*Accurate* food/drink labelling: time to get serious about it?

Dostoevsky

For the first time, this week I went to a butchers instead of to my local Tesco for meat, as the butcher is part of this Farm-to-Fork traceability programme where they know the source of all meat. At least that's the claim. I paid more for it, but I just felt a sense of dread walking up the food aisle in Tesco that evening. 'This shit is coming from everywhere, and nowhere at the same time', I couldn't help thinking while walking through all the "bargains" in Tesco.

Tesco makes no such "Farm-to-Fork" traceability claims, even in its Finest* range it just says it's "Irish". Food labelling is a huge problem across the entire industry - just look at these products which advertise a neat 99 calories. How convenient for marketing purposes....

Personally, I'd rather pay a bit more for my food/drink in order to ensure that the quality and content is as described on everything I buy. On the current record of the FSAI Ireland could be innovators here, if the state so decides. I get the sense that there are huge revelations to come about how untrustworthy food labelling is. If a decision is made to be honest about the reality regarding food labelling, we have a much better chance of knowing our food content before other EU countries have the honesty to investigate their own industries.

Three questions:

1) Why is every supplier of food and drink in this state not compelled to give the nutritional content of their products? The alcohol companies are obviously getting away with not disclosing that information - have you ever seen the calorie content on a can of beer, for instance? - and undoubtedly there are others. Why?

2) With all the products on shelves, what percentage have their content tested to see if it matches the claims on the labels? 5%? 15%? 60%?

3) What fines do the FSAI/ Irish state impose upon companies which provide false nutritional information on their products? Are these fines sufficient enough to be a deterrent? With the exception of the current horse meat scandal, why aren't the offending companies publicised?

---

Do you think this state should put the resources into taking food labelling seriously by 1) insisting that all food and drink products must be labelled accurately; 2) that there will be enough inspectors appointed to act as a deterrent for companies which might otherwise make false claims and 3) that the state ensures there are heavy fines and publicity for companies which make false claims to Irish consumers?

3ndahalfof6

It sounds so horse meat to me.

MistyCheese

Yes, it is time to get cereal.

squod

Dostoevsky wrote: »

*Accurate* food/drink labelling: time to get serious about it?

Never gonna happen.

amacca

MistyCheese wrote: »

Yes, it is time to get cereal.

No my friend...time to get SUPER Cereal about it!

ITS_A_BADGER

No, I pay no attention to the labels

well yeah id agree they need to get more strict on whats going into foods especially after the horse meat scandal, The public is gonna need reassurance that what they are buyng isnt going be some other form of cheap meat or bits of the animal that no one wants to eat. people are going to want labelling if they are to trust tesco or any other of the places that got contaminated meat products

galwayrush

Pretty easy to print a label to suit whatever needs.

Archeron

Imagine how sausage sales would plummet.

Contents :
10% eyelids
20% lips
20% sphincter
50% sawdust
May have been looked at by a pig.

danniemcq

even hotdogs?

http://www.boosman.com/blog/images/2003-08-15-03.jpg

Where To

Some people nowadays wouldn't eat a carrot if they knew where it came from. We need less labels, and a greater understanding of the reasons why cheap processed foods are more likely to be full of sh1te than more expensive food.

Miss Lockhart

No, I trust that the labels are being truthful

I have a friend with a severe pork allergy and she considers herself very lucky now that she didn't eat any of the contaminated food. What would these companies have done if somebody suffered a fatal reaction because they lied about the contents of their products?

Mr. Manager

MistyCheese wrote: »

Yes, it is time to get cereal.

You called?

amacca

Where To wrote: »

We need less labels, and a greater understanding of the reasons why cheap processed foods are more likely to be full of sh1te than more expensive food.

In fairness if a person can't understand why cheap processed foods are more likely to be full of sh1te than more expensive food then perhaps they should be fed sawdust

weldoninhio

I don't understand the hysteria about this!! If people had gotten sick, or something seriously wrong had happened then fair enough, there should be uproar, but meat is meat.

amacca

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

I have a friend with a severe pork allergy and she considers herself very lucky now that she didn't eat any of the contaminated food. What would these companies have done if somebody suffered a fatal reaction because they lied about the contents of their products?

Never even considered that......If its as widespread as it seems to be I wonder why someone hasn't suffered a serious allergic reaction?

meoklmrk91

No, I trust that the labels are being truthful

Take a look at this http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/traffic-light-food-labelling-rejected-by-meps-122680.html, I watched a documentary on C4, I think last year regarding this and it was massive food companies lobbying that stopped it coming in, one of the biggest culprits was Tesco.

Now two years later they have finally agreed to implement it. http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/health/trafficlight-food-labels-on-the-way-to-help-us-eat-healthier-28824859.html Its a much simpler system especially when you are rushing around the shops. But I personally believe that they don't want us to know what we are eating because if we did then we probably wouldn't.

Next time you are in a super market have a look at some of the "healthy stuff" usually aimed at people trying to loose weight and mothers with young kids. You will see yogurts with labels stating tha they are fat free but when you actually look you will see that they are packed with sugar, but still can be advertised as being healthy despite that this is not true. As for kids foods there are countless examples but who can forget sunny D, advertised to mums as a healthy alternative to fizzy drinks, with loads of vitamins, it just turned out to be sugar water with colourants that could turn kids orange. We are too trusting of the big food companies and they are happily taking advantage of that.

amacca

weldoninhio wrote: »

I don't understand the hysteria about this!! If people had gotten sick, or something seriously wrong had happened then fair enough, there should be uproar, but meat is meat.

Yes but they lied......I'd have no problem eating horse meat, pork, cat, dog lips, brain etc (as long as its I cant get sick etc from it - through and through carnivore me)

To take just one example, if they are willing to lie about the ingredients then whose to say what quality control exists on the undeclared horse they are putting into it - lots of horses are pumped full of antibiotics (v.dangerous and unsuitable for human consumption) whose to say as they are engaged in something shady already you are not getting this stuff in your burger

like I said I would eat anything that moves as long as its safe to eat ....thats the issue here for me, shady with labelling then whose to say what you are getting is actually safe for consumption

ITS_A_BADGER

No, I pay no attention to the labels

weldoninhio wrote: »

I don't understand the hysteria about this!! If people had gotten sick, or something seriously wrong had happened then fair enough, there should be uproar, but meat is meat.

Do you not think, you should know what you are putting into your body tho? surely you buy beef to eat beef, so if you buy a meat under the pretents that it is beef but is actually horse meat, do you not find something wrong with that? also you are being ripped off as horse meat is a cheaper product

My name is URL

I'd be happy enough if the correct species was listed... there's never going to be 100% honest labeling though. It'd be impossible to enforce.

amacca

My name is URL wrote: »

I'd be happy enough if the correct species was listed... there's never going to be 100% honest labeling though. It'd be impossible to enforce.

Pomeranian tenders anyone?


actually there wouldnt be a pick on those yappy little bolloxes..............st.bernard nuggets:D

Miss Lockhart

No, I trust that the labels are being truthful

weldoninhio wrote: »

I don't understand the hysteria about this!! If people had gotten sick, or something seriously wrong had happened then fair enough, there should be uproar, but meat is meat.

No, meat is not simply meat. The testing carried out on drugs used in food animals is much more than the testing carried out on drugs used in non-food animals. Not all animal produce is suitable for human consumption. People can also be allergic to some meats and not others.

BrokenArrows

Meh. Just stick a "probably" label above the contents.

seven_eleven

Dostoevsky wrote: »

Three questions:

1) Why is every supplier of food and drink in this state not compelled to give the nutritional content of their products? The alcohol companies are obviously getting away with not disclosing that information - have you ever seen the calorie content on a can of beer, for instance? - and undoubtedly there are others. Why?

There is actually strict food labelling legislation in place that manufacturers have to abide by. IIRC all foods manufactured in the EU are required to follow these and display nutritional information, as well as other information and to follow strict packaging rules to prevent misleading of the consumer.

While I have seen many cans of beer with nutritional information on them, mainly the calorie count and ingrediants, I have also come across several types of beer without them on it.
For whatever reason I do not know but maybe there is a loophole somewhere, and maybe foods imported from outside the EU dont have them because they dont have to abide by these laws.

2) With all the products on shelves, what percentage have their content tested to see if it matches the claims on the labels? 5%? 15%? 60%?

I would be interested to see when the last time these horse-meat tainted products were tested.

Speaking of which, I had a package of big-al burgers (or something similar) a few weeks ago, which was one of them that contained pork meat. But yet the packaging said "100% beef" on them. A clear breach and very misleading, unacceptable imo. I felt like calling the enquiry number to inform them but I'm sure they were well aware of it and me ringing to shout down the phone at them wasnt going to do any good.