1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

Enough is enough.

Discussion in 'Fred's House of Pancakes' started by Godiva, Apr 28, 2007.

  1. Godiva

    Godiva AmeriKan Citizen

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    10,339
    14
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Now they're after my CHOCOLATE.

    The F.D.A. (the people who have done such a good job with pet food protection, peanut butter, and spinach) is considering "2007P-0085 - Adopt Regulations of General Applicability to All Food Standards that would Permit, within Stated Boundaries, Deviations from the Requirements of the Individual Food Standards of Identity."

    In practice regarding chocolate, this means the substitution of "vegetable fats" for cocoa butter and "milk substitutes" in the production of chocolate.

    There is no benefit for consumers in the substitution; it is being sought by the "Grocery Manufacturers Association/Food Products Association on behalf of a number of organizations including the Chocolate Manufacturers Association."

    So we have the Drug companies writing the medicare drug laws, the credit card companies writing bankruptcy law, Oil companies writing the energy bill and now the chocolate manufacturers are going to gut the FDA laws on labeling. What next? The NRA writing the endangered species act? Can the Bush adminstration find any more unqualified cronies in the pockets of corporations to put in any morekey positions to undermine any more laws in the final months of this administration? Can we get rid of any of them any faster?

    FDA docket info and comment.

    It's another example of eroding safeguards, laws and protections in place.

    It's another law GUTTED so a few corporations can make a buck.

    So now the laws we have fought for so that we know EXACTLY what we are eating are being eroded. What you read isn't what you get because some cheapa$$ CEO needs a new yacht. First it's chocolate that is being adulterated. Then the package labeling on other foods will be less stringent or just done away with altogether. I want to know if rice protein or wheat gluten is being substituted for something in MY food and I want it ON THE PACKAGE. Because the next time it might not be cats and dogs that are dieing.
     
    #1 Godiva, Apr 28, 2007
  2. daniel

    daniel Cat Lovers Against the Bomb

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    14,487
    1,518
    0
    Location:
    Spokane, WA
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Don't they already label as "chocolate" stuff that's made with vegetable oils and milk substitutes?

    They are already allowed to print "Zero transfats" on packages of food that contain less than some (rather large) amount of transfats.

    And they are allowed to leave off the list of ingredients any chemicals which were not "intentionally" added to the product (so that carcinogens which necessarily form in the processing of a product are not listed, because, according to the FDA, they are not "ingredients.")

    So it's no surprise that now immitation chocolate will be labeled as if it was the real thing, if they are not doing it already.

    People who are not utterly brainwashed by television can still look at the label: If it contains any kind of oil or fat other than cocoa butter, then it's not chocolate. And if it does not contain cocoa butter, it is not chocolate. You gotta read the label.

    The next move, of course, is to eliminate the requirement for any kind of labeling. Everything in the grocery store that the manufacturer wants you to put in your mouth will just be labeled "Eat Me." No name, no description. Just lots of feel-good pictures and statements about how good it tastes.
     
    #2 daniel, Apr 28, 2007
  3. Beryl Octet

    Beryl Octet New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2006
    1,293
    0
    0
    Location:
    Abingdon VA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Well, they've already re-defined words like "healthy", "victory" and "success", so I guess getting around to more specific nouns such as "chocolate" shouldn't be that much of a surprise.
     
    #3 Beryl Octet, Apr 28, 2007
  4. fshagan

    fshagan Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2005
    1,766
    4
    0
    Location:
    Noneofyourbusiness, CA
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    You guys are behind the curve ... look up the ubiquitous "white grape juice" sometime. That subterfuge dates from the 1970s, IIRC.

    Current law allows substitution of "chemically identical" compounds to be listed as the naturally occurring substance, so all those mothers who think they are doing the right thing by selecting the higher priced flavored drinks that are "100% juice" are still pouring common sugar water into their children. At least we can take comfort that no grapes are harmed in the process of making "white grape juice".

    We have a remarkably safe food and water supply in historical terms, but we do seem to be willing to slide down a slippery slope to ease restrictions on "production efficiency".
     
    #4 fshagan, Apr 28, 2007
  5. danoday

    danoday Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    206
    0
    0
    Location:
    Incline Village, Nevada
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Apr 27 2007, 11:46 PM) [snapback]431595[/snapback]</div>
    OK... it just got personal. If a blow job is grounds for impeachment, altering chocolate has to be!


    In all seriousness, the FDA has been severely weakened over the past few years, and the recent pet food scare should be terrifying all of us. We need an administration that will restore the protections we used to have in place. Unfortunately, for that to happen, it will take a public outcry inspired by deaths (and not just the few ecoli, salmonella, and pet deaths we've had... it will take a wide scale food emergency to motivate the people, and the people to force the administration to act).


    I wouldn't want to see a large scale contamination happen, but logic and statistics tells us that eventually one will. If you reduce the protections, eventually bad stuff will make it's way into the food system, and a lot of people will die. Not a matter of "if", it's a matter of "when".
     
    #5 danoday, Apr 28, 2007
  6. Godiva

    Godiva AmeriKan Citizen

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    10,339
    14
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Apr 28 2007, 10:09 AM) [snapback]431667[/snapback]</div>

    I'll bet that cat food tastes just great until those poor cats died.

    I wouldn't eat any chocolate from China. But how do I know the cheapa$$ manufacturer isn't getting his "vegetable fat" from China?

    You're right. This is a camel's nose issue. It is the first step towards either getting rid of labeling or making it totally useless regarding information.

    And another example of the Bush administration eroding laws and safeguards that have been put in place through the appointment of incompetant, unqualified political cronies.

    We can't get rid of him fast enough. I hope whoever comes it does a completely clean sweep and all of the new admins work to put back everything Bush has dismantled. There goes the first four years.
     
    #6 Godiva, Apr 28, 2007
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)