Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: djf

Many people might called that a “useless” regulation... but NO ONE who has a peanut allergy would say that.


So I put a label on 99% of the stuff in the store that food may contain peanuts. The other 1% raise their prices to cover costs of regulation and liability and ok problem solved.

You are right, it is very cheap to put that label on and solves NOTHING.

But like many conservatives and liberals, the answer to any problem is more laws and regulations.

You know there ARE other options besides passing laws. Can you think of them?


22 posted on 10/20/2013 6:32:09 PM PDT by PeterPrinciple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: PeterPrinciple

That did not happen.

Foods that do contain peanut products/derivatives say so on the label, the majority of foods are unaffected in the process.

For foods that DO contain peanut products/derivatives, the consumer is free to try to find a non-peanut alternative.

I don’t see that as being some sort of great burden/problem for manufacturers.

The same is true of phenylalanine. Foods containing it or it’s derivatives say so. And that is because there is a somewhat rare genetic disorder called PKU, and for people with PKU, even tiny amounts of phenylalanine will either kill them outright or make them spend the rest of their lives staring at the wall and drooling.

Is that a “useless” regulation?
Not if you have PKU. (phenylketylnuria)


25 posted on 10/20/2013 6:40:35 PM PDT by djf (Global warming is turning out to be a bunch of hot air!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson