Jump to content
This site uses cookies. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. More Info... ×
  • Welcome to Celiac.com!

    You have found your celiac tribe! Join us and ask questions in our forum, share your story, and connect with others.




  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A1):



    Celiac.com Sponsor (A1-M):


  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Our Content
    eNewsletter
    Donate

How Many Ppm Make Something 'gluten Free'?


tsomo

Recommended Posts

tsomo Rookie

My understanding is that if something has under 200ppm it can be labeled as gluten free. At least this is the law in Canada and I believe its true for the U.S. also. I can't begin to describe how retarded that logic is, however, there have been numerous times I have gotten contamination from a product claiming to be gluten free. Only to discover after investigating that the product may contain up to 200 ppm of gluten.

I dont believe anyone anymore who says their product is gluten free. With the exception of those who use testing for less than 20 ppm which is I think the most sensitive test there is.

Does anyone else here react to this amount?

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills :)

Tsomo


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



CarlaB Enthusiast

As far as I know, in the states it hasn't been defined yet.

I consider something that has no gluten to be gluten-free ... but maybe I'm just not as smart as those making the laws. <_<

penguin Community Regular

There are no laws regarding gluten-free in the US, there's not even a definition. There will be laws on the books by 2008. The european definition is the Codex standard of 200ppm.

Jestgar Rising Star
There are no laws regarding gluten-free in the US, there's not even a definition. There will be laws on the books by 2008. The european definition is the Codex standard of 200ppm.

Does this thought worry anyone else? Do you think that current "gluten free" products from companies that have gluten products will be less safe?

Guest dreams25

Hi In answer to your question about gluten in the gluten free products here in Australia we have very strict guidelines, for a product to be named gluten free has to contain no detectable gluten.

The level of detection for the test to measure gluten is 0.0005% (ie. 5 parts per million)

The food standards code in this country is pretty strict so i'm finding most of the products gluten free here carry the 0% of gluten in them.

The food standards code also makes provision for foods to be lablelled as low gluten. If the gluten content is less than 0.02% (ie. 200 parts per million)

psawyer Proficient

As mentioned by others, there is no definition of "gluten free" in the US. Codex has a couple of different standards, depending on whether the item in question is naturally free of gluten, or has been processed in a manner that removes most of the gluten.

Canada's rule is not based on ppm. Actually, there are two regulations:

Food and Drug Regulation B.24.018

No person shall label, package, sell or advertise a food in a manner likely to create an impression that it is gluten-free unless the food does not contain wheat, including spelt and kamut, or oats, barley, rye or triticale or any part thereof.

Food and Drug Regulation B.24.019

The label of a food that is labelled, packaged, sold or advertised as "gluten-free" shall carry the following information, per serving of stated size of the food:

( a ) the energy value of the food, expressed in Calories (Calories or Cal) and kilojoules (kilojoules or kJ) and;

( b ) the protein, fat and carbohydrate content of the food, expressed in grams.

For enforcement purposes, when a test is needed, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) uses an ELISA test which can detect 20 ppm, but this is a limitation of the test itself, not an approved level of gluten. The words "any part thereof" in the first regulation prohibit even those parts of the grains in question which are not proteins.

[in my opinion, rule B.24.019 is completely irrelevant to the matter, and serves only to prevent things like apples and milk being sold as "gluten-free." Who cares?]

In Canada, gluten free really means gluten free. :)

jaten Enthusiast
I can't begin to describe how retarded that logic is, however, there have been numerous times I have gotten contamination from a product claiming to be gluten free. Only to discover after investigating that the product may contain up to 200 ppm of gluten.

Tsomo

Yes, I know exactly what you're talking about. The only "gluten-free" foods that I've found to consistently keep me well, are those that are from dedicated facilities...Kinnikinnick...Enjoy Life....whoever makes those EnviroKidz products, etc. I've researched and those stick to the less than 20 ppm. I agree, 200 ppm is TOO MUCH GLUTEN for me. The proof is in the pudding if you experience the symptoms (or not) and THEN research and uncover the reason behind the undeniable pattern...less than 20 ppm, never sick; 200 ppm allowed, often sick.


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



gfp Enthusiast
As mentioned by others, there is no definition of "gluten free" in the US. Codex has a couple of different standards, depending on whether the item in question is naturally free of gluten, or has been processed in a manner that removes most of the gluten.

Canada's rule is not based on ppm. Actually, there are two regulations:

Food and Drug Regulation B.24.018

No person shall label, package, sell or advertise a food in a manner likely to create an impression that it is gluten-free unless the food does not contain wheat, including spelt and kamut, or oats, barley, rye or triticale or any part thereof.

Food and Drug Regulation B.24.019

The label of a food that is labelled, packaged, sold or advertised as "gluten-free" shall carry the following information, per serving of stated size of the food:

( a ) the energy value of the food, expressed in Calories (Calories or Cal) and kilojoules (kilojoules or kJ) and;

( b ) the protein, fat and carbohydrate content of the food, expressed in grams.

For enforcement purposes, when a test is needed, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) uses an ELISA test which can detect 20 ppm, but this is a limitation of the test itself, not an approved level of gluten. The words "any part thereof" in the first regulation prohibit even those parts of the grains in question which are not proteins.

[in my opinion, rule B.24.019 is completely irrelevant to the matter, and serves only to prevent things like apples and milk being sold as "gluten-free." Who cares?]

In Canada, gluten free really means gluten free. :)

Agree completely....... I even wish that they would label apples and stuff gluten-free just to help confused noobies.

The codex standard itself is VERY bizarre.

First off its NOT a European standard its a WHO standard and its completely optional. As it happens the board has representatives from Canada and the US but the EU only has a single one so its not European .....I just say this because its important how its viewed. The US and Canada have far more influence than any EU nation and together twice that of the EU as a whole.

The second thing is it is done with and funded by food manufacturers, it is not a independent organisation.

The most bizarre aspect is similar to rule B.24.019 .. but it goes further.

A literal intepretation (and I can't see any other way to interpret this kind of document) is a real corn tortilla cannot be labelled gluten free BUT if you add some wheat starch to the corn flour or even some pure gluten it can be so long as the total isn't more than 200ppm (actually expressed as mg/l dry matter total nitrogen)

Someone tell me this isn't crazy!

You can only call a product which is naturally gluten free "gluten free" by adding gluten or an item that normally contains gluten.

Lastly, 20ppm is the detection limit for the ELISA test which is cheap... GC-MS or LC-MS would be able to detect it down to ppb levels.

CarlaB Enthusiast
You can only call a product which is naturally gluten free "gluten free" by adding gluten or an item that normally contains gluten.

Maybe someone who's more knowledgeable about history can tell me, at what point in time did lawmakers decide logic was irrelevant?

gfp Enthusiast
Maybe someone who's more knowledgeable about history can tell me, at what point in time did lawmakers decide logic was irrelevant?

I used to work for a company who had a policy on eMail which states "rough translation"

In order to get a company eMail account the employee must send an email from their company email to xxx@yyy.com giving there employee number and email address of their direct superior.

I actually thought whomever wrote this must be a complete idiot till I met them.

They tried 5 times to tell the person telling them to write this it was illogical BUT on the 5th time they were told that they would receive a written warning letter if they refused to write what they had been told and put thier name on it.

Actually an old college (different company) had a sign on his wall... "A camel is a horse designed by comitee"

Guest nini

since we've been told that a single molecule of gluten is enough to cause damage then anything that has more than ONE MOLECULE can not be considered gluten free

2Boys4Me Enthusiast

Nini, I've always heard that it was 1/49th of a slice of bread needed to cause an auto-immune reaction that affects villi.

I know that some people are very sensitive, and I'm wondering where I can read about the one molecule info. Ty has no outward symptoms, and I'm a lot more concerned about cc than his dad is. Dad is very careful preparing food, but thinks nothing of having a common chip bowl where people eating gluten buns are sharing the chip bowl with Ty. I always give him a separate bowl and depending on his mood, I sometimes get an eye-rolling do-you-really-think-that's-necessary speech. Well, obviously I think it's necessary or I wouldn't be doing it.

If you have easy access to that info, will you please pass it along so I can have my husband read it?

Thanks.

penguin Community Regular
Maybe someone who's more knowledgeable about history can tell me, at what point in time did lawmakers decide logic was irrelevant?

Around the same time humans started walking upright. :rolleyes:

gfp Enthusiast
Nini, I've always heard that it was 1/49th of a slice of bread needed to cause an auto-immune reaction that affects villi.

I know that some people are very sensitive, and I'm wondering where I can read about the one molecule info. Ty has no outward symptoms, and I'm a lot more concerned about cc than his dad is. Dad is very careful preparing food, but thinks nothing of having a common chip bowl where people eating gluten buns are sharing the chip bowl with Ty. I always give him a separate bowl and depending on his mood, I sometimes get an eye-rolling do-you-really-think-that's-necessary speech. Well, obviously I think it's necessary or I wouldn't be doing it.

If you have easy access to that info, will you please pass it along so I can have my husband read it?

Thanks.

Well if a T-cell detects it then it starts the whole process. Chance is it won't but 1 molecule is ... minicule/a lot .. really really small.... a single crumb contains millions so its best to just think the tiniest amount you can imagine then divide that by 100.

the 1/49th thing is really old. Its just the how much to eat to get a biopsy if I remember.

CarlaB Enthusiast
the 1/49th thing is really old. Its just the how much to eat to get a biopsy if I remember.

I think the 1/49th came from a test they did of celiacs and this is the amount they gave them and they saw damage from it. The point of the test, I believe, was to show even a little causes visible damage, I don't think it was the purpose of the test to show how much or how little.

  • 4 weeks later...
jaza33 Newbie
Agree completely....... I even wish that they would label apples and stuff gluten-free just to help confused noobies.

The codex standard itself is VERY bizarre.

First off its NOT a European standard its a WHO standard and its completely optional. As it happens the board has representatives from Canada and the US but the EU only has a single one so its not European .....I just say this because its important how its viewed. The US and Canada have far more influence than any EU nation and together twice that of the EU as a whole.

The second thing is it is done with and funded by food manufacturers, it is not a independent organisation.

The most bizarre aspect is similar to rule B.24.019 .. but it goes further.

A literal intepretation (and I can't see any other way to interpret this kind of document) is a real corn tortilla cannot be labelled gluten free BUT if you add some wheat starch to the corn flour or even some pure gluten it can be so long as the total isn't more than 200ppm (actually expressed as mg/l dry matter total nitrogen)

Someone tell me this isn't crazy!

You can only call a product which is naturally gluten free "gluten free" by adding gluten or an item that normally contains gluten.

Lastly, 20ppm is the detection limit for the ELISA test which is cheap... GC-MS or LC-MS would be able to detect it down to ppb levels.

I'm not sure I understand this correctly....

I buy corn tortilla chips with the only ingredients being corn, lime and oil. However, they are lableled gluten free. Does this mean, in order to put gluten free on the package they have to add a little gluten to the mix?

So I am better off buying corn tortilla chips with corn, lime and oil, but doesn't say gluten free on the label.

LKelly8 Rookie
. . . Does this mean, in order to put gluten free on the package they have to add a little gluten to the mix?. .

So I am better off buying corn tortilla chips with corn, lime and oil, but doesn't say gluten free on the label.

I think the idea was to stop marketers from putting a gluten-free label on everything - even those foods which never contained gluten, apples etc. - but "ideas" and "laws" have never played well together.

The codex(s) only apply outside the US. So it depends on where you live.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Celiac.com:
    Donate

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A17):
    Celiac.com Sponsor (A17):





    Celiac.com Sponsors (A17-M):




  • Recent Activity

    1. - trents replied to barb simkin's topic in Related Issues & Disorders
      8

      celiac, chocolate and alcohol

    2. - barb simkin replied to barb simkin's topic in Related Issues & Disorders
      8

      celiac, chocolate and alcohol

    3. - trents replied to barb simkin's topic in Related Issues & Disorders
      8

      celiac, chocolate and alcohol

    4. - barb simkin replied to barb simkin's topic in Related Issues & Disorders
      8

      celiac, chocolate and alcohol


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      131,327
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    pdr
    Newest Member
    pdr
    Joined

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.4k
    • Total Posts
      1m

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):





  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):



  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • trents
      So, you had both and endoscopy with biopsy and a colonoscopy. That helps me understand what you were trying to communicate. No, no! It never occurred to me that you were trying to mislead me. It's just that we get a lot of posters on the forum who are misinformed about what celiac disease is and how it is diagnosed so I need some clarification from you which you were so gracious to give.
    • barb simkin
      I had both the genetic genes for celiac.  My gastroenologist advised he also took a biopsy during one of my colonoscopies and endoscopy and advised I had celiac disease, along with stomach ulcers from my esophagus stomach down to my small bowel. I was shown the ulcers on the catscan and endoscopy report.  I also had polyps in 3 places throughout my large bowel. I was on a strict diet for months following.  I am sorry if I didnt define how I was diagnosed with celiac disease.  I am sorry if you think I was misleading you. I also had to pay $150.00 for the genetic testing.
    • trents
      So, I'm a little confused here. I understand you to say that you have not been officially diagnosed with celiac disease. Is this correct?  You have had genetic testing done to check for the potential for developing celiac disease and that was positive. Is this correct? I think you meant to type "gluten sensitivity" but you typed "gluten insensitivity". Just so we are clear about the terminology, there is celiac disease and there is NCGS (Non Celiac Gluten Sensitivity). They are not the same but they have overlapping symptoms. Celiac disease causes damage to the small bowel lining but NCGS does not. NCGS is often referred to in short form as gluten sensitivity. However, people often use the terms celiac disease and gluten sensitivity interchangeably so it can be unclear which disease they are referring to. Genetic testing cannot be used to diagnose celiac disease but it can be used to establish the potential to develop active celiac disease. About 40% of the general population has one or both of  the genes that have been most strongly connected with the potential to develop active celiac disease but only about 1% of the population actually develops active celiac disease. This makes the genetic test useful for ruling out celiac disease but not for diagnosing it. A colonoscopy cannot be used to diagnose celiac disease because it doesn't permit the scope to go up into the small bowel where celiac disease does the damage. They use an endoscopy ("upper GI) for checking the small bowel lining for celiac damage.
    • barb simkin
      I did nor read the chocolate pkg as it was of fered to me and I ate 2 pcs. I do know that only very dark chocolate and and a very few others are gluten free. Most alcohols contain gluten. I have several yrs of not knowing my celiac condition as docs would not do the test. After looking on the internet about my sufferings I insisted on the gene trsting which showed positive for gluten insensitivity and a biopsy on my next colonoscopy that also showed positive which could not help the damage done to my small bowel. So I very rarely have a glass of wine
    • trents
      @barb simkin, are you sure the chocolate products are gluten-free and not "manufactured on equipment that also handles wheat products and tree nuts", i.e., cross-contamination? And what kind of alcoholic beverages are we talking about? Most beers are made from gluten-containing grains. Just checking.
×
×
  • Create New...