SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the depends-on-what-you-are-cooking-up dept.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday released a warning letter to Nashoba Brook Bakery, reprimanding the West Concord, Massachusetts-based baker and wholesaler about the ingredients it lists in its granola.
One, in particular.
"Your Nashoba Granola label lists ingredient 'Love,'" the agency wrote in the Sept. 22 letter. "'Love' is not a common or usual name of an ingredient, and is considered to be intervening material because it is not part of the common or usual name of the ingredient."
Nashoba Chief Executive Officer John Gates said the FDA's take on love as an ingredient "just felt so George Orwell."
Ars Technica additionally reports that was not all that the FDA found:
During a recent bakery inspection, FDA agents discovered: dirt and filth caked onto ceiling vents and sprinklers directly above ready-to-eat foods; parts of the floor and ceiling that were missing for some reason; equipment, including bowls and cooling racks, that wasn't cleaned or maintained; and counters, shelves, and food production surfaces that were coated with an unknown residue.
Insects also proved worrisome. At one point, an FDA inspector noticed a one-inch-long, unidentified crawling insect directly underneath a batch of pastries. Last, the FDA reported that employees weren't following proper hygiene practices. One baker repeatedly dipped a blue bracelet into raw dough while mixing it.
For your reading pleasure, here is the warning letter.
(Score: 5, Funny) by fyngyrz on Thursday October 05 2017, @01:52PM (3 children)
They should have enquired further. They named that little fella "the love bug."
(Score: 4, Insightful) by NewNic on Thursday October 05 2017, @05:25PM (2 children)
After all, TMB hates government getting involved in anything, so government pointing out that the place is filthy and the food probably contaminated is bad, right?
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 06 2017, @12:01AM
I don't care about big or small government, which is not strictly correlated to the amount of control you retain over your life as a private citizen.
But I don't get your comment, as it implies you need a federal entity to check bugs in kitchens. Could it be done at smaller scale without experiencing too much corruption?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 06 2017, @12:22AM
TMB hates government getting involved
As filthy as the place was, I'm guessing there was some flour dust about.
Dust in the air has a nasty habit of causing explosions, so they had dodged the bullet there.
...unlike other manufacturing sites that, due to Libertarians|Reactionaries|Neoliberals cutting funding for workplace inspectors, hadn't been inspected since 1985. [wikipedia.org]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday October 05 2017, @01:54PM
You might remember from Futurama that Mom's Robot Oil is made with 10% more Love.
So why can't bakery pastries be made with Love?
As for the insects, just add some language about, " . . . and other natural ingredients".
That way you don't even have to make an effort to identify these one inch long unidentified insects underneath the pastries.
Universal health care is so complex that only 32 of 33 developed nations have found a way to make it work.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05 2017, @02:10PM (3 children)
ite, i'm outta here.
(Score: 4, Informative) by LoRdTAW on Thursday October 05 2017, @05:50PM (2 children)
Don't joke: http://cookingwithcum.com/ [cookingwithcum.com]
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Thursday October 05 2017, @08:57PM (1 child)
Would have modded you +1Gross, but...
Brings a whole new meaning to "Cum and get it!"
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Thursday October 05 2017, @09:16PM
Self-saucing pudding?
"sauce your own pudding"?
Machiatto when you've run out of milk?
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2) by acid andy on Thursday October 05 2017, @02:19PM (2 children)
That's outrageous! We've already established that "filth" is a subjective and relative term [soylentnews.org]. This three letter agency should be ashamed of themselves!
Err.. I mean, err.... I'll get me coat.
Consumerism is poison.
(Score: 1, Troll) by crafoo on Thursday October 05 2017, @05:33PM (1 child)
All of those people claiming filth is subjective should have to eat exclusively from "pet friendly" restaurants, bakeries, and food suppliers. Employees can bring their pets to work every day and let them shit, piss, and shed all over the floors. Regular cleanings are fine of course. Super clean. Enjoy "inside pet" apologists! Your houses aren't disgusting, I'm sure!
Back to main topic: their attempt to subvert the use of the ingredients label is perverse and damaging. If they don't respect the utility of this ingredients list to the general public they should be made to understand.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Thursday October 05 2017, @09:03PM
I can't believe there are 'cat cafes':
https://www.southpawcatcafe.com [southpawcatcafe.com]
Eat and drink with all the pussy you want!
Errrm, no thanks.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Taibhsear on Thursday October 05 2017, @03:17PM (9 children)
I know it sounds ridiculous on the suface but when you have douchebag companies lobbying and getting regulations changed so that they can do things like calling an ingredient by a different name to avoid boycotts (High fructose corn syrup, for example) you have to take precautions. That way they don't start off with "made with love" as a tongue in cheek marketing phrase and end up with them further down the line calling a potentially harmful ingredient "love" as a loophole around regulations or the public eye.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05 2017, @03:35PM (1 child)
Made with 50 micrograms of love 😉❤
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 06 2017, @12:16AM
These guys took it the other direction 5 decades ago.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Thursday October 05 2017, @03:53PM
The android will be disappointed. "The secretary ingredient is basil. And love. But mostly basil."
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05 2017, @05:03PM (4 children)
Entirely agreed. There is advertising feel-good fluff, and there is technical information. If they put "love" in the official label, then it necessarily must be taken both seriously and literally, as people can and should rely on the truth and accuracy of the ingredient list.
Your example of putting in harmful ingredients under the moniker of "love" is a great example. Another would be the damning-by-false-implication effect, as illustrated at: https://www.xkcd.com/641/ [xkcd.com]
There is a time and place for cute and funny things, and government mandated and enforced technical documentation is not one of them.
As a side note, I expect that if the bakery had passed everything else with flying-colors, then the FDA wouldn't have bothered. I expect this was one of those "so long as we are sending them a note anyway, we should mention this as well."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Thursday October 05 2017, @05:14PM (3 children)
> government mandated and enforced technical documentation is not one of them
Where's our friendly neighborhood Violently Imposed Monopoly troll lurking, when we properly need to denounce the inability to formally list love as an ingredient?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday October 05 2017, @07:16PM (1 child)
He died after eating a tainted batch of sausage. Karma's a beeeee-yitch.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05 2017, @10:25PM
No TMB is just taking a break since last being outed for his AC behavior.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday October 05 2017, @09:28PM
I came to the comments especially to find out how the neighbourhood libertarians were going to explain how food hygiene rules violate businesses' freedoms, and how the market will correct these sorts of problems without onerous rules.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 06 2017, @08:14AM
Here's the truth: Love is a measurable and the corporate hucksters aren't even putting it in when they say they are.
Tell some rice you love it, ignore some rice, and tell some you hate it. The loved rice stay fresh longer.
Lot's of people [youtube.com]
Have repeated the experiment [youtube.com]
It's strange, but you really can measure love. [youtube.com]
You should do the experiment yourself before you call BS. Seriously. I know it sounds strange and set out to debunk the experiment. I did it 4 times, with similar results each time. It's not hard.
There really is more to this world than academia knows, and some things are demonstrably actively censored from science -- such as Plasma Cosmology or when Social Justice Fanatics censor "sex differences" papers from medical journals. [youtube.com] Everyone knows that history is a lie agreed upon, but even modern archeology is heavily censored. [youtube.com] I say this to point out that there are some things you can't trust Academia to tell you, and you have to do the experiment yourself to know the truth.
After my first two attempts I thought that perhaps I had just been unlucky and got mold in the jars I "hated". So, I was careful not to get mold spores in the next two sets of jars, by using a sterilization technique for growing mushrooms in strata (which are sensitive to mold), and carried out the experiment in a dark temperature controlled environment. In those experiments mold did not grow, but fermentation eventually began and happened slowest in the "loved" containers. Now I wonder what the result would be if I told the yeast that I loved it with the intent that rice-wine be made with love?
TL;DR: Seriously, Love can be an ingredient. FDA (gov in general) don't want you to know the power we all have, but they are correct in condemning soulless factories for using "made with love".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05 2017, @03:54PM (3 children)
"Love, the kind you clean up with a mop and bucket
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Thursday October 05 2017, @09:09PM (2 children)
Nah, just use Kleenex!
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 06 2017, @01:13AM (1 child)
The Authority-on-everything-in-Chief says paper towels. [google.com]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Friday October 06 2017, @02:19AM
Well I hear Billy C. says use a blue dress!
;)
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05 2017, @04:30PM (5 children)
The Beatles told us that love is all you need, and now we learn it isn't even an ingredient, let alone the only one. Damn liars.
(Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Thursday October 05 2017, @05:10PM (4 children)
They initially wrote "all you need is bugs", but legitimately worried it wouldn't be a smash hit.
"All you need is Crabs" was also rejected, even if making the music video on a Pacific Island was tempting, and "All you need is Weed" never reached the last stanza.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Osamabobama on Thursday October 05 2017, @07:35PM (3 children)
All I need is this lamp. And that table.
All I need is this lamp and that table.
Oh, and this rug. So, all I need is this lamp and table and that rug and . . .
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Thursday October 05 2017, @09:15PM (2 children)
Misquoted, but great movie! :)
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Friday October 06 2017, @08:18PM (1 child)
I wanted to get the quote without consulting audio, as I'm in an office without my headphones, so I cut and pasted the first believable text I found. I'll add the movie to my Netflix queue (or whatever the kids are calling it now) to refresh my firsthand knowledge.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Friday October 06 2017, @11:10PM
No prob: i'm old enough that my memory SUCKS!!! and i have to copy and paste everything.
Getting old sucks tm
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Thursday October 05 2017, @04:46PM
Yeah, but how about you concentrate about your dirty ass facilities, employees with worn objects repeatedly dipped in batter (that you know are on their wrists in the bathroom too), and large fucking insects everywhere.
Maybe the biggest part of the story isn't the big bad government saying you can't use the word love.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by Hartree on Thursday October 05 2017, @04:51PM
If the bakery can list "Love" as an ingredient, can't Chevron list "Green Good Intentions" as an ingredient in their petroleum products?
(Score: 5, Informative) by requerdanos on Thursday October 05 2017, @05:00PM
There seems to be some confusion resulting from a Bloomberg false & clickbait headline:
False:
False:
False:
Based on false premise:
Mixture (Beatles True; not an ingredient False):
What is alleged here is that the FDA said that love is not an ingredient. That is completely false.
The FDA did not deny, nor even question or challenge the idea that Love was an ingredient in the granola. They merely point out that if Love is a physical ingredient, included in the food, then it is being listed in the ingredients in a confusing or misleading way.
Specifically, "'Love' is not a common or usual name of an ingredient" according to the Combined Federal Regulations that govern what can be listed among ingredients, and how.
This is not a statement about the contents of granola, but rather the content of a specific law describing how you can list ingredients. Editorial comments can't go in the list of approved nouns; thus even if the product is 99.999% intangible but wholesome love, the tiny area of the label listing physical ingredients isn't the place to list it, and the entire rest of the label would be a great place to put it, by federal law. As a Bakery, Nashoba Brook's knowledge area is what to put in granola, and as a federal agency, the FDA are the ones with the knowledge area of Federal law.
I interpolate from the letter--which was mostly about how nasty the bakery and its practices seemed to be to the inspectors--that should the bakery choose to specify how the love was applied to the ingredients in any area of the label other than nutrition facts, then there is no prohibition listed. Unlike "Whole Grain" or "Fat Free," there are no specific Federal guidelines for describing how you include Love in your product. There just *is* a guideline on specifically what can go in the ingredients area of nutrition facts, that being physical items described in a particular way.
In short: It was the *way* that they listed the Love that caused the problem, not a blind denial that a product could contain Love.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by istartedi on Thursday October 05 2017, @05:35PM (2 children)
The way the letter expressed it may have been a bit clumsy. It's stupid booracrat language; but it's not censorship or oppression. The ingredient list is serious business. Consumers expect it to be accurate. If you let one company start mucking around with that, next thing you know it'll be full of cuteness, magic, etc. and it will just be an annoying thing to read instead of what it's supposed to be: a standardized list of ingredients.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Thursday October 05 2017, @08:28PM (1 child)
> next thing you know it'll be full of cuteness, magic, etc. and it will just be an annoying thing to read
It's already a pain to read. But at least you can.
Let "love" slide, and before you know it you'll have a page of marketing bullshit fuzzy words used to conceal the arsenic, lead and depleted uranium they put in there to save five cents.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 06 2017, @06:13AM
Depleted uranium has been heavily processed. It's unhealthy. Natural uranium is much better.
(Score: 5, Informative) by EvilSS on Thursday October 05 2017, @06:03PM
https://consumerist.com/2017/10/04/fda-tells-bakery-love-is-not-an-actual-ingredient-in-your-granola/ [consumerist.com]
Honestly if I were the bakery I'd kept my mouth shut and fixed it. This is just bringing more attention to the rest of the violations.