In a recent vote, the European Parliament approved a measure to restrict the use of meat-related terms like “steak” and “burger” to products derived from meat. This move, supported by a majority of MEPs, is intended to benefit farmers and provide clarity for consumers, mirroring existing regulations on dairy product terminology. The proposal’s future remains uncertain as it requires approval from a majority of the EU’s member states, and faces opposition from Green MEPs and some consumer groups who argue that such a ban is unnecessary and confusing. German supermarkets and others fear that the ban could make it more difficult for consumers to make informed decisions.
Read More
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has identified twelve instances of “maple washing,” where grocers use Canadian branding on imported food products. The CFIA received complaints between February and May, and while the agency took action in each case, no fines were issued. In one instance, the issue took four months to resolve, involving avocado oil at a Sobeys-owned store. Concerned consumers and experts advocate for stricter enforcement, including fines, to prevent misleading labeling and ensure the integrity of “Buy Canadian” initiatives.
Read More
The Swiss Federal Supreme Court ruled against the use of animal names for vegan meat substitutes, reversing a lower court’s decision. The court found terms like “planted.chicken” misleading to consumers, rejecting the argument that they were fanciful names. This decision impacts Zurich-based Planted Foods, a producer of pea-protein-based meat alternatives. The ruling potentially sets a precedent for similar cases across Europe.
Read More
Kraft Heinz will face a nationwide class action lawsuit alleging that its Kraft Mac & Cheese, despite labeling claims of no artificial preservatives, contains synthetic citric acid and sodium phosphates. U.S. District Judge Mary Rowland ruled that the plaintiffs plausibly alleged these ingredients function as preservatives, making the labeling false and supporting their case with academic studies and FDA guidance. While the judge agreed that the plaintiffs lacked standing to demand new labels due to their current awareness, she determined the allegations were sufficient to proceed with the case. The lawsuit seeks damages for fraud, unjust enrichment, and consumer protection law violations, highlighting the ongoing scrutiny of food label accuracy.
Read More
I’m absolutely flabbergasted by the recent ruling from the Ohio Supreme Court regarding boneless chicken wings. It seems that in Ohio, boneless no longer means boneless. According to the court, the term “boneless wings” simply refers to a cooking style, and consumers should not expect these tasty treats to actually be free of bones. This decision comes in response to a lawsuit from a man who suffered serious medical complications after ingesting a bone from his so-called boneless wing.
As someone who enjoys indulging in a plate of boneless wings, this ruling has me scratching my head. When I order boneless wings, I expect them to be just that – devoid of any bones.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker