergic reactions to food that should never have had allergens in them. I no longer trust that statement. Places like Whole Foods and TJ's don't make or process their own food. In TJ's case a lot of it is processed outside the US. They set these standards for their plants, but who knows how often they check it, how its actually being run etc. Call me paranoid, but I don't trust these big corporations to follow through on all these claims. Heck, the Peanut Butter Corp people are claiming they followed "good manufacturing practices".

I will do "shared facilities" but you won't find me eating anything "shared equipment". I have a 100% gluten-free house for a reason.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many parts per million of gluten can a product be contaminated with by being produced on equipment that also produces wheat and gluten? Since many of us have had reactions to products processed on shared equipment, then it seems likely that a product can acquire more than the 200 ppm gluten just by being produced on shared equipment.

Anyone agree/ disagree?

For those who don't yet know this, "Gluten-Free" in the US does not mean gluten-free. It means that it may contain up to 200 ppm (parts per million) gluten.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
0

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      104,115
    • Total Posts
      919,447
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Well, you can probably get an apple or something.  You might be able to get someone to boil you some eggs.  But be careful of things like nuts that should be naturally gluten free.  They have almost always been soaked in a flavor solution that usually containes caramel coloring, "soy" (wheat) sauce and other aditives.  If I am really hungry and must eat in a Chinese restaurant, I order plain white rice and steamed vegetables.  But even so, you must monitor it carefully.  The rice sometimes has other substances added to give it a better texture, and very often the vegetables have in fact had "just a little bit" of soy sauce added.  To be fair, celiac disease is hardly ever found in East Asians, so understandably people are not tuned it to it.  Also, culturally, with the exception of fruits, it is generally thought that the flavor of foods needs to be enhanced, so it is had to find anything natural even in the "western" gorceries. Even in the western restaurants, be careful.  Fish and meat and often vegetables are usually pre-marinated. I will not even attempt to address the issue of cross-comtamination, since that is a whole higher order of things. I do know what I am talking about; I have celiac and have worked here for nearly 7 years.  
    • I'm glad I found these forums!  I will spend some more time this evening reading through them.  But I wanted to get my question out there just to see if anyone else might have answers quicker than I can sift through the forum for them.      I've been feeling terrible for about a year, and after an elimination diet last month, figured out that if nothing else, gluten/wheat is a problem.  After lots of research, I abandoned the elimination diet and added gluten back in, so that I could get tested for Celiac.   I was off gluten for 3 weeks, from mid-June until early July.  I've had it back in my diet for almost 3 weeks now.    My question is this: Since I was off gluten for 3 weeks, and now back on for almost 3, is that enough time on to yield a positive Celiac blood test, if that indeed is what I have?  All the research I've done says 4-6 weeks for a gluten challenge, but is that really necessary if I was only not eating it for 3 weeks?  I am desperate to get this testing done and over with.  I feel terrible all the time and getting through the day is a struggle.  My doctor ran allergy panels already and everything came back clear except for a mild wheat allergy.  So if nothing else, I'll have to give up wheat for sure at the end of all this.  I get the feeling she doesn't know a ton about Celiac though, so I'm doing a lot of the research on my own. Any advice or information would be so appreciated! 
    • Hi Michael, That's quite a spike in blood pressure!  I haven't tested that myself and don't want to if it means I have to eat gluten.  Blood pressure testing to identify food reactions is something that has come up before.  It sounds like it might be possible but I don't know how much study has been done on it.  Probably not much since it is such a simple, straight forward idea. Welcome to the forum!
    • Hi Megan, Did the doctor test you for celiac disease?  You really shouldn't go gluten-free until all the testing for celiac disease is completed.  It is a little odd for a doctor to tell you to go gluten-free for no reason IMHO.  Did he/she explain the reason for it? Personally, I have learned over the years what I can eat safely and what I can't.  Occasionally I get hit but it is rare.  Simplifying your diet is a good first step.  Avoiding processed foods for a while and dairy also is good.  I suggest any change you make last for a month at least. Then try the food again. If you are eating 100 random ingredients/foods each day it is hard to figure these things out.  If you reduce it to a much smaller number of foods then things become simpler. Welcome to the forum!
    • Finally, proof that non-celiac gluten sensitivity is real. ... for the 30 percent of consumers who choose to buy gluten-free products and the 41 percent of ... View the full article
  • Upcoming Events

  • Blog Entries

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      61,154
    • Most Online
      1,763

    Newest Member
    calla84
    Joined