anyone know why this warning label would be any purchasable food package, especially naengmyeon?? the brand is yissine if that has to do with anything
by ricefolyfe
11 Comments
burnt-----toast
*Sigh* I’m guessing you live in California? It’s a California legal requirement for food packaging that anything that could be a carcinogen, even things that are inconclusive, must be labeled as a potential carcinogen on packaging. My understanding is that it’s easier and cheaper for companies to label any ingredients as such rather than proving that they aren’t.
ImGoingToSayOneThing
It’s not necessarily that it is but that it could have been in contact with things that could be cancer causing.
Instead of actually doing the research they put those labels on a a fail safe in case it dies.
silveryellowblue
Curious enough to post about it on reddit. Not curious enough to google p65 labels.
emuchop
Internet likes to make fun of it but it had very real recipe changes to many food items to avoid this label. Unfortunately it was poorly implemented so now we are left with a joke.
probably safe to consume but remember, we said the same shit about microplastics. So ultimately its up to you. I would eat it.
naiadheart
I cook Korean food daily and a large number of products exported from Korea and Japan that are packaged for US consumers have the prop 65 warning label. I’ve never bought dasima/konbu or dried anchovies in the US that don’t have this label on it, but these foods are consumed by hundreds of millions of people around the world daily.
When you see prop 65, just know that it’s potentially hazardous if consumed in excess, e.g., if you were to eat like 50 packages of that product in a sitting you might reach the bare minimum level that is considered toxic.
It’s still worth paying attention to prop 65 for instance on cutlery and glazed plates/bowls (or anything that is not food), since the standards are very different for those products and the glaze could contain heavy metals and could be unhealthy if it chipped or cracked.
hepgeek
California just likes to remind the world that everything gives you cancer
haukino
oh, you’re fine. It’s only carcinogenic in the state of California
/s just in case
lol_yuzu
I’ll put it to you this way.
Those products wouldn’t be warned in Korea or Japan which have significantly higher food quality standards.
Prop 65 is well meaning but poorly implemented. In fact, a lot of the times it is on things simply because the companies or importers did not want to pay to have the stringent testing done for the labeling purposes.
​
It’s fine. You’ll see it a lot on Asian imported foods.
Enjoy your food!
gastro_psychic
Does it have nitrites or nitrates? Nitrosamine formation can occur.
HoboArmyofOne
That label is on everything here. It’s counter productive if it’s on everything because you just ignore it
11 Comments
*Sigh* I’m guessing you live in California? It’s a California legal requirement for food packaging that anything that could be a carcinogen, even things that are inconclusive, must be labeled as a potential carcinogen on packaging. My understanding is that it’s easier and cheaper for companies to label any ingredients as such rather than proving that they aren’t.
It’s not necessarily that it is but that it could have been in contact with things that could be cancer causing.
Instead of actually doing the research they put those labels on a a fail safe in case it dies.
Curious enough to post about it on reddit. Not curious enough to google p65 labels.
Internet likes to make fun of it but it had very real recipe changes to many food items to avoid this label. Unfortunately it was poorly implemented so now we are left with a joke.
probably safe to consume but remember, we said the same shit about microplastics. So ultimately its up to you. I would eat it.
I cook Korean food daily and a large number of products exported from Korea and Japan that are packaged for US consumers have the prop 65 warning label. I’ve never bought dasima/konbu or dried anchovies in the US that don’t have this label on it, but these foods are consumed by hundreds of millions of people around the world daily.
When you see prop 65, just know that it’s potentially hazardous if consumed in excess, e.g., if you were to eat like 50 packages of that product in a sitting you might reach the bare minimum level that is considered toxic.
It’s still worth paying attention to prop 65 for instance on cutlery and glazed plates/bowls (or anything that is not food), since the standards are very different for those products and the glaze could contain heavy metals and could be unhealthy if it chipped or cracked.
California just likes to remind the world that everything gives you cancer
oh, you’re fine. It’s only carcinogenic in the state of California
/s just in case
I’ll put it to you this way.
Those products wouldn’t be warned in Korea or Japan which have significantly higher food quality standards.
Prop 65 is well meaning but poorly implemented. In fact, a lot of the times it is on things simply because the companies or importers did not want to pay to have the stringent testing done for the labeling purposes.
​
It’s fine. You’ll see it a lot on Asian imported foods.
Enjoy your food!
Does it have nitrites or nitrates? Nitrosamine formation can occur.
That label is on everything here. It’s counter productive if it’s on everything because you just ignore it
https://www.reddit.com/r/ramen/s/B3d1IoFyKU