This is a pet peeve of mine. When labels say "natural flavor." A lot of times,
this seems to mean that the flavor is artificial, but designed to taste like
its natural counterpart. Like, "natural orange flavor" sometimes means flavored
to taste LIKE natural oranges.

But sometimes, I think it really does mean that the flavor is naturally
derived. I can't tell the difference sometimes. It bugs me! Has anyone else
managed to decode this?

-Jen
Half the people you know are below average. -Steven Wright

On 24 Oct 2003 03:23:17 GMT, OSPAM (JLove98905)
wrote:

>This is a pet peeve of mine. When labels say "natural flavor." A lot of times,
>this seems to mean that the flavor is artificial, but designed to taste like
>its natural counterpart. Like, "natural orange flavor" sometimes means flavored
>to taste LIKE natural oranges.
>
>But sometimes, I think it really does mean that the flavor is naturally
>derived. I can't tell the difference sometimes. It bugs me! Has anyone else
>managed to decode this?

Natural cimply means that it's derrived from natural sources rather
than synthetic. Natural orange flavor (eg.) is not necessarily from
oranges. If they can extract the same chemicals from another
(cheaper) natural source (even cows), they will, and still call it
"natural falvors".

-sw

On 24 Oct 2003 03:23:17 GMT, OSPAM (JLove98905)
wrote:

>This is a pet peeve of mine. When labels say "natural flavor." A lot of times,
>this seems to mean that the flavor is artificial, but designed to taste like
>its natural counterpart. Like, "natural orange flavor" sometimes means flavored
>to taste LIKE natural oranges.
>
>But sometimes, I think it really does mean that the flavor is naturally
>derived. I can't tell the difference sometimes. It bugs me! Has anyone else
>managed to decode this?

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/CF101-22.HTML

An extract:
"(3) The term natural flavor or natural flavoring means the essential
oil, oleoresin, essence or extractive, protein hydrolysate,
distillate,
or any product of roasting, heating or enzymolysis, which contains the
flavoring constituents derived from a spice, fruit or fruit juice,
vegetable or vegetable juice, edible yeast, herb, bark, bud, root,
leaf
or similar plant material, meat, seafood, poultry, eggs, dairy
products,
or fermentation products thereof, whose significant function in food
is
flavoring rather than nutritional."

In article >,
OSPAM (JLove98905) wrote:


> But sometimes, I think it really does mean that the flavor is naturally
> derived. I can't tell the difference sometimes. It bugs me! Has anyone else
> managed to decode this?


My sister is a vegetarian, and sometimes "natural flavor" is extracted
from meat. Since you can't tell whether or not it is, she refuses to eat
anything where the label lists "natural flavor".

--
Dan Abel
Sonoma State University
AIS

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:59:05 -0700, (Dan Abel) wrote:

>My sister is a vegetarian, and sometimes "natural flavor" is extracted
>from meat. Since you can't tell whether or not it is, she refuses to eat
>anything where the label lists "natural flavor".

This is apparently true. Many of the references I turned up Googling
on "natural flavor" came from vegetarian-interest sources. Given that
many food labels are now noting that the machinery used in manufacture
may have previously been in contact with nuts or dairy or meat, it may
soon be common practice for every packaged food to come with a 'safety
sheet' detailing even the most microscopic ingredients and
manufacturing details. And it's going to cost us all.

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:59:05 -0700, (Dan Abel) wrote:

>In article >,
(JLove98905) wrote:
>
>
>> But sometimes, I think it really does mean that the flavor is naturally
>> derived. I can't tell the difference sometimes. It bugs me! Has anyone else
>> managed to decode this?
>
>
>My sister is a vegetarian, and sometimes "natural flavor" is extracted
>from meat. Since you can't tell whether or not it is, she refuses to eat
>anything where the label lists "natural flavor".

And she probably drives a car which runs over or otherwise splatters
dozens of bugs each day.

-sw

"Steve Wertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:59:05 -0700, (Dan Abel) wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> (JLove98905) wrote:
> >
> >
> >> But sometimes, I think it really does mean that the flavor is naturally
> >> derived. I can't tell the difference sometimes. It bugs me! Has anyone
else
> >> managed to decode this?
> >
> >
> >My sister is a vegetarian, and sometimes "natural flavor" is extracted
> >from meat. Since you can't tell whether or not it is, she refuses to eat
> >anything where the label lists "natural flavor".
>
> And she probably drives a car which runs over or otherwise splatters
> dozens of bugs each day.
>

And your point is....? Unless of course you can point us to a definition of
"vegetarian" that includes "refuses to engage in activities that might kill
insects."


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

In article >, Steve Wertz
> writes:

>On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:59:05 -0700, (Dan Abel) wrote:
>
>>In article >,
(JLove98905) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> But sometimes, I think it really does mean that the flavor is naturally
>>> derived. I can't tell the difference sometimes. It bugs me! Has anyone
>else
>>> managed to decode this?
>>
>>
>>My sister is a vegetarian, and sometimes "natural flavor" is extracted
>>from meat. Since you can't tell whether or not it is, she refuses to eat
>>anything where the label lists "natural flavor".
>
>And she probably drives a car which runs over or otherwise splatters
>dozens of bugs each day.

But she doesn't *eat* those critters... killing and eating are two different
things... but I guarantee she eats meat, just won't admit to it, ALL so-called
vegetarians eat meat. Show me a vegetarain who doesn't eat meat and I'll show
you a dead vegetarian.


---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
Sheldon
````````````
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 21:55:16 GMT, "Peter Aitken"
> wrote:


>"Steve Wertz" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:59:05 -0700, (Dan Abel) wrote:
>>
>> >In article >,
>> (JLove98905) wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> But sometimes, I think it really does mean that the flavor is naturally
>> >> derived. I can't tell the difference sometimes. It bugs me! Has anyone
>else
>> >> managed to decode this?
>> >
>> >
>> >My sister is a vegetarian, and sometimes "natural flavor" is extracted
>> >from meat. Since you can't tell whether or not it is, she refuses to eat
>> >anything where the label lists "natural flavor".
>>
>> And she probably drives a car which runs over or otherwise splatters
>> dozens of bugs each day.
>
>And your point is....? Unless of course you can point us to a definition of
>"vegetarian" that includes "refuses to engage in activities that might kill
>insects."

Obviously this person is a vegetarian for *ethical* reasons, not for
health reasons. Wouldn't you agree?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98227,00.html

-sw

Steve Wertz wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 21:55:16 GMT, "Peter Aitken"
> > wrote:
>
>
>
>>"Steve Wertz" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>>On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:59:05 -0700, (Dan Abel) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article >,
(JLove98905) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>But sometimes, I think it really does mean that the flavor is naturally
>>>>>derived. I can't tell the difference sometimes. It bugs me! Has anyone
>>>>
>>else
>>
>>>>>managed to decode this?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>My sister is a vegetarian, and sometimes "natural flavor" is extracted
>>>
>>>>from meat. Since you can't tell whether or not it is, she refuses to eat
>>>
>>>>anything where the label lists "natural flavor".
>>>
>>>And she probably drives a car which runs over or otherwise splatters
>>>dozens of bugs each day.
>>
>>And your point is....? Unless of course you can point us to a definition of
>>"vegetarian" that includes "refuses to engage in activities that might kill
>>insects."
>
>
> Obviously this person is a vegetarian for *ethical* reasons, not for
> health reasons. Wouldn't you agree?
>
> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98227,00.html
>
> -sw

I can only shake my head in disbelief, that someone would risk months of
having a vacant property to "save" the ants (as if they are not prolific
when it comes to procreating,)losing $ in the process, and not even
consider the many children dying of hunger and CURABLE diseases at a
global level; which two or three months of rent can be devoted to said
cause.


This, to me, is the epitome of idiocy and hypocrisy.

Richard

--
"..A census taker once tried to test me. I ate his liver with some fava
beans and a nice chianti..."

Hannibal "The Cannibal"

Silence Of The Lambs 1991

Richard Periut wrote:
>
> This, to me, is the epitome of idiocy and hypocrisy.
>


Where did this thread start?

Mark wrote:
>
>
> Richard Periut wrote:
>
>>
>> This, to me, is the epitome of idiocy and hypocrisy.
>>
>
>
> Where did this thread start?
>

Try google newsgroups.

--
"..A census taker once tried to test me. I ate his liver with some fava
beans and a nice chianti..."

Hannibal "The Cannibal"

Silence Of The Lambs 1991

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 03:06:03 GMT, Richard Periut >
wrote:

>> Obviously this person is a vegetarian for *ethical* reasons, not for
>> health reasons. Wouldn't you agree?
>>
>> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98227,00.html
>>
>> -sw
>
>I can only shake my head in disbelief, that someone would risk months of
>having a vacant property to "save" the ants (as if they are not prolific
>when it comes to procreating,)losing $ in the process, and not even
>consider the many children dying of hunger and CURABLE diseases at a
>global level; which two or three months of rent can be devoted to said
>cause.
>
>This, to me, is the epitome of idiocy and hypocrisy.

This is Texas - Fire ants are *everywhere* and are quite the PITA.
I've been the hospital twice this year already due to the little
pricks. It really becomes a safety and legal issue whe you have
fire-ant infestations in public places.

The hamurger joint's lease is up RSN. So that's another vacancy. The
bridal shop is still empty (and will probably be that way for quite a
while, along with a fully equiped restaurant space that will only be
able to serve vegetarian food.

-sw

"Steve Wertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 21:55:16 GMT, "Peter Aitken"
> > wrote:
>
>
> >"Steve Wertz" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:59:05 -0700, (Dan Abel) wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article >,
> >> (JLove98905) wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> But sometimes, I think it really does mean that the flavor is
naturally
> >> >> derived. I can't tell the difference sometimes. It bugs me! Has
anyone
> >else
> >> >> managed to decode this?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >My sister is a vegetarian, and sometimes "natural flavor" is extracted
> >> >from meat. Since you can't tell whether or not it is, she refuses to
eat
> >> >anything where the label lists "natural flavor".
> >>
> >> And she probably drives a car which runs over or otherwise splatters
> >> dozens of bugs each day.
> >
> >And your point is....? Unless of course you can point us to a definition
of
> >"vegetarian" that includes "refuses to engage in activities that might
kill
> >insects."
>
> Obviously this person is a vegetarian for *ethical* reasons, not for
> health reasons. Wouldn't you agree?
>

Perhaps, but I do not see the relevance. Some vegetarians believe it is
wrong to kill sentient beings, by which they mean mammals and birds, and
have no objection for animals they consider non-sentient (fish, insects).
Others believe it is wrong to kill an animal unnecessarily when you have a
choice so they don't eat animals, but understand that some human activities
unavoidable result in animals being killed. Your original post was obviously
an attempt to paint this person as a hypocrite and I am showing that this is
not necessarily the case.

Peter G. Aitken

>On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:59:05 -0700, I think it was
(Dan Abel) who wrote:
>
>>My sister is a vegetarian, and sometimes "natural flavor" is extracted
>>from meat. Since you can't tell whether or not it is, she refuses to eat
>>anything where the label lists "natural flavor".

There have been endless discussions of vegetarianism here. I am
sympathetic to those who chose this regimen for religious, ethical, or
health reasons. However, unless one chooses a *very*
close-to-the-earth lifestyle which excludes all manufactured goods,
there's probably *some* animal/fish/bird contribution to even the most
vegie substances. "Natural flavor" isn't the only (possible) non-veg
contribution to foods. As I searched on "natural flavor" I found many
references to those misc. funny-sounding food additives that come from
animal sources. Modern food processing means that nearly every part of
an animal can be utilized in some, often food-associated, way. Rather
than *exclude* processed foods on the basis of being able to identify
one source of possible animal origin, better the super-commited
vegetarian/vegan simply restrict his/her intake to unprocessed foods
of known origin or those brands specifically guaranteeing *no*
animal-based additives.