BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Aaron Morris <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 24 Oct 2000 07:05:47 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (21 lines)
John Mitchell asks:
> Aren't the manufacturers here in violation of the U.S. label laws?

I'm winging it here, I have not referenced any legal documents.  My
understanding is that manufacturers can pretty much put anything on the box
that they want.  The labeling laws kick in under the list of ingredients,
which I can no longer read with my new glasses.  Optomotrist recommended
bifocals, but in a fit of denial (bifocals are for old farts) I passed.  But
I digress.  It is the list of ingredients that must tell the truth of what's
in the product, listing first the most prominent ingredient, followed in
succession down to the least prominent ingredient.  I don't recall if it's
by volume or by weight ;-)  Most products which prominently feature HONEY on
the box usually have honey towards the tail end of the ingredients list
after sugar and/or corn sweeteners.  Fat content can be found in the
ntritional value label.

Funny how the box advertising vs. ingredient/nutritional value list can
allow such fuzzyness when honey label laws are so stringent.

Aaron Morris - thinking the playing fiels is not level.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2