San Francisco restaurant closes and leaves angry note: "we don't give a f*** about gluten-free"

[pnwmom]

201. Of course it's fair to have a standard label, even though some of the answers may be ZERO.

Ted Kennedy fought for decades to get the food manufacturers to use the now standardized labels and to specifically list corn, wheat, nuts, gluten, etc. -- instead of hiding things under the catch-all phrase "natural flavors." They complied with every one of those ingredients except gluten. Why is it "silly" to require gluten to be listed on the label if it's in the product? That is the issue here. Wheat isn't the only food that contains gluten; barley does, too, for example, and barley doesn't have to be listed.

One of my friends gave her child a chocolate Paul Newman's bar, thinking it was safe, according to the ingredient label. The girl threw up. When the mother called the company, she learned that it contained barley -- which contains gluten --as an added sweetener, but that wasn't on the label. Why wasn't that bar properly labeled? Because the law doesn't require barley or gluten to be listed. How many other kids got sick from it? Is that really "silly" to you? Aren't you supposed to be a nurse?