Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

RKB_MD

Modified Food Starch - Correction Of Misconception

Recommended Posts

Guest KG in FL
We never see dogs in stores here, either. Must be a NY/CA thing.

First we got the outdoor restaurants here with the outdoor malls were the dogs started showing up alot in public. Then I just saw a little terrier in the cart kid's seat at Steinmart a couple weeks ago. And another of the ladie's boutiques here, too.

Must be a NY/CA thing because Florida will be following right behind!

I'd hate to put my baby on some seat where a dog's butt just was though... Now they have those cute fabric seat covers for the shopping carts. They weren't invented when mine were babies though. And antibacterial cart wipes are at some of our stores. A good thing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Between me and my DH we have a combined 28 years in the supermarket business, in all different ways. From working in the aisles (him) and me behind the scenes and very rarely did we see any animals besides working animals in the stores, we did have one guy who tried to pass his one dog off as a working dog. It was plain to see that the large dog was not a working dog. very rarely do you see blind people with a working dog walking alone in a grocery store.

I agree, this is a store management issue and not an FDA thing. I would much rather see the FDA working on our food regulations that whether Fifi can come into a store. (meaning that as a joke, not to knock on anyone).

I agree with richard too, if anyone does come across any food that has a different modified food starch, such as barley or rye in it, I would really appreciate them listing it here. I am not getting involved with the whole thread here, there are a lot of valid points and maybe they were expressed wrongly or harshly, but this is a learning place. I know I have learned a lot, and have kept from being glutened in places I never expected it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's all please calm down--I want to remind everyone of the Board's #1 rule:

1) Do not be abusive or otherwise out of line towards other board members. Show respect for each board member, no matter what you think of their views. This is not a place to quarrel.

I believe that anyone who makes a claim--in this case that Modified Food Starch may contain gliadin so it should be avoided--it is up to that person to back up their claim with facts. Although this is an unwritten board rule, everyone here should understand that it us up to the person who makes such a claim to back it up with evidence, and it is not up to everyone else here to disprove their claim.

1) In this case if a product that contains Modified Food Starch was made in the USA there is virtually no chance that it would contain gliadin, because no modified food starch that is made in the North America is made from anything that contains gliadin. There are only several manufactuers of it in the USA, and each have been contacted and none use grains that contain gluten/gliadin to make it. Even before the new labelling laws this particular ingredient was of little or no concern to celiacs if it or the product that it was in was made in the USA.

2) Since 2006 if the product that contains Modified Food Starch was sold in the USA it would have to identify wheat as a source of the modified food starch (for example, modified wheat starch or modified food starch from wheat), otherwise they would be liable for any damages caused by the unidentified allergen and would be subject to fines and product recalls--any one of which would be ample punishment to discourage not labeling their products according to the law, but taken together no company in their right mind would knowingly violate the new labelling laws. McDonald's didn't even violate this law and yet they are still getting sued because after they didn't identify trace amounts of gliadin in their French fries BEFORE the new laws came into effect. There are no manufacturers that I've ever heard of that use barley, rye or oats to make modified food starch, although I have heard that wheat is used in some MFS in products sold in England and perhaps in Europe.

3) If there was gliadin in the modified food starch in a product that was sold and/or made in the USA and it was not disclosed on the label, a phone call to that company likely would not help you determine anything because this company would be violating the law and would probably be totally ignorant of what gliadin is, what the laws are, and probably would have no clue what you were talking about. I cannot imagine any scanario where a company would know what those things are and would still sell a product containing wheat or any other allergen without disclosing it on their label.

Last, if you buy a product that was made in the USA and sold in the USA, you really don't need to worry about Modified Food Starch, it is safe--or as safe as anything can be (sure, you can continue to worry about such things if you want to, but please don't try to make others here worry about it without good evidence to back it up).

Rice flour, or any other naturally gluten-free flour is probably a bigger concern for celiacs than Modified Food Starch is due to issues with cross-contamination in fields, transportion and at mills--so there are perhaps other things to spend our energy on here that will be more productive...just my two cents. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest j_mommy

From a newbie who has had alot of help from members here..... Thank you S :D cott for clarifying!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1) In this case if a product that contains Modified Food Starch was made in the USA there is virtually no chance that it would contain gliadin, because no modified food starch that is made in the North America is made from anything that contains gliadin.

Scott, one possibility that you might have missed is that products made in the US do not need to use Modified Food Starch that was made in the US. They can use any source of Modified Food Starch that they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KG in FL
Scott, one possibility that you might have missed is that products made in the US do not need to use Modified Food Starch that was made in the US. They can use any source of Modified Food Starch that they want.

Oh, I see what you mean. The ingedients are obtained from another source, out of the US, and then are simply described as MFS but might not have followed the US's strict standards the whole process long? And then added legally to our foods? Which goes back to what Darlindeb was saying?

I think after the cat food/dog food issue here in the US, that is something to consider. As well as other incidences of this type activity that could be named.

But that must be why the thread here is still wanting some conclusion.

Could the above idea be potentially correct on occasion? In the future? Or at least due some validity in acknowledging the possible danger or allergic reaction, depending on the contaminant? NOT a scare tactic, just an alert to be aware.

And also what is stated as US, FDA fact or law be considered correct and factual as well? For most of us, we have to trust what we are eating to be, what we are eating. And I think we have been "OK" for the most part here.

Maybe us celiacs are a bit careful, as we have, generally speaking, had to figure things out on our own and not always trust the "authority"? Due to the lack of knowledge to diagnose some of us, maybe we question a lot?

In the long run, this will all be a good thing I think. As long as we can keep questioning, without stepping on too many toes, things will progress fast, faster and we will all keep learning and getting healthy, healthier!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Scott. I agree, except for this statement: Last, if you buy a product that was made in the USA and sold in the USA, you really don't need to worry about Modified Food Starch, it is safe--or as safe as anything can be (sure, you can continue to worry about such things if you want to, but please don't try to make others here worry about it without good evidence to back it up). It may be as safe as anything can be in some minds, but not in mine. I do not present my opinion to scare people or worry them--I truly feel we cannot trust a company just because they say we can. If it is modified cornstarch, then why not use the word "CORNSTARCH"? I do not trust my health to others, I take it into my own hands. I eat mostly unprocessed foods and when I do purchase something processed, it always says modified cornstarch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scott, one possibility that you might have missed is that products made in the US do not need to use Modified Food Starch that was made in the US. They can use any source of Modified Food Starch that they want.

I have read the Food Allergen Law again. I have not seen any exception for any foreign made food starches. Regardless of where they are made, if the starch is made from a source of one of the Allergens targeted by the 2006 Law, then it must be disclosed.

Darlindeb, I may be mistaken, but if I remember correctly, the words cornstarch and modified corn starch actually have different meanings. I can't recall if it deals with the amount of protein in the starch or if the MFS variety is called "modified" because of the way it is manufactured.

Also, I read Scott's explanantion as saying that is possible, though unlikley that a company would conceal a gliadin source. However, if you know of an example, you should bring it to the board as evidence of your claim that somethng is not safe (rather than non-specific claims against the FDA/government).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is highly unlikely that such an ingredient would be bought more cheaply outside the USA, after all, we are the additive capital of the world, but the labeling law still would cover the product--they would have to identify "wheat" on the label if it was used, so they would have to say "Modified Wheat Starch" or "Modified Food Starch (From Wheat)." I've never seen or heard of such a label on a product made in the USA, so I believe 99% or more of companies don't import this ingredient.

Not trusting corporations isn't a good enough reason to spread fear in people regarding the safety of an ingredient like Modified Food Starch...sorry. Back it up with facts please. Corporations have real fear over getting sued, and purposely hiding allergens like gliadin that can be easily detected with an inexpensive home test kit is a good way for them to get sued and lose a lot of money--not to mention get really bad publicity (i.e., McDonalds).

Take care,

Scott

Scott, one possibility that you might have missed is that products made in the US do not need to use Modified Food Starch that was made in the US. They can use any source of Modified Food Starch that they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KG in FL
I have read the Food Allergen Law again. I have not seen any exception for any foreign made food starches. Regardless of where they are made, if the starch is made from a source of one of the Allergens targeted by the 2006 Law, then it must be disclosed.

Darlindeb, I may be mistaken, but if I remember correctly, the words cornstarch and modified corn starch actually have different meanings. I can't recall if it deals with the amount of protein in the starch or if the MFS variety is called "modified" because of the way it is manufactured.

Also, I read Scott's explanantion as saying that is possible, though unlikley. However, if you know of an example, you should bring it to the board as evidence of your claim that somethng is not safe (rather than non-specific claims against the FDA/government).

I still think the debate goes on here because no one is argueing apples and oranges here.

They are arguing oranges and manderine oranges.

EXACT law defined vs accidental potential error regarding the SAME issue....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is highly unlikely that such an ingredient would be bought more cheaply outside the USA, after all, we are the additive capital of the world,

:lol::lol::lol:

you are too funny Scott! :D

Thank you for clarification on the issues

sandy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you Scott. I agree, except for this statement: Last, if you buy a product that was made in the USA and sold in the USA, you really don't need to worry about Modified Food Starch, it is safe--or as safe as anything can be (sure, you can continue to worry about such things if you want to, but please don't try to make others here worry about it without good evidence to back it up). It may be as safe as anything can be in some minds, but not in mine. I do not present my opinion to scare people or worry them--I truly feel we cannot trust a company just because they say we can. If it is modified cornstarch, then why not use the word "CORNSTARCH"? I do not trust my health to others, I take it into my own hands. I eat mostly unprocessed foods and when I do purchase something processed, it always says modified cornstarch.

And yes, this is your choice Deb to be in controll of your health life. Trusting your health to you and you alone is the only way to go. I totally agree 100%. But choose it for you.

As you know well, you can offer supported information and it is up the the reader to accept or not accept. Celiac.com is not the end all for product information as things change daily. This site is a learning process and a stepping stone for potentional good health of those who knock at this door.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And yes, this is your choice Deb to be in controll of your health life. Trusting your health to you and you alone is the only way to go. I totally agree 100%. But choose it for you.

As you know well, you can offer supported information and it is up the the reader to accept or not accept. Celiac.com is not the end all for product information as things change daily. This site is a learning process and a stepping stone for potentional good health of those who knock at this door.

There you are!! Hope you had a great day today......we need our Momma Goose!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always agreed that you must watch out after yourself. But for a while now my argument has been that MFS has been an EXTREMELY low worry for us. I'm not saying you don't have to check it, and I do. But I haven't seen ANY evidence anywhere that it it is in fact a major threat. I've yet to find any company telling me that they use modified rye, barley or millet starch. And I certainly haven't seen any evidence, as claimed by others, that MFS is usually made by gluten suspects.

Honestly, I'm always open to any evidence to the contrary. If somebody can identify that MFS or any other suspect ingredient is made from a gluten product, I really, really want to know. I don't want to eat it. But when I ask people to show me the MFS or other additives with hidden gluten, I pretty much get silence.

richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've yet to find any company telling me that they use modified rye, barley or millet starch. And I certainly haven't seen any evidence, as claimed by others, that MFS is usually made by gluten suspects.

It makes sense really, rye, barley or millet would be I'd think more expensive as sources than corn or wheat.

Pauliina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yes, this is your choice Deb to be in controll of your health life. Trusting your health to you and you alone is the only way to go. I totally agree 100%. But choose it for you.

As you know well, you can offer supported information and it is up the the reader to accept or not accept.

This is the big problem, in my opinion. I do not see supported information proving that MFS is safe either. I feel we should all have info from both sides of this fence. I absolutely do not trust MFS and my opinion is as important as those of you who feel it's ok to indulge. You truthfully have no more proof that it is always safe, just as I can't prove it isn't. Don't tell me to not cause worry, I feel everyone should beable to make their own choice using all of our opinions.

By the way, I do know the difference between cornstarch and MFS, I wasn't using cornstarch in the context you are meaning. I was using modified cornstarch vs modified food starch--they work the same way and are both thickening agents. I think you misunderstood my meaning, maybe I didn't make my thoughts clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My intention is not to throw a new "fear bomb" but to put this out there as something to think about.

Due to the ethanol as an alternative fuel issue, corn prices are climbing here in USA.

Corn will become more expensive than wheat. I check this out in financial section of newspapers on Sundays - look at the business page, stock market section then go to "Futures". You'll see pricing per bushel for commodities such as corn, wheat, soybeans and notice the price increases over the past year. In 2004 or about I wrote about this on the board - this board and the response was 'ho-hum'. At that point I wanted to invest in "corn futures" but did not have the capital to do so. I wish I did....

So no one can tell if ethanol will be as popular as gasoline/petrol is and if it'll take over but we will be the losers if manufacturers in USA decide to replace the corn in MFS. I am not saying that this WILL happen, nor am I saying that manufacturers won't change/re-word their labels , but this certainly gives us pause to make sure that we read our labels and make our calls at our descretion. Next Sunday I am going to see in newspaper current price of these commodities (I threw the Sunday paper out) - all of them: corn, wheat, soy, etc. for a side by side comparison.

As an aside, on news I heard that farmers in southeast have eliminated cotton and planted corn (to make more money) and they are facing a big drought.....additionally I don't believe that the corn they make ethanol from is the same grade/quality as corn we consume, so that too limits the edible corn crop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A do agree with you Deb--then what do we do.

For all the rest of you in this thread, I wanted to post a thought that I find very true for us all.

When you disagree with someone, the way out of that disagreement is not to strengthen it by holding firmly to your own side. The most valuable and productive way out is to resolve the situation by finding common ground. That does not mean giving in. It does not mean forcing the other person to give in to you. Instead, it means being as open, honest and direct as possible. It means acting with a genuine desire to arrive at the best solution for everyone involved.

To every extent possible, forget about the disagreement itself and look for what the situation is trying to tell you. Imagine yourself in the place of the other person, and look at things from that perspective.

Nothing of value is produced by arguing. Look instead for ways to cooperate, to understand and to make yourself more clearly understood.

When you're concerned only with what works for you, and only with what affects you, then you're never going to receive any cooperation. Yet when you concern yourself with what's best for all involved, that's when you start to get somewhere.

Ralph Marston

Ralph Marston has some of the best thoughts I have ever read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As an aside, on news I heard that farmers in southeast have eliminated cotton and planted corn (to make more money) and they are facing a big drought.....additionally I don't believe that the corn they make ethanol from is the same grade/quality as corn we consume, so that too limits the edible corn crop.

We're not getting any rain in the Midwest either. This is corn/soybean country ... pray for rain. We've only ever had two other months of May that have been this dry in recorded history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Along Debmidge's line of thinking in her last post--I received an email from Jack Samuels. Someone gave me a link to his website yesterday and I have lost it. Before I lost it though, I emailed him and asked about MFS. His reply to me was:

Deb:

I have never heard of starch being produced from barley or rye. Most is from corn, but if I recall correctly, Tate & Lyle has started to actively use wheat. Go to their Web site and ask that specific question.

Although Tate & Lyle is an English company, they own one of the largest starch producers in our country.

Jack Samuels

I'm thinking we might be needing to make a lot more calls, just to be safe.

Deb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...