Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 365 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
Three blonde, blue-eyed siblings are named Suzy, Jack and Bill.  What color hair does the sister have?:
Spell the answer to 6 + 7 =:
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by mommabridget
 - July 03, 2013, 02:18:04 PM
When DS was over a year into his SLIT desensitization trial, he could more likely tolerate a may contain.  Now that he has dropped out of the study, I think he would react to a smaller amount of protein and a may contain is too much of a risk.  All that to say, advisory warnings help us make individual choices based on tolerance and comfort levels.  Advisory labeling is very much appreciated and needed!!
Posted by maeve
 - July 03, 2013, 10:36:49 AM
CM,
It seems logical to me too.  Why not just put the information on the label and let the consumer decide if they want to take the risk.  There might be some in the community who might take those odds, and others who would not.  However, for those of us who would not take the chance on shared lines/may contains, not having the advisory label makes our decision-making process really hard (especially when you encounter customer service reps who are obtuse).
Posted by CMdeux
 - July 03, 2013, 08:44:30 AM
That seems to be about the going rate in N. America, too, yes?

Honestly, I'm not sure how anyone could think that doing away with advisory labels is a good idea.   :-/
Posted by eragon
 - July 03, 2013, 08:14:16 AM
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23802714?dopt=Abstract

peanut in 5% of irish food products labelled may contain.