[yellow]

How do you feel about our standards for labeling foods?
What about meat or dairy product identification, no matter the percentages. The specifics of "natural flavoring".
I know there are laws that protect flavors and recipes and such, but what about a simple yes or no, derived from animal or plant label/symbol.

Or, there are the countless other items that are made from animal sources?

Gelatin for example:

Common examples of foods that contain gelatin are gelatin desserts, jelly, trifles, aspic, marshmallows, and confectioneries such as Peeps and gummy bears. Gelatin may be used as a stabilizer, thickener, or texturizer in foods such as ice cream, jams, yogurt, cream cheese, and margarine; it is used, as well, in fat-reduced foods to simulate the mouth feel of fat and to create volume without adding calories.

Gelatin is used for the clarification of juices, such as apple juice, and of vinegar. Isinglass, from the swim bladders of fish, is still in use as a fining agent for wine and beer. [5] Beside hartshorn jelly, from deer antlers (hence the name "hartshorn"), isinglass was one of the oldest sources of gelatin.

Technical uses

*Gelatin typically constitutes the shells of pharmaceutical capsules in order to make them easier to swallow. Hypromellose is the vegetarian counterpart to gelatin, but is more expensive to produce.
* Animal glues such as hide glue are essentially unrefined gelatin.
* It is used to hold silver halide crystals in an emulsion in virtually all photographic films and photographic papers. Despite some efforts, no suitable substitutes with the stability and low cost of gelatin have been found.
* Used as a carrier, coating or separating agent for other substances, it, for example, makes beta-carotene water-soluble, thus imparting a yellow color to any soft drinks containing beta-carotene.
* Gelatin is closely related to bone glue and is used as a binder in match heads and sandpaper.
* Cosmetics may contain a non-gelling variant of gelatin under the name "hydrolysed collagen".
* As a surface sizing, it smooths glossy printing papers or playing cards and maintains the wrinkles in crêpe paper.

We all know gelatin comes from an animal source, but who knew that their medication capsules, or scrapbooking paper has some animal ingredients?

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by yellow

We all know gelatin comes from an animal source, but who knew that their medication capsules, or scrapbooking paper has some animal ingredients?

Most of the vegetarians and former vegetarians I know, know, if for no other reason than it’s hard to be a vegetarian without at some time shopping in a alternative/health food store, and hard not to notice the many gelcaped food supplements sold there that include prominent mention of the non-animal origin of their gelcaps.

Usually made of HPMC, though sometimes of alternatives such as wheat gluten, these capsules are pretty good for delivering dry substances that don’t need to be released quickly and very predictably in the stomach. Though significantly more expensive than ordinary, animal-derived gelcaps, they still contribute only a tiny fraction to the total cost of the products they contain.

Their main drawback, AFAIK, is that none of them are very liquid-proof, so they can only be used to contain dry substances, and can stick together or dissolve in humid conditions

Originally Posted by yellow

How do you feel about our standards for labeling foods?

By and large, very satisfied[/quote]

Originally Posted by yellow

… but what about a simple yes or no, derived from animal or plant label/symbol.

That would be handy. However, since vegetarians and other strict dieters are a desired market, most makers and distributors of animal-free foods already include this prominently in their labeling

In general, for food in the US, I’m more concerned by regulations forbidding some kinds of voluntarily labeling than the lack of laws requiring labeling of some kinds. In particular, although I’m unable to find a reference to it, I believe that the US Congress has specifically prohibited packaging advertising a food as not containing foods from certain sources, such as genetically modified corn. The reasoning behind such laws and regulations is that, as there is no credible scientific evidence that such foods are in any way harmful (and there really is no such evidence, despite much popular outcry to the contrary), advertising its absence would constitute an unfair claim of a health benefit. Not only could this hurt the consumer, by tricking them into spending more money on a product with no benefit over a less expensive one, but it could hurt growers and manufacturers, by pressuring them to use less hearty crops, possibly even hurting the consumer because they require more unhealthy pesticides and preservatives, or are subject to greater spoilage and harmful contamination.

Though I can see the logic behind it, I don’t support such reasoning. Rather, I consider such policies to reflect an inappropriate degree of influence of companies developing and selling GM crops on the US government.

Such laws are not, I believe, the norm in wealthy countries outside of the US.

I’d like to find references indicating that such laws and regulations are actually in force or not – although I have read numerous reference to them in paper publications in the last couple of decades, I’m unable to find a good citation with a simple internet search .

[Biomajor]

I was a vegetarian for about six years and it was VERY difficult maintaining a "pure" diet. Not only was it extremely difficult, but it was expensive. After having a child I eventually gave up on it because of the time and expense involved...and that would be times two if I was going to raise my child the same way.

So, now we just try to be as healthy as possible.

[yellow]

FDA Issues Documents on the Safety of Food from Animal Clones
FDA Issues Documents on the Safety of Food from Animal Clones

The agency is not requiring labeling or any other additional measures for food from cattle, swine, and goat clones, or their offspring because food derived from these sources is no different from food derived from conventionally bred animals. Should a producer express a desire for voluntary labeling (e.g., "this product is clone-free"), it will be considered on a case-by-case basis to ensure compliance with statutory requirements that labeling be truthful and not misleading.

The guidance states that food products from the offspring of clones from any species traditionally consumed for food are suitable to enter the food and feed supply.