DiGiorno Debuts Gluten-Free Frozen Pizza

PattyWayne,

I'm with you on the egg intolerance. I've just recently discovered I can't eat more than one whole egg at a meal and not get a belly ache. Not sure when this egg intolerance set on but up until the last few years I have been a big egg eater with no issue.

But how many ppm of gluten would you consider to be the threshold of a trace and to be "safe"? You agreed with me that throwing away production batches that exceed "0" ppm of gluten would not be practical or possible for the processed food industry. Then what threshold would you establish that would make the food industry honest with the public, as you say, about their gluten free products being gluten free and safe for all celiacs. Up to now you seem to be saying that the food industry is not being honest with the public by claiming that products are not safe that meet the current FDA established limit of 20ppm. How would you change the standard or how would you change the marketing?

Just like they state "made in a facility that also...", or "reduced salt" they could label it "Less than x ppm gluten." Apples are gluten free. Watermelon is gluten free. But this is primarily an economic and political issue, not nutritional. By the way, Wheat is excluded by statute from all congressional discussion of GMO. What does that tell us?

Wheatwacked,

Do you have a link dealing with the exclusion of wheat by statue from all congressional discussion of GMO?

Also, we already know that anything labeled gluten free contains <20 PPM and anything labeled as "Certified Gluten Free" contains <11 PPM. I'm not sure I see your suggestion really accomplishing anything. The FDA has established the definition of gluten free as <21 PPM. The issue isn't with the food companies as long as they abide by that standard. They aren't being deceptive.

I cannot find where I read that statement, so I must retract it. Since there is no GMO wheat, there is no reason for wheat to be included in discussions. I did find this: Open Original Shared Link

"Safety of GE Wheat for Food and Feed While the glyphosate-tolerant GE wheat was never deregulated by APHIS, Monsanto had submitted materials to FDA on the biological characteristics of the GE variety for a determination of the variety’s safety. FDA completed a voluntary consultation on the safety of food and feed derived from the glyphosate-tolerant GE wheat in 2004, and agreed with Monsanto that the GE wheat was not “materially different in composition, safety, or any other relevant parameter from wheat now grown, marketed, and consumed.”9 In other words, FDA concluded that food and feed derived from GE wheat was as safe as and nutritionally equivalent to food and feed derived from non-GE wheat. Once a determination is made by FDA on the substantial equivalence of a GE variety compared to a non-GE variety, FDA’s role in the regulatory process typically ends.

In fairness to the consumer, if it has gluten, it should not say gluten free. Legally it may be correct, but I feel that morally it is misrepresenting. Buyer Beware. Although to be fair to Digiorno they do state on the label that it has wheat.

8 hours ago, Wheatwacked said:

In fairness to the consumer, if it has gluten, it should not say gluten free. Legally it may be correct, but I feel that morally it is misrepresenting. Buyer Beware. Although to be fair to Digiorno they do state on the label that it has wheat.

The really, the bone you are picking is not with Digiorno, or any other food company that is abiding by the 20ppm standard for marketing a product as "gluten free." It is with the FDA.

There is a technical reason for not saying that “gluten free” means absolutely no gluten. When the regulations were published by FDA for gluten free labeling, the 20ppm level was chosen for two reasons.  It is ok for most with celiac disease, and at that time that was about as low as most available analytical methods could detect.  It would be nice if they would update and lower the limit, since analytical methods are more sensitive now.

It is impossible to test a food in a laboratory and get an answer of 0ppm gluten.  Analytical tests have a “limit of detection.” If that limit is 5ppm, it means that the test can’t detect less than 5ppm, even if it is present. If you tested an apple, which should not have any gluten, the answer would be “not detected” or “less than Xppm”, not zero.

6 hours ago, RMJ said:

There is a technical reason for not saying that “gluten free” means absolutely no gluten. When the regulations were published by FDA for gluten free labeling, the 20ppm level was chosen for two reasons.  It is ok for most with celiac disease, and at that time that was about as low as most available analytical methods could detect.  It would be nice if they would update and lower the limit, since analytical methods are more sensitive now.

It is impossible to test a food in a laboratory and get an answer of 0ppm gluten.  Analytical tests have a “limit of detection.” If that limit is 5ppm, it means that the test can’t detect less than 5ppm, even if it is present. If you tested an apple, which should not have any gluten, the answer would be “not detected” or “less than Xppm”, not zero.

RMJ, I don't doubt what you say but do you have a link that explains how the testing methods have improved and become more sensitive? I would like some information on that. If this is so, then the FDA ought to consider lowering the threshold PPM for "gluten free" qualification.

Then there is the possibility that a person diagnosed with Celiac, also has unidentified NGWS or wheat allegies. Something that typically would not be on the radar except in products like this.

Quote

A reaction to wheat can be completely different from a reaction to gluten. In fact, those with a true allergy to wheat are often not reacting to the gluten, but to some other part of the plant. Researchers have actually identified 27 different potential wheat allergens (1), of which gluten is one type. Albumin and globulin proteins may be particularly common triggers (2). Open Original Shared Link

12 hours ago, trents said:

RMJ, I don't doubt what you say but do you have a link that explains how the testing methods have improved and become more sensitive? I would like some information on that. If this is so, then the FDA ought to consider lowering the threshold PPM for "gluten free" qualification.

I don’t have a link for the test method improvement. I’ve just observed that some now report < 10 or < 5ppm, and I know that in general analytical method sensitivity gets better as technology improves. 
If you really want I can search out the FDA document that describes how they set the 20 ppm limit.

Perhaps the food companies should be required to adopt the 10ppm limit for advertising their products as gluten free. This would motivate them to look into the more sensitive testing methods used by the gluten free certifying bodies.

On 5/16/2021 at 12:06 AM, Guest UCLA4ME said:

Open Original Shared Link

Quote

the appearance of a “gluten-free” claim on the labels would provide consumers with the expectation that, if any gluten were present, it would be present at less than 20 ppm in final product. Persons with celiac disease, especially those who may be sensitive to these low levels of gluten, and persons who are otherwise sensitive to gluten should seek the advice of their health care providers for selecting appropriate foods they can consume following a gluten-free diet.

And the merry-go-round goes round and round

I got horribly sick from this pizza last evening. It’s unreal to me that they can market it as gluten free.