I’ve been seeing this on a lot of “natural” or “healthy” (read, expensive, pitched-to-yuppie) prepared foods.
Why are you putting sugar in my tomato soup in the first place?
Why do you think I am too stupid to understand what “evaporated cane juice” is, or to think it is any better or less out-of-place in my soup than sugar called by its true name?
That’s all.
That’s been bugging me for a while. Then today, I picked up some bread rolls that had ‘raisin juice’ in them. I said, “Hello, ‘we don’t want to say this has sugar in it’!”
Fortunately, the Whole Foods people don’t seem to mind me talking to the baked goods.
Well, it’s in your tomato soup to cut the acidity. I put some in when I do it homemade.
But yeah, “evaporated cane juice” is hilarious. It’s in these running chew things I like. Seriously, do they think runners don’t know sugar is, you know, a carb anyway? And that you’re eating the damned things for carbs?
The main ingredient in my shampoo is something called ‘aqua’. I wonder how they can sell the stuff at such a low price when it has expensive ingredients like that.
That may not be deliberately obscurantic, though. I’ve heard of food labelling regulations insisting on that terminology supposedly because it is close to the actual word in more European languages than “water” is.
But I once wrote a sarcastic letter to the paper over a homeopathic ingredient called natrum muriaticum or, as it might have been otherwise known, “chloride of soda”. :dubious:
Eh, I’d take that one with a grain of salt.
Can’t help wondering why homoeopathic preparations need to list ingredients at all - except water.
It’s to let you know you are getting a better quality of stuff than the stuff with high fructose corn syrup.
Do they actually sell liquid homoeopathic preparations? I thought they come as little sugar balls.
I think the funniest thing about the so-called healthy drinks is that they often contain more sugar than the equivalent volume of Coca-cola. Smoothies by Innocent are especially guilty, and it’s ironic that they sell them in McDonald’s as a “healthy alternative” for kids to the soft drinks.
You know, I actually do take your point on acidity. BUT . . . the one of which I complain was on an Amy’s CREAM OF Tomato soup (by the way – a lovely type of soup), which already contained a substantial jolt of cream, where both the milkfat, and the lactose, would AMPLY cushion me from the terrible horrible acidity of the tomato paste.
I am a bit of an anti-HFCS zealot, and would gladly see “sugar” or “sucrose” as opposed to HFCS. “Evaporated cane juice” does not incrementally impress me.
Of course, as I noted, none of these need to be in my barbecue sauce, tomato soup, sparkling water, beef jerky, but all of said above items, even from “healthy” companies, tend to include such “cane juice.”
My understanding was that the “evaporated cane juice” label was distinct from “sugar” because it’s unrefined, i.e. not passed through a bunch of filters to make it white. I have a big bag of evaporated cane juice and it’s a light blonde color. (Personally I think it tastes better, too, at least in coffee. I doubt I’d notice in brownies or anything like that.)
Anyway, I doubt yuppies care, but vegetarians would, since one of the common ways to refine sugar is to push it through filters made from bone charcoal – thereby rendering a plant product non-vegetarian. :rolleyes: I was pretty horrified when I learned about that, actually – I mean really, why does anyone need sugar to be white? What does that accomplish?
You know the label says, “no sugar added”, don’t you?
Love, Phil
I’m glad that Kaio posted. I was a little confused about what the OP thought that companies were trying to fool him about.
If you’re looking for the sugar content, it generally says how many sugar grams the product has, so that’s not fooling anyone. Evaporated cane juice and refined sugar have the same sugar content. But they’re processed differently.
According to this, there are a tiny bit more vitamins in evaporated cane juice, but they say it’s way more expensive as well. And as Kaio noted, some vegans make the distinction in terms of the processing.
On preview: phil, what label says “no sugar added”?. . . the one in the OP?
[quote=“Kaio, post:13, topic:471949”]
My understanding was that the “evaporated cane juice” label was distinct from “sugar” because it’s unrefined, i.e. not passed through a bunch of filters to make it white. I have a big bag of evaporated cane juice and it’s a light blonde color. (Personally I think it tastes better, too, at least in coffee. I doubt I’d notice in brownies or anything like that.)
A nursing nutrition course in college taught me that all sugars can be defined three ways: glucose (the simplest sugar, essential for life), sucrose (“regular” sugar, which may include milk sugar), and fructose (fruit sugar…prunes & raisins, touted as “sugar-free” have this sugar naturally).
Kaio, your “evaporated cane juice” sounds a lot like raw sugar…something like underprocessed “light” brown sugar. It’s still sucrose, & still 4 kcal/gram. If you like it, keep it – whatever works, eh?
Love, Phil
My bad…milk sugar is lactose, considered the fourth catagory in simple sugars.
Love, Phil
…and while we’re on the topic, I’d be ever happy if those “natural energy drinks” would stop saying “guarana” when they actually mean “caffeine”.
It’s pure sugar, with no additives. Particularly for baked goods, that avoids odd colors, strange off-flavors, and provides consistency between batches.
But it’s not absolutely essential, no.
While we’re at it, enough with the “no hormones or antibiotics*”. Where the asterisk note hidden somewhere near the UPC says “the USDA does not permit the use of hormones or antibiotics in the production of X”.
Thanks for letting me know you follow the regulations pertinent to your industry.