While I understand the post is mostly about stuff that’s not listed at all, the non-obvious stuff is always the grossest possible thing:
-
Carmine: why yes I would like some crushed up bugs in my cranberry juice, why not?
-
Vitamin D3: mmmm, sheep hair oil… delicious! (There are vegan sources)
-
Shellac: why do we love crushing up insects so much???
-
L. Cysteine - fucking feathers or human hair (there are vegan sources)
-
Omega fatty acids - fish oil yum! (there are vegan sources)
Imagine my horror pour a glass of OJ at my parents place and realizing I was drinking ground up fish 🤮
- Shellac: why do we love crushing up insects so much???
Look, it may be made of animals, but in terms of wood finishes, it could be a lot worse. Most of the others are toxic and/or made from petroleum.
Something being toxic doesn’t make shellac vegan.
-
A fucking
boomeranggram of milk powder.It’s usually “may contains traces of…” Or "prepared in a factory that handles… " Or milk powder that is added for no reason.
This may be the case but I also see products labeled as vegan that have the allergen warnings. So I tend to assume the worst. I could contact the company to ask, but I lack object permanence due to chronic nutritional deficiencies.
spoiler
(That is a joke, it’s the autism.)
I never considered that to be a factor in whether it’s labelled vegan or vegetarian. Many vegan products are labelled as such (although being fair, they don’t always claim to be vegan).
Maybe they’re using the older and superior definition of vegetarian and consider veganism to be more than a vegetarian diet.
It’s not possible to know if they mean it in the “excludes animal products” or short hand for ovo-lacto tho. And where does that leave honey, carmine, lanolin?
I agree veganism is more than food, but I trust vegan on a label more than vegetarian or plant based because it’s more likely to mean they exclude animal products from all the unlisted components, or items that can come from more than one source.
Today I also trust a vegan stamp more than a vegetarian one when it comes to food labels. I also learnt that while vegetarian mainly meant strict vegetarian in sweden until the 1990s it wasn’t so in the anglosphere. There was some rich biblical folks who wanted in on the word and diluted it to mean lacto-ovo-vegetarian in 1847.
I was not a wee lad in the 1840s that’s for sure.
https://ivu.org/history-of-ivu.html?view=article&id=2622%3Ahistory-salt-dairy&catid=72Regarding products from insects I don’t really see how them having an exoskeleton makes it more okay.
Regarding lanolin I’d say its the same as with wool. The sheep that was sheared has been or will be slaughtered and buying the byproducts aid that reality.Regarding products from insects I don’t really see how them having an exoskeleton makes it more okay.
Regarding lanolin I’d say its the same as with wool. The sheep that was sheared has been or will be slaughtered and buying the byproducts aid that reality.What I meant with those examples is that using vegetarian vs ovo-lacto vegetarian only lets you know if it’s free of flesh or free of flesh and eggs and milk. It doesn’t acknowledge the other types of animal derived ingredients.
What do you mean?
That when I was a wee lad a vegetarian diet meant abstaining eating any animal products, not just skipping meat. Those that consumed biproducts added prefixes, f.e. lacto-ovo-vegetarians eating both dairy and eggs.
Veganism meant not using animal products at all, not just abstaining from eating them.I hadn’t heard that before, that’s interesting
Probably milk or egg powder on the same line
