Burger wars 2049

FauxPseudo

No. It doesn't. It asks that the actual ingredients used be identified. So, as an example, if they used lactose extracted from milk, they can say lactose and be done with it. It's a refined sugar, not milk. And that applies to packaged food manufacturers

And actually, they don't need to state their ingredients. I didn't state clearly what I meant about that. What I meant is that they can't lie about it. They're under no legal requirement to list their ingredients. But it makes good sense from the perspective of our litigious society.

"Additives" means put into the food. "Processing materials" means used in preparation of, but not integral to the food itself. Do I have to list the vegetable oil I spray on my grill, and then mostly wipe off when cleaning it, in any foods I cook on it? Do I have to list the wax that might come off when wrapping a sandwich in wax paper? It can get nuts. Do I give an analysis of the water I use in rehydrating or boiling foods? Where's the stopping point?

I wrote the "Food Additives" section in the Oxford University Press Encyclopedia of Food and Drink in America. I'm somewhat conversant with the subject.

I do agree that ingredients-processing materials that might have a secondary effect - allergies or intolerances - should be part of the information about the food. But I also think that people at large go way beyond any reasonable consideration in dealing with them. In the one web site I posted, how many of those people were frantic about not being able to eat those fries any more. Any more. Can't eat them again. No allergens in them, no gluten, no additional proteins, but that doesn't stop the insanity of panicky ignorance.

If McD has been knowingly adding stuff to their fries but not saying it, or worse, denying it, they should get a smack. Not for legal reasons, but because they need to be more concerned about public reaction and the bogus stuff that it leaves them open to. More Stella lawsuits.

Pastorio