salt vs. iodized salt in ingredient labeling question

1,340 views
Skip to first unread message

Barbara Wakeen

unread,
Jun 18, 2010, 2:50:00 PM6/18/10
to Foodservice-L, foodsa...@googlegroups.com, dh...@mail-list.com

I am dealing with an multiple allergy diet w/iodine being an allergen.

 

Regarding foods that contain salt as an ingredient,  I am trying to determine if ‘iodized’ salt has to be listed on an ingredient statement if it is iodized or if just ‘salt’ can be listed (which is mostly what I see) and then there has to be a disclaimer about iodine.

 

I  have looked in the CFR sited below and my interpretation is….if iodized salt is an ingredient, a notation about ‘iodine’ must be on the label as well.  The part stating “For the purposes of this section”  bothers me as though there should be another reference somewhere. 

 

 Does anyone have any other detail information/clarification on this?

Thanks in advance!

 

 

100.155 - Salt and iodized salt.

  (a) For the purposes of this section, the term iodized salt or iodized table salt is designated as the name of salt for human food use to which iodide has been added in the form of cuprous iodide or potassium iodide permitted by 184.1265 and 184.1634 of this chapter. In the labeling of such products, all words in the name shall be equal in prominence and type size. The statement This salt supplies iodide, a necessary nutrient shall appear on the label immediately following the name and shall be in letters which are not less in height than those required for the declaration of the net quantity of contents as specified in 101.105 of this chapter.


Read more: http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/100-155-salt-and-iodized-19705302#ixzz0rEP6QBLt

 

 

Barbara

 

Barbara Wakeen, MA, RD, LD, CCFP, CCHP

Correctional Nutrition Consultants, Ltd.

 

ACFSA Chair Dietitians in Corrections

ADA-NCCHC Advisory Committee Representative

DHCC Network Liaison Coordinator

OCD-HCF Secretary

330 499 1715 (office)

330 497 2531 (fax )

www.cnconsult.com

 

Robert A LaBudde

unread,
Jun 18, 2010, 8:31:32 PM6/18/10
to Barbara Wakeen, Foodservice-L, foodsa...@googlegroups.com, dh...@mail-list.com
Iodine is not actually an allergen, I believe.
Some people are 'sensitive' to iodine. And most
of these are not sensitive to iodide.

People can easily be overdosed with iodide, so
this may be the motivation for the labeling regulation.

><http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/100-155-salt-and-iodized-19705302#ixzz0rEP6QBLt>http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/100-155-salt-and-iodized-19705302#ixzz0rEP6QBLt


>
>
>Barbara
>
>Barbara Wakeen, MA, RD, LD, CCFP, CCHP
>Correctional Nutrition Consultants, Ltd.
>
>ACFSA Chair Dietitians in Corrections
>ADA-NCCHC Advisory Committee Representative
>DHCC Network Liaison Coordinator
>OCD-HCF Secretary
>330 499 1715 (office)
>330 497 2531 (fax )
>www.cnconsult.com
>
>

>--
>You received this message because you subscribed to the "Foodsafe" group.
>To post to this group, send email to Foodsa...@googlegroups.com
>To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>Foodsafe-lis...@googlegroups.com
>For more options, visit this group at
><http://groups.google.com/group/Foodsafe-list?hl=en>http://groups.google.com/group/Foodsafe-list?hl=en
>If you're having problems with the list, contact
>Cindy Roberts at foodsa...@gmail.com

================================================================
Robert A. LaBudde, PhD, PAS, Dpl. ACAFS e-mail: r...@lcfltd.com
Least Cost Formulations, Ltd. URL: http://lcfltd.com/
824 Timberlake Drive Tel: 757-467-0954
Virginia Beach, VA 23464-3239 Fax: 757-467-2947

"Vere scire est per causas scire"
================================================================

NEAL FORTIN

unread,
Jun 23, 2010, 12:53:26 PM6/23/10
to foodsa...@googlegroups.com


No, "iodized salt" need not be in the ingredient statement.  However, all the ingredients in the salt must be listed in the ingredient statement of the new food. The ingredients must be listed by their common and usual name. Often there is an anti-caking agent as well as the iodine.

This will be covered in detail in a 2-day workshop at Michigan State University   http://www.iflr.msu.edu/label.html 

Neal Fortin
-- 
You received this message because you subscribed to the "Foodsafe" group.
To post to this group, send email to Foodsa...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Foodsafe-lis...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Foodsafe-list?hl=en

Ralph Meer

unread,
Jun 23, 2010, 1:55:20 PM6/23/10
to foodsa...@googlegroups.com

They would probably leave the anti-caking ingredient out and consider it an incidental additive.

 

21 CFR 101.100 (a) (3)

 

(3) Incidental additives that are present in a food at insignificant

levels and do not have any technical or functional effect in that food.

For the purposes of this paragraph (a)(3), incidental additives are:

    (i) Substances that have no technical or functional effect but are

present in a food by reason of having been incorporated into the food as

an ingredient of another food, in which the substance did have a

functional or technical effect.

 

Ralph Meer

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2958 - Release Date: 06/23/10 04:11:00

K B

unread,
Jun 27, 2010, 10:03:41 PM6/27/10
to Ralph Meer, foodsa...@googlegroups.com
Generally processors are going to use noniodized salt because it's cheaper and they gain no labeling advantage from using iodized salt. However, I disagree with Neal, I think iodine could be considered an incidental additive. To the best of my knowledge there is no FDA list or limit on what is incidental except in the case of the "big 8" allergens. I have been wrong before, but I believe this would be an interpretation issue unless he's aware of a specific FDA ruling on iodine. Many processors list the four mandatory nutrients (calcium, iron, Vitamin A, Vitamin C) as zero if they are below the 10% needed for a claim of good source.

From: Ralph Meer <mee...@cox.net>
To: foodsa...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wed, June 23, 2010 1:55:20 PM
Subject: RE: [Foodsafe] salt vs. iodized salt in ingredient labeling question

Ralph Meer

unread,
Jun 27, 2010, 11:22:50 PM6/27/10
to foodsa...@googlegroups.com

It would not surprise me if a manufacturer adding iodized salt as a ingredient chose to consider the iodine as a incidental additive in the finished product and didn’t list it in the final ingredient statement.

 

However, because the purpose for adding the iodine to the salt is to increase overall dietary intake of iodine, one might argue that since most people don’t typically consume salt by itself it is still serving its original purpose or technical effect in the finished product.

 

Ralph

Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2965 - Release Date: 06/27/10 11:35:00

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages