‘Suitable for diabetics’ labels off the shelves from today

[Cookiemonster2017]

Hi Northerner,
Yes it was Frank's Diabetic Vanilla, my parents say it may have come from Waitrose...

 

[Northerner]

Hi Northerner,
Yes it was Frank's Diabetic Vanilla, my parents say it may have come from Waitrose...

I have let Diabetes UK know, and about the jam too @Mark Parrott 🙂 Naughty! 😱

 

[Northerner]

Just to give you an update, I've had feedback from Diabetes UK about this:

Although the Department of Health envisaged products to have gone by the end of the year, there are still companies running their stocks down.

We have been raising concerns about products to Trading Standards Agency and advising others to do so. I know that ‘Franks Diabetic Ice-cream’ is one that has been raised to us a number of times, as has the section in some Boots stores labelled ‘diabetics’. Unfortunately this label restriction is applicable to food only, so does not necessarily apply to a shopping aisles, hence the fact that food products in Boots have changed over to ‘sugar-free’.

So it seems that some companies are being a bit tardy, but hopefully they will get the message before too long 🙂 Looks like Boots might be observing the letter, but not the spirit of the legislation Write to them and complain! 🙂

 

[Lilian]

You also have to be very wary of these labels saying 'sugar free' because legally they only have to refer to sucrose. There was a product that used to have sugar free on the front but in the very small print at the back it contained glucose (as the first item) plus various other 'ose' in it. I wrote to ask how they could put sugar free but include these other things and was told that only sucrose was considered to be sugar (legally). I did point out to them that it was a pity to ruin a good reputation by misleading people, legal or not. They did eventually change their packaging to low calorie. We still have to read the labels and small print very carefully.

 

[Northerner]

You also have to be very wary of these labels saying 'sugar free' because legally they only have to refer to sucrose. There was a product that used to have sugar free on the front but in the very small print at the back it contained glucose (as the first item) plus various other 'ose' in it. I wrote to ask how they could put sugar free but include these other things and was told that only sucrose was considered to be sugar (legally). I did point out to them that it was a pity to ruin a good reputation by misleading people, legal or not. They did eventually change their packaging to low calorie. We still have to read the labels and small print very carefully.

They will try every trick in the book I actually think 'small print' is deliberate deception - there is usually no excuse for printing things so small you need a magnifying glass to read it

I spy with my little eye,
A hundred food labels that just pass me by
Perhaps, Mr Food Man, you could explain why
The writing’s so small as if hiding a lie.

In bright coloured letters, and bold as can be
The packet says ‘I’m healthy! And almost fat-free!!
But in tiny black letters you can hardly see
Is an excess of sugar that’s harmful to me.

Oh please, Mr Food Man, I’m not being rude!
Why can’t you be honest in labelling food?
If this was America*, you’d likely be sued
For hiding the facts with a method so crude.

So, buck your ideas up and please make it clear
That your food’s really healthy, we’ve nothing to fear!
It would make our lives easier and fill us with cheer,
And perhaps, if you did it, we’d buy you a beer!

😱

* I realise the Yanks probably do this even more than we do! 😱 🙄

 

[Poppy460]

A change in food regulation means that from today manufacturers will no longer be able to label food as ‘diabetic’ or ‘suitable for diabetics’.

Diabetes UK has welcomed the change and has lobbied for over 30 years for the end of the labels which incorrectly imply a health benefit for people with diabetes and have been seen as essential over mainstream alternatives.

However, analysis has found that because many of the products carrying the label – including jams, ice creams, cakes, biscuits and chocolates – contained polyols, they were not any lower in fat or calories compared to the standard products, so could lead to weight gain. They were also often more expensive than regular products.

https://www.diabetes.org.uk/About_us/News/Suitable-for-diabetics-food-labels-outlawed-from-today/

Hurrah! No more 'diabetic' jam! 🙂 Although the point is that they still contain carbs - the calories and fat have nowt to do with it, really 🙄

View attachment 1575

Ah! You’re diabetic? Well, don’t worry my dear,
We’ve got all sorts of goodies that are suitable here!
There’s diabetic chocolate and diabetic cake,
And diabetic jam – took me ages to make!

And diabetic sweets in all sorts of flavours –
For someone like you they’re heavenly saviours!
So don’t feel deprived, they’re especially for you!
I’ve heard sugar would kill you – is that really true?

Now you might find the sweeteners are rather emetic,
But you’ll just have to suffer since you’re diabetic…
I should also mention they cost twice the price
Of ordinary sweet stuff, but don’t taste as nice…

What’s that? You’re declining? Well how can that be?
But you can't eat normally, like people like me!
You can? Well, my goodness, I’ve learned something new!
My business is finished, and no thanks to you!

Hi Poppy 460 here
I have just seen your post and the poem, absolutely brilliant, even in the short time I have had type 2, I am getting a little tired of explaining to people around me the myths of "diabeti" foods.
It made me smile.
Thanks
Poppy