Click to be +/- on this low volume wine ping list.Oenology egg white fining news ping.
Posted on 01/15/2007 9:11:04 PM PST by quantim
SANTA ROSA, Calif. - Vintners have been using byproducts from milk, eggs, wheat and even fish guts in the winemaking processes for centuries.
But a new federal proposal could require American wineries to disclose such unsavory items _ used as "fining" agents to remove grit _ as ingredients. The proposal, which could be passed by the end of the year, would require companies to redesign the labels on every bottle to protect people who are allergic to certain foods.
Executives at Sonoma and Napa county wineries and their trade groups say few, if any, wine drinkers suffer allergic reactions from fining agents, which are nearly untraceable by the time consumers uncork or unscrew their bottles. They're rallying against the proposal, which they say would make even the biggest oenophiles turn up their noses.
"It's a solution in search of a problem," said Pete Downs, vice president of governmental affairs for Santa Rosa's Kendall-Jackson Wine Estates. "I kind of feel like its Shakespearean in nature. It's much ado about nothing."
Wine industry veterans say the labels could mislead consumers, leading them to believe wine contains milk or fish membranes. Vintners use a milk protein called casein and a substance derived from the inner membrane of the air bladders of sturgeon, called isinglass, to bind with yeast, bacteria and excess tannins that are naturally found in the winemaking process. Thanks to the binding agents, the larger molecules sink to the bottom of the barrel, leaving the wine above it clean.
"It's kind of like sweeping the wine," said Bill Nelson, president of the wine lobby Wine America.
The U.S. Treasury Department's Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau is expected to publish a final rule on the issue by late 2007. It has received comments from nearly four dozen consumers, trade groups and wine industry veterans.
The FDA adopted the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act in 2004. It requires labels on every food or drink that contains one of eight major food allergens: milk, eggs, fish, crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat and soybeans.
The act came after Harvard University scientist Christine Rogers petitioned the government to add an allergen warning to alcoholic drinks. Rogers, who is allergic to eggs, said she would notice reactions whenever she tipped a glass of wine.
Food allergies affected 2 percent to 5 percent of children, send 30,000 people to emergency rooms every year, and kill 150 people annually, according to the FDA. Nine out of 10 allergies are from the eight major groups cited in the law.
Fremont resident Catharine Alvarez supports the proposal. Her 4-year-old son is allergic to eggs, and her 7-year-old daughter is allergic to peanuts.
"There are a lot of people I know who are willing to pay extra for products that they know to be safe," Alvarez said.
Information from: The Press Democrat, http://www.pressdemo.com
A service of the Associated Press(AP)
The act came after Harvard University scientist Christine Rogers petitioned the government to add an allergen warning to alcoholic drinks. Rogers, who is allergic to eggs, said she would notice reactions whenever she tipped a glass of wine.
At least the 'caps lock' wasn't on.
Click to be +/- on this low volume wine ping list.Oenology egg white fining news ping.
Why in the world does this article cite children's allergies? Last time I checked, the minimum age for consuming alcohol is 21 in the US.
By the way, the traditional, old-school long-banned but non-necessarily forgotten filter is bull's blood. Some top French vitners still use it, even though they face steep fines and penalties, because it simply works better than any of the alternatives.
How about the sulfuric acid used in French wines, either from a bottle or by burning chunks of sulfur on sticks inside the barrels?
If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson
yea cause nobody has food allergies right? Try to feed a kid with multiple allergies then tell me this is a solution with no problem..
and if you cook with wine?
nobody is saying what people can or should eat, were talking about allergies here!
I'm deathly allergic to celery and highly allergic to carrots and rye bread. I don't have to read the labels - if in doubt, I just don't eat the food.
True... She would seductively strip, pull me into bed, throw her feet into the air and start screaming in delight...
Semper Fi
You too, eh?
L
You know we got some people who can't take care of themselves, so they need the government to look after them. There's one of them on this thread.
I have used isinglass ie fish guts in all my home brews with great success. It binds with the particles in suspension and falls to the bottom. I siphon off the top and get good clear beer. It's all good.
Labeling foods with their contents is NOT telling people what to eat. It is informing people what is in a food so they can CHOOSE what to eat.
As someone who reacts very unpleasantly to casein, gluten and corn, I am very grateful when companies list whether or not these things are in their products. And yes, as noted in the article about that one lady, some of us do react to traces of these things. I have to avoid things like vanilla extract because of its base being grain alcohol.
If companies don't label their products, we tend to assume they are free of our allergens. But once we've been burned, we realize that many packaged items may contain our allergens whether they say so or not. We either have to jump through a bunch of hoops to call the company and then choose whether to believe them when they say their product is allergen free, OR avoid the product altogether.
You should be happy that a company that sells you food to eat is required to tell you what is in your food so that you can make an informed choice.
Ping to Gabz for her 'Nanny State' list.
Wouldn't bull's blood make the wine non-Kosher?
I haven't read rabinical opinions of this, I would assume so, but note that bull's blood doesn't actually remain in the wine --- it binds with foul-tasting toxins disolved in the wine and sinks to the bottom, where it is entirely filtered out. If anybody's consuming any blood at all, it's only a microscopic portion.
Nanny State Ping!!!!!!!!
I was wondering the same thing............
I occasionally cook with it!
I guess it may depend on the orthodoxy level. The two refrigerator crowd may reject it.
Realistically, there is some blood remaining in all meat, so, I was just curious.
that's still serving alcohol to a minor. You do realise that all the alcohol doesn't burn out, right?
Vanilla flavoring has grain. Deadly for some.
I don't see information as nanny-statism. Mandating what can be sold is.
Any preparation prior to use? Any fish gut you prefer? I wouldn't imagine there is enough sturgeon guts for the entire industry.
""Thanks to the binding agents, the larger molecules sink to the bottom of the barrel, leaving the wine above it clean.""
Let Them Drink Chunky Wine!
the information is not a bad thing. its being being FORCED to put on the information that's a problem.
Cooking.
Quit tipping, quit dripping.
Slutty pregnant sots?
Wait until this hits tobacco when it's regulated.
I'm curious how the buying public is going to react to reading the flavoring ingredients on a pack of cigs:
"Tobacco, reconstituted tobacco(floor sweepings), menthol, caribou tongue oil, essence of Siberian Yak droppings, Pakistani figs fermented in camel urine, etc......"
I buy it commercially in small vials, no clue as to what fish it may or may not be. It is dried and has no odor. It only takes a teaspoon or so to do the job in a 5 gallon batch. Compared to gelatin which has to be prepped.
Oh YUCK!!!!!!!!!
Will you continue to do so, now that you know that there may be trace allergens?
We are talking such impossibly small trace amounts here that the heat of cooking would burn them off, just as it burns off the alcohol content.
Thankfully my kid does not have an allergy to fish but if they did I would stop, If there was somehow peanuts being used your damn straight I would stop..
Should companies have to publish nutrition information on packages at all? calories, ingredients, etc..
should they have to? no. I'm sure there are people that actually read them, and those people like it. but i could care less. besides, the majority of what i eat is fresh.
I think if enough people want it done, then their buying power will make a company choose to do it on their own.
Thanks for the ping!
ok so long as you dont think that a company should tell people what they are putting into their products (preservatives, chemical crap and the like) at least you're consistent..
I just hope a loved one of yours never has a deadly allergy otherwise you might become one of those annoying people who give a crap about whether or not something was process on a belt that the day before had peanuts on it..
Then my next question is, how much of what you prepare for dinner do you rely on labels to inform you of the presence of aflatoxins from peanuts or another source, and how much research do you do personally to educate yourself for those food products that may not be labeled for whatever reason?
Beyond that, at what level do you think the consumer must asssume that certain risks are not amenable to practical government intervention considering small-scale producers are not covered by existing regulations?
Does prudence dictate that regimen rather than selection might be the better choice?
Everything, if there is no label I could be giving my daughter something that can kill her (peanut allergies are that serious). If its not labeled I cant use it and worst of all even if something one day has not been processed where there are peanuts the next week the exact same product might be processed at a different factory.
Beyond that, at what level do you think the consumer must assume that certain risks are not amenable to practical government intervention considering small-scale producers are not covered by existing regulations?
Saying what goes into food and what else is made in that facility is not anywhere near what I would consider an impractical burden. If you use egg or egg produces just say so on the label, if you make peanut butter in the same faculty just let me know.
Does prudence dictate that regimen rather than selection might be the better choice?
In order for people to make an educated choice they need to know what is in the food. and given that very *very* rarely does egg products get called 'eggs' in the label allergen warnings are critical.
Its medical fact that there are a handful of very deadly allergies (peanuts, treenuts, soy, fish, shellfish) and some things that are so common that if you have a serious allergy you need to know (wheat, oats, ...) I'm not for regulating what they can put into their food but they should be required to tell consumers exactly what they are eating.
I understand what you mean. I had a lot of allergies as a kid. But rather than my mom spending alot of time reading labels, she just cooked everything from scratch. That's how I still cook almost all my food.
Also, maybe I was lucky, but I had an awesome pediatrician that gave my mom a list of food brands that he knew would be ok for me. I also feel really lucky that the guy is still in practice and now takes care of my kids.
When were you a kid? cooking from scratch is what my wife and I do alot of but what about pasta? what about cereals? its wonderful that you were able to have amother at home to cook for you all the time but the reality of peoples lives dont meet that. Why is it asking soo much to erquire food produces tell you whats in the food..
Put the list of ingredients in with the Pregnant women shouldn’t dink warning and no one will ever read it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.