CELIAC Archives

Celiac/Coeliac Wheat/Gluten-Free List

CELIAC@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

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:
Dimitrios Douros <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Dimitrios Douros <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 6 May 2004 22:07:14 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (79 lines)
<<Disclaimer: Verify this information before applying it to your situation.>>

    The question has been raised again about the usefulness of labeling
legislation that does not require specifically calling out GLUTEN.

The question has been put this way:
   " ... does this legislation cover "gluten" or just "wheat"? If it
    just covers wheat, then what does the Celiac community benefit? We
    still have to know if foods contain other gluten sources. I guess
    it will help clarify the "modified food starch" issue, but it seems
    that the bill would be a lot better for us celiacs if gluten were
    identified; not just wheat."

   This is an extremely important issue since, as we speak, a Food
Labeling Bill has already made it through the Senate and a similar one
is steadily working its way through the House.

So here it is in a nutshell:

   7) As celiacs we have a problem with wheat, rye, barley and - guilt
       through association - oats.

   6) With the exception of beer and some hard liquor ( mostly scotch )
       it is extremely rare to find rye or barley in a food by
       themselves; they are always accompanied by wheat!

   5) Therefore, Food Labeling Legislation that requires listing wheat
       on the label, will serve 90% of every celiac's needs; more than
       95% of the needs of celiacs that drink no alcoholic beverages.

   4) If we were to demand GLUTEN on the label we would have to wait
for
       a LONG, LONG, LOOOOONG time because:

       a) first there would have to be a consensus definition of the
            term GLUTEN ( not as easy as you think )

       b) There would have to be negotiations - FROM SCRATCH - on a
            new labeling bill

       c) And since it's an election year, and this is not a barn-
           burner issue, none of this would even be started before
           2005! So, if we were lucky: NO LEGISLATION before, say 2009!

   3) The current bills represent several years of work and the support

        of an unprecedented, fragile coalition of medical experts,
        patient support communities and food manufacturers you'd be
        hard pressed to bring together again!

   2) The events of the past year: new prevalence study, the work of
        the American Celiac Task Force, raised awareness and publicity
        for the celiac sufferer in print, radio and TV - including the
        10 minute segment on NBC's TODAY Show. This is our 5 minutes
        of fame and we need to capitalize on it!

   1) And in Leterman fashion: THE NUMBER ONE REASON to fight for
         passage of the current legislation:
         It has an excellent chance of becoming law - THIS YEAR!
         This would alleviate over 90% of the celiac's food labeling
         issues, and would be the biggest, forward step EVER in making
         the management of our disease significantly simpler.

So, my vote: SUPPORT THE CURRENT LEGISLATION AND TELL EVERYONE ELSE
             YOU KNOW TO DO THE SAME.

Regards,
Dimitrios Douros




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover

*Support summarization of posts, reply to the SENDER not the CELIAC List*

ATOM RSS1 RSS2