Fda Proposal Allows Gluten-free Label

[Moongirl]

Open Original Shared Link

WASHINGTON --Foods made without a protein found in wheat, rye and barley could be labeled gluten-free under a proposed rule released Monday by federal health officials.

The proposal would allow companies to voluntarily flag foods without the cereal protein, which can cause inflammation of the small intestine in the estimated 1.5 million to 3 million Americans with celiac disease. Most have never been diagnosed.

Gluten can trigger an immune response in celiac sufferers that damages the lining of the small intestine. Eventually, that damage can hamper the ability of the intestine to absorb nutrients.

Celiac disease has no cure but can be managed by avoiding foods that contain gluten.

The label could be used on foods that have been processed to remove the protein. The rule wouldn't apply to foods that ordinarily don't contain gluten, like corn and rice.

The Food and Drug Administration posted the proposed rule for comment on its Web site Monday.

Open Original Shared Link

[emcmaster]

*jumps up and down*

YESSSSSSSSSSSS!

I love seeing the "gluten-free" label on Wal-mart products. Seeing it on other products would pretty much make my day!

[MySuicidalTurtle]

How interesting, MoonGirl.

[Viola 1]

Yesss, way to go, I hope they do that up here too.

[Gentleheart]

Open Original Shared Link

WASHINGTON --Foods made without a protein found in wheat, rye and barley could be labeled gluten-free under a proposed rule released Monday by federal health officials.

The proposal would allow companies to voluntarily flag foods without the cereal protein, which can cause inflammation of the small intestine in the estimated 1.5 million to 3 million Americans with celiac disease. Most have never been diagnosed.

Gluten can trigger an immune response in celiac sufferers that damages the lining of the small intestine. Eventually, that damage can hamper the ability of the intestine to absorb nutrients.

Celiac disease has no cure but can be managed by avoiding foods that contain gluten.

The label could be used on foods that have been processed to remove the protein. The rule wouldn't apply to foods that ordinarily don't contain gluten, like corn and rice.

The Food and Drug Administration posted the proposed rule for comment on its Web site Monday.

Open Original Shared Link

The third from the last sentence concerns me. Some of us seem to still react to whatever is left of the gluten protein even when it supposedly has been processed out. On another thread there was a discussion about the great company Namaste. Apparently they have not been stating on their label that their xanthan gum actually originally came from wheat or soy, because it had all been processed out. So legally they could say gluten free and I'm sure that's what they are thinking. But unfortunately for some of us that's just a little too scary. I would rather be the one deciding what I want to do with wheat-derived xanthan gum processed down to a legal level of gluten rather than the company making that assumption for me by keeping me in the dark.

I will admit that it would be absolutely wonderful to be able to walk down a grocery store aisle and see "gluten-free" clearly labeled on products. Right now, even the ones that do it, almost try to hide it at the bottom in little itty bitty letters. Health food store items are better. I'm grateful for any progress. But it's sort of like the word organic. Now that it is popular to say something is organic, the real meaning of organic has changed, for the worse. I want to really be able to trust something labeled gluten free if I can. If it's iffy, then I would just as soon they leave it off.

[blueeyedmanda]

One giant step for the Celiac Community!

[happygirl]

Thanks so much for posting this and sharing this with us!

[tarnalberry]

Well, the 20ppm is the better of the two likeliest alternatives.

The thing is, legally, it was going to happen that 'processed out' was going to be left in. Because if you say that it has to test below an amount, then it doesn't matter if it's avoidance of contamination or processing or voodoo magic that gets it below that amount - it's below the 'limit'.

And there has to be a limit, because there's a point at which you can't test below - you can't test for "ZERO", and unless you define a lower limit, the term has no value.

We can ask for a few things - such as a requirement that companies retain information on sources of the items, so that, if asked, they are required to provide the information as to whether or not something has been processed down to a particular level. We could even ask for the 'derived from wheat' statement, but no marketer is going to put that on their product because it would create consumer confusion.

Honestly, this is a very practical answer - particularly in the handling of oats. I'm surprised, as I didn't expect it would go that well in the oats issue.

[lonewolf]

This is great! But I have one question. (Please forgive me if I'm misunderstanding this, it's getting late and I'm tired.) Does this say that naturally gluten-free foods can't be labeled gluten-free? Or does it mean that no company can claim, for example, that their milk is gluten-free without noting that all milk is gluten-free. (Kind of like companies that label their poultry as "hormone free" and then there's a little blurb that says, "The USDA forbids the use of hormones in poultry food" or whatever it actually says.)

It's nice for newbies to have gluten-free labels on things that "old-timers" understand to be gluten-free. It's amazing how many people don't have a clue what gluten is or where it's found, even if you just try to explain the wheat part of it.

[savvvyseller]

This is great! But I have one question. (Please forgive me if I'm misunderstanding this, it's getting late and I'm tired.) Does this say that naturally gluten-free foods can't be labeled gluten-free? Or does it mean that no company can claim, for example, that their milk is gluten-free without noting that all milk is gluten-free. (Kind of like companies that label their poultry as "hormone free" and then there's a little blurb that says, "The USDA forbids the use of hormones in poultry food" or whatever it actually says.)

It's nice for newbies to have gluten-free labels on things that "old-timers" understand to be gluten-free. It's amazing how many people don't have a clue what gluten is or where it's found, even if you just try to explain the wheat part of it.

According to the article in the Wall Street Journal today, naturally gluten free foods can't be labeled gluten-free. They quoted someone for Wegman's expressing concern for this because Wegman's uses a gluten-free designation on their store-brand items, such as pasta sauce, applesauce, etc. I agree that this is a concern - I like being able to rely on the gluten-free designation so that I don't have to read every ingredient regardless of the type of product. I think it's confusing too - what is "naturally gluten free"? Is pasta sauce "naturally gluten free?" Maybe some manufacturers add wheat to certain varieties. I'd prefer the gluten-free designation on all qualifying products, whatever the ppm standard ultimately is.

[Viola 1]

According to the article in the Wall Street Journal today, naturally gluten free foods can't be labeled gluten-free. They quoted someone for Wegman's expressing concern for this because Wegman's uses a gluten-free designation on their store-brand items, such as pasta sauce, applesauce, etc. I agree that this is a concern - I like being able to rely on the gluten-free designation so that I don't have to read every ingredient regardless of the type of product. I think it's confusing too - what is "naturally gluten free"? Is pasta sauce "naturally gluten free?" Maybe some manufacturers add wheat to certain varieties. I'd prefer the gluten-free designation on all qualifying products, whatever the ppm standard ultimately is.

I think it is just the stuff that is "naturally" gluten free such as milk, meat (not spiced etc.) and fruits and veggies. All sauces can and sometimes do contain gluten, so they should be labeling anything that ingredients are added to. I doubt whether they would label rice, however, rice with a spice added would be labeled.

[zansu]

I dunno, I always liked reading "fat-free" on applesauce!

OK, so they've gone to things like "naturally fat-free" now. Maybe we'll reach that point with gluten.

[tarnalberry]

I agree that not having gluten free on naturally gluten free things could be ambiguous. I would have thought that chili would be naturally gluten free, but we all know that there are instances of chili out there with wheat in them. Same with pasta sauces - something I'd *never ever ever* think would contain gluten, but we know can.

This still is no 'get out of label reading for free' card, but it's an improvement.

[sunshinen]

There's just too much potential for people messing with nature and not admitting it, that adding the label to anything that is gluten free seems great to me, that way we can see it and move on, without having to look for the ingredients and make sure.

[Mtndog]

This is the email I just got from the Celiac Disease Alliance:

DA's Gluten-Free Proposal Will Benefit Millions of Americans

Under an FDA proposal published yesterday, food companies will have to meet new standards before labeling their products as gluten-free. It also provided a new definition for 'gluten-free' which will give individuals with celiac disease greater confidence that specially labeled foods are in fact, safe for them to eat, according to the American Celiac Disease Alliance (ACDA).

The Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act (FALCPA) passed by Congress in 2004, requires food manufacturers to clearly state if a product contains any of the eight major food allergens: milk, eggs, peanuts, tree nuts, fish, shellfish, wheat, and soy. It also required the FDA to develop and implement rules for using the term

[tarnalberry]

If you check out the questions and answers they provide, it's actually a little more helpful - it does note that naturally gluten free foods can be labelled gluten free as long as it's noted that it's not a brand specific thing. The issue with oats seems a little more confused in the faq, though.

[ryebaby0]

Our worry is not about the labels, per se. How likely is it that manufacturers of "naturally" gluten-free products -- companies not marketing, necessarily, at niche consumers -- will add some negligible amount of gluten just to avoid the whole problem? I can see where the testing, etc. is not worth it to them, and mainstream consumers often veer away from special-diet products. You all know it's true : think how many people go "oh, no thank you" when offered something they've been told is gluten-free, but otherwise eat it without thinking.

How likely is it that mainstream companies will just not label at all? It is optional, right? And the lawsuit exposure is tremendous (look how fast everyone was on McDonalds!) . Just thinking out loud

[tarnalberry]

How likely is it that mainstream companies will just not label at all?

Very likely, I'd think. They have to worry about the perception of the "gluten-free" label by consumers who have no idea what that label means and what that means to their purchase rates. Not to mention the 'real estate' cost on the label.

[NoahBunny]

Quite Frankly, I'm more worried about this part:

"Will foods that meet the definition for "gluten-free" be required to bear a "gluten-free" claim?

No. FDA is proposing to define the term "gluten-free" for voluntary use in the labeling of foods. In other words, once a final federal definition of the term is in effect, if a manufacturer wishes to label his product as "gluten-free," it may do so at its own discretion, but only if the food bearing the label meets the proposed regulatory definition."

So in essence, this is all voluntary.

[4getgluten]

Thank you everyone for posting all this great information. I

[chick2ba]

It's nice to see the FDA considering our needs, however, I certainly hope companies that slap a "gluten free" label on their products have ACTUALY TESTED them to be under 20ppm.

I know I've been glutened by foods that have "gluten free" printed right on the box. It does no good for us to have products labeled gluten free that are actually very contaminated. I don't care about going to the store and being "happy" about a variety of gluten free labels if I come home and the safe foods make me ill!

[Mtndog]

It's nice to see the FDA considering our needs, however, I certainly hope companies that slap a "gluten free" label on their products have ACTUALY TESTED them to be under 20ppm.

I know I've been glutened by foods that have "gluten free" printed right on the box. It does no good for us to have products labeled gluten free that are actually very contaminated. I don't care about going to the store and being "happy" about a variety of gluten free labels if I come home and the safe foods make me ill!

i'm with you!