Usually ingredients are obfuscated by using the INCI names, which is a loathsome practice IMHO.
Comparitively, this is a breath of fresh air.
hillaryrettig1says
Great signage is cool!
Akira MacKenziesays
(Decloaking)
Hmmm… Cool idea. I like it.
Ignorant Rube: “Do you know what [INSERT SCARY CHEMICAL NAME HERE] even does?!”
Me: “Yeah, (points to label) it says what it does right here.”
(Cloaking.)
wzrd1says
rsmith @ 2, I actually prefer the INCI names. It tells me specific species or specific chemical names, which then makes my emulating flavors even easier.
Laughably, the last four ingredients are either insect repellents or insecticides and well, human attractants. Makes sense, ostensibly, many smell good to humans (I’ve no clue, as I have only a trigeminal carried sense of smell) and definitely tastes good (nothing wrong with my taste buds, indeed they may actually qualify as “super taster”).
Huh, just ran into an odd tidbit. Peppermint roots bioaccumulate radium. Good to know, should anyone poop radium in my garden…
Laughably, we also know that the toothpaste is gluten free (I really want to beat some company heads with my shoe when they’re ridiculously labeled as such) and GMO free (see the previous bit about my shoe). Didn’t know that chalk, water and calcium fluoride (fluorite) were available as genetically modified organisms too.
tacitussays
Why aren’t all labels like that?
Because processed food manufacturers prefer that you don’t read the ingredients list (and it wouldn’t even fit on the packaging in most cases).
xohjoh2nsays
Just remember, it’s Un-American to require that manufacturers not put poison into things you will ingest, or if they do, tell you what those poisons are.
Why do you hate America?
brightmoonsays
What I used to think the FDA was like as a kid (sigh) Even finding out Santa wasn’t real didn’t hurt as much
stuffinsays
The fundamental information about the product makes it possible for everyone to understand. Also, the ease with which the information is displayed making it easy to read deserves some applause.
I, personally, am most astonished that they managed to transmute calcium fluoride, a chemical containing two specific elements, into sodium monofluorophosphate, a chemical containing three elements, only one of which is shared with its supposed source. I had not heard that nuclear fission and fusion (can’t get from the one to the other without using both) was being used commercially in the manufacture of toothpaste.
simpliciosays
Where did they ever find gluten-free fiber, minerals, herbs, and water?
wzrd1says
Vicar @ 10, fluorite is a common source for fluorine in industry. The rest is, well, industrial chemistry that frequently utilizes HF.
simplicio @ 11, that’s the question of the year, given how ubiquitous gluten is. After all, gluten holds the atomic nucleus together and all.
I’ll just get my coat, before a physicist comes along with a wet trout…
Snarki, child of Lokisays
What? You mean you DON’T check the SDS for your toothpaste?
How else are you going to find out if it causes environmental hazards, and how to dispose of it???
muttpupdadsays
I only look at the T50 of those things I put into my body.
It says that the glycerol is from a vegetable source.
That suggests to me it is a leftover from the conversion of vegetable oil to biodiesel. If that is so, it makes me wonder how it is purified for human consumption.
I know that this glycerol is used in the production of epoxy resin, but getting all the impurities out to make it food safe seems non-trivial.
wzrd1says
rsmith @ 16, it’s quite literally detailed in the Wikipedia article on glycerol in the section on production.
lumipunasays
Re: 2, 5, 6
Here in Finland we have fairly high legal requirements for food labeling (ingredients, nutritional content), but there doesn’t seem to be any labeling requirements for cosmetic/hygiene products. They usually come from international manufacturers, with a default ingredient list that’s in English (where INCI isn’t applicable), and it apparently doesn’t need to be translated into local languages.
I like the idea of information and completeness, but am a bit amused that “aqua” comes from water and is, surprise surprise, a moistener! Well, whattaya know?
Erlend Meyer says
My gast is thoroughly flabbered.
rsmith says
Usually ingredients are obfuscated by using the INCI names, which is a loathsome practice IMHO.
Comparitively, this is a breath of fresh air.
hillaryrettig1 says
Great signage is cool!
Akira MacKenzie says
(Decloaking)
Hmmm… Cool idea. I like it.
Ignorant Rube: “Do you know what [INSERT SCARY CHEMICAL NAME HERE] even does?!”
Me: “Yeah, (points to label) it says what it does right here.”
(Cloaking.)
wzrd1 says
rsmith @ 2, I actually prefer the INCI names. It tells me specific species or specific chemical names, which then makes my emulating flavors even easier.
Laughably, the last four ingredients are either insect repellents or insecticides and well, human attractants. Makes sense, ostensibly, many smell good to humans (I’ve no clue, as I have only a trigeminal carried sense of smell) and definitely tastes good (nothing wrong with my taste buds, indeed they may actually qualify as “super taster”).
Huh, just ran into an odd tidbit. Peppermint roots bioaccumulate radium. Good to know, should anyone poop radium in my garden…
Laughably, we also know that the toothpaste is gluten free (I really want to beat some company heads with my shoe when they’re ridiculously labeled as such) and GMO free (see the previous bit about my shoe). Didn’t know that chalk, water and calcium fluoride (fluorite) were available as genetically modified organisms too.
tacitus says
Because processed food manufacturers prefer that you don’t read the ingredients list (and it wouldn’t even fit on the packaging in most cases).
xohjoh2n says
Just remember, it’s Un-American to require that manufacturers not put poison into things you will ingest, or if they do, tell you what those poisons are.
Why do you hate America?
brightmoon says
What I used to think the FDA was like as a kid (sigh) Even finding out Santa wasn’t real didn’t hurt as much
stuffin says
The fundamental information about the product makes it possible for everyone to understand. Also, the ease with which the information is displayed making it easy to read deserves some applause.
The Vicar (via Freethoughtblogs) says
I, personally, am most astonished that they managed to transmute calcium fluoride, a chemical containing two specific elements, into sodium monofluorophosphate, a chemical containing three elements, only one of which is shared with its supposed source. I had not heard that nuclear fission and fusion (can’t get from the one to the other without using both) was being used commercially in the manufacture of toothpaste.
simplicio says
Where did they ever find gluten-free fiber, minerals, herbs, and water?
wzrd1 says
Vicar @ 10, fluorite is a common source for fluorine in industry. The rest is, well, industrial chemistry that frequently utilizes HF.
simplicio @ 11, that’s the question of the year, given how ubiquitous gluten is. After all, gluten holds the atomic nucleus together and all.
I’ll just get my coat, before a physicist comes along with a wet trout…
Snarki, child of Loki says
What? You mean you DON’T check the SDS for your toothpaste?
How else are you going to find out if it causes environmental hazards, and how to dispose of it???
muttpupdad says
I only look at the T50 of those things I put into my body.
The Vicar (via Freethoughtblogs) says
@#12, wzrd1:
Then under “source” it should have said “natural flourite deposits” or something.
rsmith says
It says that the glycerol is from a vegetable source.
That suggests to me it is a leftover from the conversion of vegetable oil to biodiesel. If that is so, it makes me wonder how it is purified for human consumption.
I know that this glycerol is used in the production of epoxy resin, but getting all the impurities out to make it food safe seems non-trivial.
wzrd1 says
rsmith @ 16, it’s quite literally detailed in the Wikipedia article on glycerol in the section on production.
lumipuna says
Re: 2, 5, 6
Here in Finland we have fairly high legal requirements for food labeling (ingredients, nutritional content), but there doesn’t seem to be any labeling requirements for cosmetic/hygiene products. They usually come from international manufacturers, with a default ingredient list that’s in English (where INCI isn’t applicable), and it apparently doesn’t need to be translated into local languages.
John Morales says
lumipuna, https://tukes.fi/kemikaalit/kosmetiikka/kosmetiikan-merkinnat
Matthew Currie says
I like the idea of information and completeness, but am a bit amused that “aqua” comes from water and is, surprise surprise, a moistener! Well, whattaya know?