Jump to content
  • Welcome to Celiac.com!

    You have found your celiac tribe! Join us and ask questions in our forum, share your story, and connect with others.




  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A1):



    Celiac.com Sponsor (A1-M):


  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Our Content
    eNewsletter
    Donate

Cadbury Cream Eggs- Now With Wheat :(


SuperGina

Recommended Posts

cruelshoes Enthusiast

Thanks for the heads up. I posted this info on a couple of other celiac boards that I go to. A lot of people will be totally bummed. Makes me glad I don't like these things. ;)


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



alamaz Collaborator

My day is officially ruined (although, I wouldn't have read ingredients and it could have been a lot worse!). Figures the year I'm pregnant and craving just about anything bad for me Cadbury eggs have to become un-gluten free!

Shame on Hershey's!

I'd be interested to see an ingredient listing from pre labeling laws to see if they added the glucose recently or just started labeling it recently.....

melrobsings Contributor

I wrote to the and complained. I'll let you know if I hear anything.

cruelshoes Enthusiast

I do not like Cadbury Creme eggs, but it appears that Glucose syrup, even if derived from wheat, is a gluten free ingredient. I think it will be another decision we all have to make like the one on McDonald's fries, but below is information on this ingredient. I suspect that there has been no change to the ingredients for the creme eggs, only that the labeling laws now require that the source of the glucose syrup be disclosed.

Irish Daveyboy already posted this one, but here it is again:

GLUCOSE, GLUCOSE SYRUP AND CARAMEL COLOUR

It is important for those following a gluten-free diet to incorporate the latest valid scientific information into their diets. Under current Australian food law, glucose, glucose syrup and caramel colour are "gluten-free", even if derived from wheat, as the wheat is so highly processed, there is no gluten detected.

Glucose, glucose syrup, caramel and similar ingredients have no detectable gluten, even if derived from wheat. New food labelling laws require food labels to list all ingredients derived from wheat, rye, barley and oats. This does not mean that all ingredients derived from these sources actually contain gluten. So, it is a legal requirement that the source be declared, but remember that ingredients derived from wheat that are gluten free are: dextrose, glucose and caramel colour (additive 150). "

"Open Original Shared Link" Shelley Case, author.

page: 53- "Glucose syrups are highly processed and purified in order to separate and remove the protein portion from the starch mixture. .... Although glucose syrup can be made from wheat, the processing renders it gluten free. This has been verified by scientists and research centers in Europe, Australia and other countries using the highly sensitive R5 ELISA tests."

Lisa Mentor

So.....dextrose, glucose and caramel color are ALWAYS gluten free even if listed (wheat)?

I have seen these ingredients often and have never been concerned, but rarely have I seen the source listed as (wheat).

blueeyedmanda Community Regular
So.....dextrose, glucose and caramel color are ALWAYS gluten free even if listed (wheat)?

I have seen these ingredients often and have never been concerned, but rarely have I seen the source listed as (wheat).

This was the first I have ever seen it listed this way either....but seeing as it says wheat I am going to stay away from it. As long as they keep the Cadbury Mini Eggs gluten free.....once they use gluten in those We will have LOTS of problems.

  • 2 weeks later...
gfp Enthusiast

Not long ago 200ppm (the lowest detection limit for cheap testing) was considered safe.

Now cheap testing goes to 20 or 5 ppm ...

For many years current scientific research could make no definitive statement that smoking causes cancer.

I would say when people make their descision that current scientific research is not the last word...

I am certainly unaware of any long term studies on this (and there hasn't even been time) ... but I would be more worried what future scientific research will say when long term studies have been made.


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



Ms. Celiac Apprentice

Are Cadbury eggs that are sold in the UK still gluten free?

Worriedtodeath Enthusiast
Not long ago 200ppm (the lowest detection limit for cheap testing) was considered safe.

Now cheap testing goes to 20 or 5 ppm ...

For many years current scientific research could make no definitive statement that smoking causes cancer.

I would say when people make their descision that current scientific research is not the last word...

I am certainly unaware of any long term studies on this (and there hasn't even been time) ... but I would be more worried what future scientific research will say when long term studies have been made.

HearHear!!!! Scientific research is also usually backed by the very people trying to make a buck by having said research turn out for their best bottom dollar. Current medical scientific research tells my whole gang to eat wheat to our heart's content because we have no medical scientific reason to avoid it despite severe sickness and undeniable positive results from a gluten-free diet. The only research that might change that has not been published yet or examined by other scientist yet so thus it is unknown.

While it is nice to know that today's research claims it is safe, in 50 years will they say the same as technology becomes better???

And if you are allergic to wheat, would you still react?? If so then it still has enough wheat to cause someone a problem. And thus still trip autoimmune reactions.

Stacie

gfp Enthusiast
HearHear!!!! Scientific research is also usually backed by the very people trying to make a buck by having said research turn out for their best bottom dollar. Current medical scientific research tells my whole gang to eat wheat to our heart's content because we have no medical scientific reason to avoid it despite severe sickness and undeniable positive results from a gluten-free diet. The only research that might change that has not been published yet or examined by other scientist yet so thus it is unknown.

While it is nice to know that today's research claims it is safe, in 50 years will they say the same as technology becomes better???

And if you are allergic to wheat, would you still react?? If so then it still has enough wheat to cause someone a problem. And thus still trip autoimmune reactions.

Stacie

This is the bottom line ....

The 200ppm limit was set by the food industry, not based on scientific study.

The food industry itself then paid for the studies saying celiacs were no worse off on 200ppm than a 'normal' gluten-free diet.

This in itself is fundamentally flawed... it took 50 yrs to 'prove' smoking causes cancer ... and this was in the face of a lot of evidence because its so easy to fix a clinical trial.

You can start by pre-screening candidates ... the ones you worry about you throw out. So in the case of a gluten-free test you just make sure those on a gluten-free diet have no idea about hidden gluten or cross contamination....

Its hardly difficult, most of us comiong here had no idea until we found this board!

Then you say '200ppm limit' .. again fine this doesn't mean the test sample are eating 200ppm, just they are eating something with 'some gluten' which of course can be controlled specifically. 200ppm was not the limit for testing, it was the limit for testing my ELISA tests, GC-MS could for the last 20 yrs detect <1ppm. Its just more expensive but hey, if your doing a study you do one set of tests to determine its VERY LOW and a seperate set of qualitative tests to say 'its present'

The tobacco industry used this type of leveraged testing successfully for 50 yrs.

Really, you have to wonder why their testing is even considered valid?

wildchild-nan Newbie

I know it is in the caramel ones, I was so bummed. It was one of the things I look foward to this time of the year.

angielackner Contributor

i am not celiac, but i at least have a gluten intolerance, but i honestly think it is either a gluten ALLERGY or wheat allergy...sigh

anyways...i first bought a batch of the minis and ate them with no problem, then got the full sized ones (3 of them mind you) a few days later and sucked them all down that evening (nothing new there for me...i do it every year)...but i got an itchy throat after eating the full sized ones, like i do with a glutening...i never read the labels as i blindly trusted they were still gluten free...i mean come one, who messes with perfection on a recipe?!?!?! crazy!

so yeah, i must have reacted to the wheat in them.

ughhhhh!

angie

HeartofGlass224 Rookie

Figures...this is the one candy that I wait all year to be able to get at Easter! :( Thanks for the info!

Archived

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

  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Celiac.com:
    Join eNewsletter
    Donate

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A17):
    Celiac.com Sponsor (A17):





    Celiac.com Sponsors (A17-M):




  • Recent Activity

    1. - Scott Adams replied to Borky's topic in Gluten-Free Foods, Products, Shopping & Medications
      1

      Gluten food test strips

    2. - Scott Adams replied to Midwesteaglesfan's topic in Celiac Disease Pre-Diagnosis, Testing & Symptoms
      2

      Going for upper endoscopy today

    3. - elisejunker44 commented on Scott Adams's article in Latest Research
      1

      Study Estimates the Costs of Delayed Celiac Disease Diagnosis (+Video)

    4. - Borky posted a topic in Gluten-Free Foods, Products, Shopping & Medications
      1

      Gluten food test strips


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      132,269
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    powergs03
    Newest Member
    powergs03
    Joined

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.5k
    • Total Posts
      1m

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):





  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):



  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • Scott Adams
      Welcome to the forum! Do you mean this article, and if so, I don't think these are available yet.  
    • Scott Adams
      First of all, I want to wish you the very best of luck with your procedure today. It's completely understandable to feel a mix of apprehension and hope. Your proactiveness in researching and advocating for that endoscopy was incredibly smart; securing that formal diagnosis is crucial for both insurance and long-term health management. While it's natural to worry that those five gluten-free days could affect the results, your logic is spot-on—it's highly unlikely your intestines healed completely in that short time, and the fact that your joint pain and stomach issues have flared back up aggressively after reintroducing gluten is a very strong, and unfortunate, sign that the inflammation is indeed present and active. It's also very common for people to look back and connect dots, like your lifelong migraines, once a potential celiac diagnosis is on the table, as it's a systemic condition with many non-gastrointestinal symptoms. I truly hope this scope provides the clear answers you need to finally start on the right path to managing your health and finding lasting relief from the fatigue and pain. Safe travels for your drive, and here's hoping for a definitive answer and a brighter, healthier chapter ahead.
    • Scott Adams
    • Borky
      I just recently saw something on this.  Has anyone tried test strips?  Which brand is better?  Not sure how they really work and if they really do work.  Thank you, Nancy (aka Borky)
    • Wheatwacked
      Surge of information on benefits of vitamin D McCarthy has been employing these methods since February 2007, and patient acceptance has been high. He said he checks each patient’s 25(OH)D level and supplements to reach a target of 80 ng/mL in adults and children. Of the first 1,500 patients McCarthy tested, 40% began with vitamin D levels less than 20 ng/mL and 70% less than 35 ng/mL. Only 1% initially had values within his target range. According to McCarthy, his target range is based upon several factors: A lifeguard study that found vitamin D levels in the 70 ng/mL range up to 100 ng/mL (nature’s level) were associated with no adverse effects; Data in patients with breast cancer showing a reduction in the incidence of new cancer with postulated 0 point at 80 ng/mL; Colon cancer data showing a reduction in the incidence of new cancer (linear) with postulated 0 point at 75 ng/mL; More than 200 polymorphisms of the vitamin D receptor requiring higher D levels to attain same desired outcomes;
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

NOTICE: This site places This site places cookies on your device (Cookie settings). on your device. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.