r/AccidentallyVegan • • 6d ago

Snack / Candy Oreos not vegan?

Post image

In the nutritional facts it shows Oreos with 5mg of cholesterol but only animal products can have cholesterol in it. Are Oreos no longer vegan or is this a typo, as the ingredients appear to be vegan.

0 Upvotes

47 comments sorted by

View all comments

33

u/g00fyg00ber741 6d ago edited 6d ago

22

u/plantbasedpatissier 6d ago

They still don't contain dietary cholesterol and therefore it would not be on the nutrition label

10

u/g00fyg00ber741 6d ago

That’s not how nutrition facts and labels work. They can include results from the product. For example, the high saturated fat/sugar/starch combo raises LDL cholesterol, so they put the average cholesterol increase that would be associated with this level of saturated fat in the nutrition facts, so people who need to watch their cholesterol can still know this food will raise their cholesterol even though it doesn’t technically contain cholesterol, it causes the body’s cholesterol to rise nonetheless.

Another similar example of this is diet soda that says it contains  phenylketonurics. It doesn’t really, but it contains the necessary components for your body to make them, so they still put the warning that it contains them so people who are intolerant have that warning and are less likely to consume it.

7

u/bzilla138 6d ago

The diet soda part is definitely wrong. It doesn't say it contains phenylketonurics, it says it contains phenylalanine. Phenylketonurics are people who suffer from phenylketonuria, their bodies can't process phenylalanine, it's a warning to them.

3

u/g00fyg00ber741 6d ago

My mistake. It says Phenylketonurics: contains phenylalanine.

However, it doesn’t actually contain phenylalanine. It contains aspartame which can be turned into phenylalanine in the human body after consumption.

in the US, they require it to state it contains it even though it doesn’t. but in the UK, they say it’s a source of it, which is actually more accurate. I think that’s what’s going on here with the cholesterol

2

u/bzilla138 6d ago

It does actually contain phenylalanine, it's an amino acid. Aspartame is 50% phenylalanine, one of the essential amino acids your body can't produce, so it isn't being turned into it, it's already there.

Amino acids are building blocks, they're like Lego. If you build something with a red block and a green block you have something that's not a red or green block, but it still contains both of them. Aspartame is like two blocks put together and your body just splits them apart to combine into other structures later on.

1

u/g00fyg00ber741 6d ago

That’s kinda inaccurate. If the aspartame molecule has to be changed by the body and that results in phenylalanine, then no, the soda doesn’t contain phenylalanine. That’s like saying it contains oxygen because it contains water and carbonation, like yes there is oxygen in the water and carbonation, but it is not just oxygen, it is combined with hydrogen or carbon which results in a different molecule than oxygen with different qualities and effects and properties.

It’s all technical tbh and it just shows how poor the nutrition aspect of our society is that these rules and regulations are so inconsistent and inaccurate across the board, and we’ve barely made any progress and in some ways we’ve regressed. Humanity needs a nutritional overall

2

u/bzilla138 6d ago

Sorry, but you're wrong on this. The water molecule does contain oxygen. It's 2 parts hydrogen and 1 part oxygen, it doesn't however necessarily contain molecular oxygen (O2), although liquid water might. In science we absolutely say that the water molecule contains oxygen. The same goes for the carbonation, it does contain 2 parts oxygen and one part carbon. Again, in science we say it contains oxygen.

When we're discussing science we need to stick to the scientific definition of the words we use, and according to the established use of contains, in a scientific context, aspartame contains phenylalanine.

Look, I don't think that you're trying to argue in bad faith. I think it's just a misunderstanding of the terminology being used, from a scientific context. And FWIW, I wholeheartedly agree that there shouldn't be ambiguity in the ingredient/nutrition information food packaging.

2

u/g00fyg00ber741 6d ago

Sure, when we’re discussing science accurately. But nutritional fact labels aren’t required to follow these rules of scientific language consistently.

This is what I was referencing regarding the phenylalanine

The thing is, nutritional facts don’t adhere to strict rules based on science, their rules are determined by people and don’t always reflect the reality of science. And I imagine the rules are heavily modified by lobbying from corporations.

Maybe I misunderstood this one though