But if a product is labeled as “plant based”, and it turns out that it uses, say, animal-derived gelatin, or lac, or whatever, are they in any legal trouble?
‘Plant-based’ may imply ‘no animal products’, but without some regulated definition, it’s semantically iffy. ‘Wheat-based’ baked goods, for example, may contain a whole load of other ingredients besides wheat, without violating the notion that they are based on wheat.
I think so. I recently discussed this with a manufacturer of vegetarian products - of which some where also vegan; they were reluctant to use the term ‘vegan’ prominently on their labelling; their explanation was:
research has shown that tagging products ‘vegan’ loudly sometimes turns those away who are trying to reduce their meat intake but don’t strictly consider themselves as vegan
I’ve been out of the food business for a while, so I may not be up to date on the rules. In the US, there are standards of identity for a number of foods, such as cheese, peanut butter, butter, margarine, ice cream, etc. To be labeled as one of these products, they must meet the standard of identity. For peanut butter, it is something like: at least 90% roasted peanuts, sweetener of either sugar or honey, salt, and may have stabilizer (usually partially hydrogenated oil).
I am unaware of a standard for “plant based,” but advertising claims must be supportable. You can’t claim that a food improves your sex life unless you have data to prove it. There are rules for “organic” but I have never worked in that area so I don’t know what they are.
One thing to note: it definitely isn’t any kind of scientific description, because some of these ‘plant based’ products are actually made from fungi or cultured yeasts or bacteria, none of which are plants.
This 2019 article suggests that the FDA, which would be the agency that would be responsible for regulate a claim such as “plant-based” in the U.S., doesn’t currently have a standard or regulation around the term itself; most of their regulation related to plant-based foods is around whether such foods can use terms that are usually associated with animal-based foods, like “meat” or “milk.”
That said, the article also notes, “the FDA does not stand idly by when a product is labeled in a manner that poses consumer confusion concerns.”
Is it really true that cheese must contain bacteria? I used to make a mozzarella by heating milk to 88 F, adding a rennet substitute, heating till it all coagulates and then subjecting it to further heating and straining. Assuming the milk I used was pasteurized, there were no bacteria present.
I always thought that cheese product meant they had ground it up and then glued it together somehow. Velveeta was the paradigm example.
Pretty much. A “cheese food” (or a “processed cheese”) contains cheese and other stuff, and/or has been subjected to additional processing steps after the cheese itself has been made. Exact wording of the term depends on how much actual cheese it contains.
I’m suspicious of ‘plant based’, as all vegetable or vegetarian would seem easy enough terms to describe what the consumer thinks they’re getting.
Whereas plant based, sounds like a lawyerly term for something perhaps on the ragged fringes of qualifying as either, all vegetable or vegetarian.
(Also plenty of bacteria in pasteurized milk, hence the development of mould! Whereas Kraft cheese food product does NOT mould. It turns into an oily semi plastic like thing!)
Bacteria doesn’t lead to mold. Mold leads to mold. And just because something eventually gets moldy doesn’t mean the mold was already there when you bought it.
Sorry, I didn’t say or mean to imply that I thought they came with mould in them.
More pointing out, Kraft cheese, unlike say milk or real cheese, will NOT mould.