| ▲ | andybak 3 days ago |
| > Most people I know consider E-numbers as dodgy ingredients. (From a quick 30 second search) E300 is Vitamin C, E101 is Vitamin B2 And yes - I'm aware that vitamins that are naturally present are probably better than "fortifying" food - but still. |
|
| ▲ | r00fus 3 days ago | parent [-] |
| I've never seen Vitamin C listed as E300 on a label. So while you are correct, the heuristic (avoid E-numbers) works in practice. |
| |
| ▲ | andybak 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | OK but then why would a manufacturer ever use a E number - considering the stigma attached? Only when the other name "sounds worse"? Is there a legal threshold where you have to use the E number? | | |
| ▲ | lrem 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Indeed, they’ll use E numbers to shorten the chemistry catalogue part of the list. Note the law requires sorting ingredients by weight, so these additives end up clumped together. You’ll end up with half a line instead of half a page. | |
| ▲ | olejorgenb 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Limited space on the label maybe :D Some of the real names of the E's are very long. |
| |
| ▲ | Jensson 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yeah, anything good wont be listed as an E number, you use the name people recognize. |
|
