Right this is exactly what happened with the new sesame laws. The government declared sesame as an allergen and enacted heavy fines if it was undisclosed. This lead to manufacturers adding sesame because they couldn't guarantee they were sesame free.
"May contain" labeling seems like the better solution to this problem. This should be allowed for allergens that are present in the manufacturing or packing facility but not intended to be ingredients in the product.
That's part of the problem. "May contain" doesn't provide legal protection and then if you make it a standard there needs to be testing for compliance which ends up as the same original problem and you just add compliance tits to your food product.
"May contain" should provide legal protection. It may be compliance tits in some cases, but that's better than forcing the addition of a compliance ingredient.
> Some companies include statements on labels that say a food "may contain" a certain product or that the food is "produced in a facility" that also uses certain allergens. However, such statements are voluntary, not required, according to the FDA, and they do not absolve the company of requirements to prevent cross-contamination.
> Instead, some companies have taken a different approach. Officials at Olive Garden said that starting this week, the chain is adding "a minimal amount of sesame flour" to the company’s famous breadsticks "due to the potential for cross-contamination at the bakery."
> Many companies now routinely attach Prop 65 warning labels to any product of theirs that they think might possibly contain one of the 900 listed chemicals without testing to see whether the chemical is really present in their product and without reformulating their product, because it is cheaper to do so than to run the risk of being sued by Prop 65 enforcers.
Meanwhile the Jewish world has a project that shows Bible passages and if you click on them, it does connect you to a world of translations, commentary, references in other books. https://www.sefaria.org/Genesis.1.1?lang=bi&with=Commentary%.... Comparing this to the famous Xanadu demo mentioned in the article, makes you think that Xanadu could have worked. (Except for the micropayments thing).
If unions are so great, just make them voluntary and give workers a choice. For some reason Union advocates always want them to be mandatory, because if workers are not forced to join them, most wont.
If you read it consistently you soon realize that every article has a short form summary in the front and long form article in the back, and sometimes a mid size as well, in the same edition.
The economist is the only paper I read where articles on topics I know about are fair, balanced and grounded in science. The opposite of the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect.
If some PMs today evaluate performance by the number of lines of code, I wonder if the punch card equivalent was weighing the punched-out holes that were removed by each developer.
reply