Yesterday my eye fell on this little label on our ‘Trust’ sugar.
photo by myself
On one hand it is quite a relief to learn that our sugar is not just sulphurless, but apparently contains no harmful chemicals at all. On the other hand, the absence of such label on our bread, flower, water, … worries me a little.
It’s all a matter of dosage. I am reasonably sure you can kill yourself with too much sugar as well as with too much salt (if you manage not to get sick that is). Please correct me when I’m wrong.
I’m sure sugar can kill you if a whole sack of it fell on you from a great height.
What would sulphur be doing in a bag of sugar in the first place? A preservative? Keep it from browning? It’s sugar! Why does it matter? Does sugar even go bad? it seems they could advertise the absence of arsenic with the same success.
Frankly, it scares me half to death to read labels in grocery stores. I love Cheetos as much (or more) than the average gal, but the inclusion of a few hard-core chemicals in the product makes me think twice.
I agree with Anna, and would go further. To advertise sugar as ‘not just sulphurless’ is part of an ancient trick well known to
the evil zombie undead demon spawn of Satanadvertising and marketing executives as a way of casting aspersions on your competition without actually committing a libel. To say that your brand of sugar is free fromarseniccyanidebotulinum toxinrusty bicycle pedalsputs in the mind of the buyer the faint possibility that other brands might actually contain such things. A laughable counter-example is a brand of sea-salt I have on my shelf that advertisize itself as ‘pure’ in that it contains no additives, so the health-conscious consumer can have less salt for the same … er … saltiness. Which makes no sense at all.Bit like fat-free (labelled) ice cream — loaded with sugar so probably just as bad for you, even if it doesn’t fall on you from a great height!
Many drinks and other products sold, including aimed at children and/or parents who are buying food for their children, are labelled “sugar free” but have other sweetners included that ultimately contain, er, sugar (eg concentrated apple juice).
Wicked old world.
Besides fooling people, would this load of crap labels also blur the sight of customers for real certified food labels?
If you grow your own, you’ll know precisely where it’s been and what’s happened to it. Sigh. In an ideal world…
…’till the deer push their way through the mesh entrance curtain into the fenced garden area and mow the tomatos, snow peas, beans, strawberries and peppers (mercifully skipping the Chinese eggplant, basil and onions). Ahhh, the ideal world we live in. Henry, do you have any plans drawn up for a sturdy garden drawbridge?
If I grew all my own food, I wouldn’t have time to play on Nature Network. And then I would be out of a job. I like my job. I think I would rather just shop at local organic farmer’s markets. They need my money and I need their produce. It’s a beautiful relationship.
@ Jon – you could just shoot the deer, of course. At least you’d know what they’d been eating.
@ Anna – I think I would rather just shop at local organic farmer’s markets. They need my money and I need their produce. It’s a beautiful relationship.
Quite right too. Division of labor. Reminds me of that poem by Hilaire Belloc
It struck him dead, and serve him right.
It is the duty of the wealthy man
To give employment to the artisan.
Traditionally molasses has sometimes been “sulfured” to preserve it. That was actually sulfur dioxide that was used, not sulfur. Sulfur dioxide was also used to preserve cane juice while it was being processed into sugar.
It is doubtful that there would be any significant sulfur dioxide (or sulfites) in sugar even if that sugar was made from cane juice treated with sulfur dioxide. However people can have allergic reactions to sulfites.
The main purpose of adding sulfur dioxide to the cane juice during processing is to prevent degradation due to other organisms. The worst actors are probably molds, a little aflatoxin would go a long way in making sugar not fit for human consumption. Molds can tolerate pretty low osmotic strength, the molds that produce aflatoxin can be common on sugar cane.
Trace impurities are important if you are going to use the sugar to make something for injection. Lipopolysaccharide is extremely difficult to remove once it is present. That is the reason that most injectables are processed while containing inhibitory concentrations of stuff such as thimerosal.
@ David – Thanks for this information. As this is Indian sugar it is probably made of cane. So, if I understand well, the label has at least some basis, but the absence of such label should not worry anybody…
@ Anna – just shop at local organic farmer’s markets
Good for your carbon footprint, as well!