Ingredient Transparency - Using Common Names Only

To ensure clarity and consumer confidence, any food sold or distributed is required to list all ingredients using their most basic, recognizable names. This policy aims to prevent misleading or confusing terminology that may obscure the true source of an ingredient.

1. Common Names Only

Ingredients must be listed using their simplest and most commonly recognized names. Scientific or alternative names that may confuse consumers are not permitted.

2. Examples of Non-Compliant Naming

Natural Red Dye 4 (Also known as Carmine, Carmine Lake, C.I. 75470, E120) must be listed as Cochineal Insect-Derived Dye.

3. Ingredient Visibility on Packaging

The ingredients must be easily visible and legible on all product packaging to ensure consumers can quickly identify what they are consuming. The following rules apply:

  • No Concealment: Ingredients must not be hidden, minimized, or placed in areas that are hard to find on the packaging.
  • Readable Fonts: The font size and style used to list ingredients must be large enough to be easily read by the average consumer.
  • Clear Contrast: There must be sufficient contrast between the text color and the background of the packaging to ensure the ingredient list is easily readable.

4. Public Reporting

Consumers are encouraged to report any packaging issues related to ingredient visibility or misleading names. A clear process will be provided for the public to submit reports, and all complaints will be reviewed and addressed promptly.

14 Likes

I agree, there is around 60 different words for sugar and that has been used to subvert the labeling guidelines.

6 Likes

Listing ingredients as natural or artificial flavors needs to change also. People with food allergies need to know exactly what ingredients are in the product. Natural ingredients can be animal or plant so it is important for some people with allergies.

5 Likes

This 100%. No hiding ground up crickets behind a name that average people may not know.

5 Likes

I agree. No roulette labeling. (Corn oil or canola oil or soybean oil). No “natural flavorings” or “spices”.

6 Likes

Exactly. And with all of the “hiding” of ingredients, it’s more difficult to check for ingredients in regards to allergies.

1 Like

I agree. Thank you for commenting!

1 Like

Such a great point! Trying to check for allergies has been the most difficult. Especially when “codes” can be used for ingredients.

1 Like

Canola is a made up word (a play on canada and oil to be precise). Harmonized Tariff Schedule 1205.90.0090 rape or colza seed.

2 Likes

Interesting to note that decades ago, the use of Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) was shunned. MSG’s potential side effects on human health emerged in the 1950s and 1960s. It was described as “Chinese Restaurant Syndrome” (CRS) after a Chinese-American chef reported that some people experienced headaches after eating food with MSG. But there haven’t been any studies I can find that proved MSG is harmful when eaten at regular levels. I personally don’t want to eat it! The FDA says it’s safe for consumption but they say that about far too many controversial ingredients. I remember looking for restaurants that promised dishes with no MSG.

Now, any mention of eliminating seed oils is seen as some sort of conspiracy! I’ve been a label reader as long as I can remember and many times ask, “What is that stuff?” The only oils I have ever bought or cooked with is EVOO and unsalted butter. I do keep toasted sesame oil on hand for when I make tahini sauce. I especially like the idea of readable fonts and clear contrast for ingredient lists, especially for my old eyes!

2 Likes

Thank you so much for commenting! And for the history of MSG… I had no idea! But I absolutely agree, just because the FDA says it’s safe, doesn’t mean it should be consumed regularly.

Interesting! I hadn’t heard that before… I’ll definitely look into it.

I spent the last 16 years of my career working for a company which processed both organic and conventional oil seeds. The company imported rapeseed (aka Canola) from Canadian producers (farmers) with the income driver being the extracted oil. When the oil was sold overseas, it was exported for non-human consumption. The domestic sales were to human food manufacturers.

Ruminants whose sole forage was rapemeal (aka canola meal) died because it ate holes in their digestive systems. Ruminants fed low ratio canola meal to high ratio of flax meal and/or safflower meal feed did ok but not as well as those fed flax or saff meal.

Canola meal and mustard meal when spread on soil are effective herbicides.

I have never nor will I ever consume alleged fit for human consumption food containing or prepared with canola oil.

I, for one, do not understand how rapeseed was approved as general food ingredient due to its high erucic acid content (20 - 54%).

Retired CPA, organic producer, heritage seed & non gmo activist, anti-round up ready seed proponent, mother, grandmother (oldest of 4 is 6).

And how about tax incentives for companies who use all natural and organic ingredients and penalties for using chemicals and other garbage. And no more bioengineered.

2 Likes

Fantastic idea! There should be incentives like this.

How about listing what the ingredients are and sources of “natural flavorings”? I sent an email to STOK coffee asking what the “natural flavoring” is listed in COLD BREW COFFEE. What the heck else should be in COFFEE other than water? Crickets, no pun intended. Practically every product has “natural flavoring” listed in ingredients. Rumors were that it was aborted fetus cells!
Thank you Rachel!!!

1 Like

Yes - great point! And I agree - “Natural Flavoring” shouldn’t be allowed.