Irish court rules Subway bread is not bread

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Reminds me of an insane ruling by our own Supreme Court here in the U.S., that ruled that a tomato is not a fruit.

Same general madness —a ruling based on absurd regulatory criteria rather than on objective fact.

Ketchup makers in the US are limited on the amount of sugar they can put in their products. I thought that was bad enough - that government is telling people how to make their goods.

I didn't read the OP's link, but if the Irish government is telling Subway to change their recipe (and apparently they are), then they're just as bad as the US.

“I didn't read the OP's link…”

Hence the willfully ignorant conservative.

Necessary, proper regulatory policies enacted at the behest of the people – reflecting the will of the people – are perfectly appropriate and warranted; particularly given the fact that corporations are more than willing to place profit over the health and safety of consumers.

And save the rot about how consumers should stop going to Subway if they don’t like how the bread is prepared to ‘force’ Subway to change or drive Subway out of business – such rightwing dogma is as ridiculous as it is wrong.

I checked out the Subway website and the sugar content is pretty similar on both sides of the Atlantic. The basic issue is that Big food would rather that you didnt know what was in the stuff that you buy. And they fight all the way to prevent that information from getting to the consumer.

I dont think that anyone would want to ban Subway from selling this stuff but they should be clear on what they put into it.

To argue against that is breathtakingly stupid.

Correct.

There’s no way for consumers to know the content of that which they buy and consume, if it’s safe or harmful.

That’s why consumer safety regulatory policies are perfectly appropriate and warranted – having nothing to do with he ‘nanny state’ lie.