Sugar-Free Bakery Closed, for using sugar

[Hum 6,929]

A New Jersey bakery that specializes in low-sugar, sugar-free, and gluten-free treats closed indefinitely after officials claimed it mislead consumers. The FDA and state officials found that some of their products contained sugar, allergens, and far more fat than was listed on the labels.

The crackdown was a warning for consumers: If it tastes too good to be healthy, it might be.

The FDA also sent a message to retailers, citing in a statement to press, that they plan to take action against "companies that mislead consumers on the products they purchase."

In the meantime, the FDA is making an example of Butterfly Bakery in Clifton, New Jersey. ?Until Butterfly Bakery meets FDA regulations, it will no longer be able to process or distribute their products," Melinda K. Plaisier, the FDA?s acting associate commissioner for regulatory affairs, said in a statement.

Butterfly Bakery sold its baked goods online and shipped them to grocery stores around the country. Company owner Brenda Isaac acknowledges the FDA's claims and confirmed that the bakery is presently closed.

"Laboratory analysis showed that foods labeled as 'sugar free' contained sugar, and that certain products contained as much as three times the amount of labeled/declared sugar, two times the amount of labeled/declared fat, and two times the amount of labeled/declared saturated fat," the FDA claimed.

more

[+warwagon 9,684]

something sounds sorta sugary!

[Hum 6,929]

Dentists are disappointed. :/

[Growled 3,880]

The crackdown was a warning for consumers: If it tastes too good to be healthy, it might be.

Good advice.

[gameboy1977 886]

the sugar-free is very dangerous for your health.

[+FloatingFatMan 13,181]

the sugar-free is very dangerous for your health.

Not for diabetics.

[Xahid 4,914]

the sugar-free is very dangerous for your health.

Not sure, if sarcasm or plain stupid.

[HawkMan 5,105]

Not sure, if sarcasm or plain stupid.

probably just ignorant. he probably equates sugarfree to sugar replacement/equivalent or artificial sweetener. which in baked goods often are not the case and they are in fact sugarfree. and even if it was another artificial sweetener or sugar replacement, not all of them are bad for you. but then again, sugar in itself isn't necessarily bad for you either, unless you're diabetic.Contrary to popular belief, sugar doesn't make you fat, it can help do it in certain situations, sure.

[Slammers 114]

Not sure, if sarcasm or plain stupid.

Think he is talking about Phenylalanine or whatever its called but Im not sure why he would be presuming it is in the baked goods, and also why it was worded "the sugar-free is very dangerous for your health" ??!!?LOL

[gameboy1977 886]

I ate that pringle with light made with Olean brand olestra oil, but I hate them so much already. I research about this, and they are very dangerous that they will make you so fat. I already throw them away. Same as Sugar-free are very dangerous. The real sugar came from sugar cane plant they are safest. Olean brand olestra oil is part of chemcials. I don't trust USA health anymore, because they wants more money.

[Hum 6,929]

Diet anything is the Evil. :crazy:

[+FloatingFatMan 13,181]

I ate that pringle with light made with Olean brand olestra oil, but I hate them so much already. I research about this, and they are very dangerous that they will make you so fat. I already throw them away. Same as Sugar-free are very dangerous. The real sugar came from sugar cane plant they are safest. Olean brand olestra oil is part of chemcials. I don't trust USA health anymore, because they wants more money.

Uh.. what? :huh:

Can anyone decipher that for me? I can't make head nor tails of most of it, and what I could was just plain incorrect...

[TPreston 5,384]

Oh its the usual anti science naturalnews bullcrap, There are many sugars deal with it.

[Hum 6,929]

Uh.. what? :huh:

Can anyone decipher that for me? I can't make head nor tails of most of it, and what I could was just plain incorrect...

^ Pringles light, potato chips, or crisps.

Olestra is supposed to lower fat absorbtion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olestra

Apparently he does not trust evil American processed foods.

[+FloatingFatMan 13,181]

^ Pringles light, potato chips, or crisps.

Olestra is supposed to lower fat absorbtion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olestra

Apparently he does not trust evil American processed foods.

Ah, just read up on it. Any product that reduces fat absorption will, as a matter of course, cause loose stools. That's because you're absorbing less fat! Duh! Stupid people.

[Growled 3,880]

Diet anything is the Evil. :crazy:

Amen, Brother Hum. Preach the Word!

[n_K 1,641]

Not for diabetics.

Depends really, sugar isn't good for anyone heck sugar and heat causes bacteria to multiply at a very fast rate.

On the other hand, sugar is natural, isn't linked with 90+ medical problems, wasn't pushed to get legalised/licesed in america for many years being rejected each time until, for some strange reason, the FDA team were fired and replaced with 'new staff' who approved it right away.

Yeah, I'd rather have sugar.

[Gabe3 12]

ha, story reminds me of the fat free yogurt seinfeld episode.

[pgn1 0]

It's a good thing the FDA was out there putting a stop to all those burger places that were using pink slime in their burgers claiming/giving the impression they were selling 100% beef burgers!!! oh wait they didn't.

Guess all that money coming in from lobbyists from the big boys keeps the fda away, not really possible for a small bakery that used a little too much sugar.

[HawkMan 5,105]

Pink slime is and was 100% beef, just part of the beef that's less desireable and harder to get. pink slime is not what you think it is or what some of the conspirationalists want you to think it is.

[francescob 560]

Pink slime is and was 100% beef, just part of the beef that's less desireable and harder to get. pink slime is not what you think it is or what some of the conspirationalists want you to think it is.

[theyarecomingforyou 9,094]

Pink slime is and was 100% beef, just part of the beef that's less desireable and harder to get. pink slime is not what you think it is or what some of the conspirationalists want you to think it is.

It's exactly what we think it is - scraps of poor quality animal matter that can't be extracted naturally (i.e. by a butcher) but that have to be separated from the bone using heated centrifuges, then chemically processed with ammonia gas to make fit for human consumption. Just because it comes from animals doesn't mean it can be called "meat". That might be fit for animal consumption but it certainly shouldn't be in the human food chain. When people buy a meat product that is not what they expect.

[HawkMan 5,105]

Actually that's not true. A butcher would be able and would extract that meat. But in todays more efficient butchery it's not effective so bones are left with significant amount of meat left on them, they are then sent on to be "mechanically" de-meated.

[+FloatingFatMan 13,181]

Depends really, sugar isn't good for anyone heck sugar and heat causes bacteria to multiply at a very fast rate.

On the other hand, sugar is natural, isn't linked with 90+ medical problems, wasn't pushed to get legalised/licesed in america for many years being rejected each time until, for some strange reason, the FDA team were fired and replaced with 'new staff' who approved it right away.

Yeah, I'd rather have sugar.

Sugar is bad, but you'd rather have sugar?

Umm.. I'm guessing you mistyped something there. :p

[Hum 6,929]

It's exactly what we think it is - scraps of poor quality animal matter that can't be extracted naturally (i.e. by a butcher) but that have to be separated from the bone using heated centrifuges ...

In other words, dog food. :dog: