Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I went to Aldis today and saw that some of their brands such as Baker's Corner and Chef's Harvest have some gluten free products. They are labeled gluten free but it doesn't say whether the facilities that they were made in were gluten free. Do you know if there are issues with cross contamination with certain products? The other thing is that there are things like their Southern Grove brand dried fruits that are not labeled gluten free. Yet, gluten is not listed as an ingredient. Under their allergen information, they mention that certain products were produced on equipment shared with peanuts and tree nuts. But they didn't mention wheat or gluten. Does that mean that the product is gluten free, even though it's not labeled as so? I mean, if the equipment used to process the product shared lines with wheat products, wouldn't they have to disclose that information? Needless to say, I'm rather confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went to Aldis today and saw that some of their brands such as Baker's Corner and Chef's Harvest have some gluten free products. They are labeled gluten free but it doesn't say whether the facilities that they were made in were gluten free. Do you know if there are issues with cross contamination with certain products? The other thing is that there are things like their Southern Grove brand dried fruits that are not labeled gluten free. Yet, gluten is not listed as an ingredient. Under their allergen information, they mention that certain products were produced on equipment shared with peanuts and tree nuts. But they didn't mention wheat or gluten. Does that mean that the product is gluten free, even though it's not labeled as so? I mean, if the equipment used to process the product shared lines with wheat products, wouldn't they have to disclose that information? Needless to say, I'm rather confused.

In this current time of lawsuits, more and more company's will list "no gluten ingredients", rather than "gluten free". Some companies will test, yet expensive. Many of those companies will list that as "certified gluten free". Again, all voluntary.

As you know Cool, the legal standard is not yet establish, where a company can claim a gluten free status and many companies will do it voluntarily. I would expect that it would be in their best interest to be honest. Nor, is it required to disclose a "shared facility or shared equipment". In the interest of proper quality control, most companies will to a good job on cleansing. But, again, you assume proper procedure and it's buyer beware.

Sometimes you need to make a educated choice. Mistakes happen, but it's never the end of the world. You just try again.

I hoped that I answered some of your questions. :) Many of us buy from companies who will disclose all sources of gluten. Peter has that listing (I have a new computer and lost some of my bookmarks).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed this "no gluten ingredients" thing and it is VERY annoying! Nevertheless, I can understand why companies use this phrase...it makes them much less liable for a lawsuit.

But if something doesn't have the status of gluten free, yet has 2 very obvious non-gluten ingredients (cherries, sugar) and they don't list gluten under allergen information (whereas they did mention nuts and peanuts) can I assume it's safe?

One of the reasons I ask is because I do not get sick if I get glutened. Therefore, I can't tell when I've eaten something with gluten in it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed this "no gluten ingredients" thing and it is VERY annoying! Nevertheless, I can understand why companies use this phrase...it makes them much less liable for a lawsuit.

But if something doesn't have the status of gluten free, yet has 2 very obvious non-gluten ingredients (cherries, sugar) and they don't list gluten under allergen information (whereas they did mention nuts and peanuts) can I assume it's safe?

One of the reasons I ask is because I do not get sick if I get glutened. Therefore, I can't tell when I've eaten something with gluten in it or not.

If a product has two ingredients, as you said cherries, sugar, it should be okay to consume. And sounds yummy also.

Wheat is required to be listed, in the ingredients listing or in the allergen statement. In this product, it would be unlikely to contain barley, rye, malt or oat.

When I shop, I intentionally look for products with the least amount of ingredients and long worded chemicals. Not necessarily because of gluten, but I have learned to eat more healthy and natural.

I was not aware that you are non-symptomatic. I will try to remember that when I reply to your post, but my memory is not great. ;) You might have to remind me again. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, being non-symptomatic is great but it can really be a great challenge for me, too. The only way I can tell if I've been eating too much gluten is if I start suddenly losing a lot of weight and/or start feeling extremely tired (normally I'm tired all the time, but I mean extreme fatigue). I've had some major problems with anxiety and brain fog, but I've not been able to tell whether it's due to eating gluten or just part of my usual symptoms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed this "no gluten ingredients" thing and it is VERY annoying! Nevertheless, I can understand why companies use this phrase...it makes them much less liable for a lawsuit.

But if something doesn't have the status of gluten free, yet has 2 very obvious non-gluten ingredients (cherries, sugar) and they don't list gluten under allergen information (whereas they did mention nuts and peanuts) can I assume it's safe?

One of the reasons I ask is because I do not get sick if I get glutened. Therefore, I can't tell when I've eaten something with gluten in it or not.

From January 2012 the world have adopted a unified description for Certified Gluten Free the finished product must be less <20PPM, in most cases their products are probably testing <5PPM but a certain margain of error has to be allowed hence the <20PPM setting.

Heretofore, Gluten free was anything less than <200PPM and most products that claimed Gluten Free status came in under this level.

Manufacturers that had previously stated Gluten Free probably couldn't Guarantee testing results below 20PPM but might have results of <80PPM (CC etc).

Under the old levels these were classified as Gluten Free, but under the new level of <20PPM they can no longer claim Gluten Free status though their products may still be safe for most Celiacs so instead of claiming their Products are Gluten Free they can claim they are made from ingredients that don't contain gluten.

These products will no longer need to be tested as they do not claim Gluten Free status.

In other words they are leaving it up to the individual Celiac/Gluten Intollerant whether or not they wish to consume their product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the US, there is no real law about gluten-free. The only thing is the basic law of not to be completely misleading. For example, labelling whole wheat bread as gluten free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Irishdaveyboy, thanks for the info about testing. I live in the United States and I notice that you are from Ireland (which, by the way, is absolutely gorgeous. I went there once in 2009). I know that the testing and labeling of gluten-free products is different in each country. Are you referring to laws in Ireland or the US? Or all countries? I'm a bit confused.

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

×