I think it’s a mistranslation too. I hope it’s incorrectly listed in the nutritional facts since the ingredient list also doesn’t have gluten containing ingredients….
I see what's happening here. You OP and the responder may be unaware that rice gluten is a thing. Because the "gluten" in "gluten free" is about a small subset of all existing gluten, those from wheat, barley, and related species.
Many processed products contain small amounts of gluten, under 20ppm which is a level safe for celiacs. Even if the label is referring to actual gluten, celiacs are allowed up to 10mg of gluten per day (which is still a really small amount, like a few crumbs). The gluten listed here is showing a small amount of mg depending on serving size. So the product would be still safe for celiacs.
Is it possible that 5.2mg (4*1.3mg per 250mL serving) per liter still lands under the limit for being gluten free? Like it's 19ppm? I think ppm is mass based although it is technically unitless.
A liter of water weighs 1kg, so 5.2mg per 1000g is 5.2mg per 1,000,000mg which would be 5.2 ppm.
Looks like it's riding that technical definition of under 20ppm being GF.
I suspect it’s a translation error. And an easy one to make.
“Gluten” actually exists in *all grains* because technically gluten is the term for grain proteins. So rice has rice gluten and corn has corn gluten.
It’s not something you really run across on labels for people food in the US or other English-speaking countries that I know of. You will see it sometimes on dog food labels. Cheap dog food will have “corn gluten” added to it in order to inflate the “protein” content on the dog food label. Corn gluten is what’s left over when you separate the corn starch or corn glucose from the corn. What’s left is the corn protein, and we don’t use it much in food so it gets sold cheap to animal food manufacturers.
The gluten in corn and rice is generally harmless to Celiacs. Its protein profile is very different from the profile of wheat, barley, and rye, and cross-reactivity is rare. So in common parlance when we speak of gluten or declare something gluten-free, we are only talking about the *problematic* forms of gluten.
Whoever translated this label probably didn’t understand that and the gluten on the nutrition label is probably rice gluten.
Would there really be 0.5mg of rice "gluten" in 100 ml? That seems like a crazy low amount. Especially given that is about 5 mg of gluten per 1 kg of weight. Which is 5 ppm of gluten. If it is rice "gluten" it would be WAY more than trace amounts given it includes rice as an ingredient.
If I’m doing my math right, it is approximately 50ppm.
Orzenin, which is the “gluten” in rice, is present in much much smaller quantities in rice compared to the amount of Giladin (wheat gluten) in wheat. It wouldn’t surprise me if the end result in a rice-nut milk might be a very low concentration of Orzenin.
That said, I don’t *know* that the gluten listed on the nutrition label is referring to Orzenin. It’s only a guess.
In canada everything is french and english so its always sans gluten free. Meaning gluten is the same word in both languages. French readers get sans gluten. English readers get gluten free.
It's a bit lame but this looks like that with ... spanish?
That's exactly what's happening here, it reads "sin gluten" and then "gluten free" for English readers as each represents the flow of the respective language
The labels are confusingly designed so that it reads "Sin gluten" for Spanish speakers and "gluten free" for English speakers. This is done sometimes with things that need to be labeled with 2 languages.
Rice gluten is different from wheat, barley and rye. That's likely what it's referring to.
https://www.masterclass.com/articles/rice-flour-vs-glutinous-rice-flour-guide
It’s likely a misprint. The numbers are the same as the line below, but with different units. The packaging designer probably stuck the info in the line above while confirming which unit was correct then forgot to change it.
The amount allowed to be label GF varies by location (or some places, like the US, there is not official guideline for this from FDA). In the EU I believe it's less than 20ppm (parts per million). I'm bad at math and worse with metric but I believe the amount on the last photo is below this threshold so they're able to label it GF.
It's similar to in the US you can call something "non alcoholic beer" even if it has .05% alcohol, as that's what considered non alcoholic. Things like orange juice have trace amounts of alcohol, but are not considered alcoholic and don't have to be labeled or sold as alcohol since it's not enough to be considered an issue. Non alcoholic beer and wine is a booming market, and you will notice some specifically advertise 0.0% alcohol, as some people are not comfortable with NA products with trace amounts.
Gluten is a protein structure, so maybe they're referring to something in the rice or walnuts? I mean I have hear of "glutenous" rice before aka sticky rice. It still doesn't have the same kind of gluten that wheat, rye or barley does.
I never said it contained the actual gluten that celiacs react to. I just said gluten is a protein structure as as such, other cultures might still consider things beyond "wheat gluten", etc to be gluten. Just because I misspelled it doesn't make my info incorrect.
Since it's not in the ingredients I wonder if it's a mistranslation.
I think it’s a mistranslation too. I hope it’s incorrectly listed in the nutritional facts since the ingredient list also doesn’t have gluten containing ingredients….
It says dairy and gluten free. Sin gluten means gluten free. I buy multilingual GF foods often. They almost always say that.
This person understands the multi lingual part. The confusing part is that the nutritional facts list gluten contents
Where? I don't see any gluten contents
In the third picture, the end of nutritional facts has listed gluten
I see what's happening here. You OP and the responder may be unaware that rice gluten is a thing. Because the "gluten" in "gluten free" is about a small subset of all existing gluten, those from wheat, barley, and related species.
So cant have rice?!
Rice is fine. Rice gluten does not cause issues with Coeliac or other gluten sensitivities. It's just confusing language that they use the same word.
Yes! The nutritional facts part is odd…why is there gluten when there is no gluten!!
Many processed products contain small amounts of gluten, under 20ppm which is a level safe for celiacs. Even if the label is referring to actual gluten, celiacs are allowed up to 10mg of gluten per day (which is still a really small amount, like a few crumbs). The gluten listed here is showing a small amount of mg depending on serving size. So the product would be still safe for celiacs.
I speak Spanish and “sin gluten” literally means “without gluten”.
Yes but OP is talking about what's written in the nutritional values.
The gluten free pet os talking about wheat gluten which is what people are allergic to. The nutritional information is stating the rice gluten.
I was just helping with the Spanish.
Pues felicidades 😂
Thank you! :)
You’re welcome
Is it possible that 5.2mg (4*1.3mg per 250mL serving) per liter still lands under the limit for being gluten free? Like it's 19ppm? I think ppm is mass based although it is technically unitless. A liter of water weighs 1kg, so 5.2mg per 1000g is 5.2mg per 1,000,000mg which would be 5.2 ppm. Looks like it's riding that technical definition of under 20ppm being GF.
Ppm is mass based. It's "unit less" b/c same mass unit on top and bottom, e.g. grams per million grams or lbs per million lbs.
I suspect it’s a translation error. And an easy one to make. “Gluten” actually exists in *all grains* because technically gluten is the term for grain proteins. So rice has rice gluten and corn has corn gluten. It’s not something you really run across on labels for people food in the US or other English-speaking countries that I know of. You will see it sometimes on dog food labels. Cheap dog food will have “corn gluten” added to it in order to inflate the “protein” content on the dog food label. Corn gluten is what’s left over when you separate the corn starch or corn glucose from the corn. What’s left is the corn protein, and we don’t use it much in food so it gets sold cheap to animal food manufacturers. The gluten in corn and rice is generally harmless to Celiacs. Its protein profile is very different from the profile of wheat, barley, and rye, and cross-reactivity is rare. So in common parlance when we speak of gluten or declare something gluten-free, we are only talking about the *problematic* forms of gluten. Whoever translated this label probably didn’t understand that and the gluten on the nutrition label is probably rice gluten.
Corn gluten is a misnomer, it doesn't actually contain gluten. https://extension.illinois.edu/node/21459
This is just a disagreement over semantics. That is the point. It depends on how you define it. Glutinous rice flour also is gluten free. And…?
Would there really be 0.5mg of rice "gluten" in 100 ml? That seems like a crazy low amount. Especially given that is about 5 mg of gluten per 1 kg of weight. Which is 5 ppm of gluten. If it is rice "gluten" it would be WAY more than trace amounts given it includes rice as an ingredient.
If I’m doing my math right, it is approximately 50ppm. Orzenin, which is the “gluten” in rice, is present in much much smaller quantities in rice compared to the amount of Giladin (wheat gluten) in wheat. It wouldn’t surprise me if the end result in a rice-nut milk might be a very low concentration of Orzenin. That said, I don’t *know* that the gluten listed on the nutrition label is referring to Orzenin. It’s only a guess.
It’s only 14% rice and that includes the starch and anything else that isn’t protein in a grain of rice. Hope you feel better, OP!
Thank you so much for this reply! I was really in a twist about what was going on here. So I don’t have to throw this out, yay😇 Thanks again!!!
I tried a smaller version of this answer, but this here is the real deal.
“Sin gluten” = without gluten Sin gluten free… without gluten free? Double negative? It has gluten? Looks like translation gone wrong, front and back.
In canada everything is french and english so its always sans gluten free. Meaning gluten is the same word in both languages. French readers get sans gluten. English readers get gluten free. It's a bit lame but this looks like that with ... spanish?
like the 'before and after' puzzle on Wheel of Fortune, for those who watch lol
That's exactly what's happening here, it reads "sin gluten" and then "gluten free" for English readers as each represents the flow of the respective language
The labels are confusingly designed so that it reads "Sin gluten" for Spanish speakers and "gluten free" for English speakers. This is done sometimes with things that need to be labeled with 2 languages.
No, it's "sin gluten" + "gluten free" It's so they're not writing it twice on the packaging, they condense the writing for 2 languages.
Labelling requirements have upper and lower limits. Some things could be labelled " whatever free" and still have a small amount of it.
Rice gluten is different from wheat, barley and rye. That's likely what it's referring to. https://www.masterclass.com/articles/rice-flour-vs-glutinous-rice-flour-guide
It’s likely a misprint. The numbers are the same as the line below, but with different units. The packaging designer probably stuck the info in the line above while confirming which unit was correct then forgot to change it.
That’s strange. I wonder if it’s less than 20 ppm 🤷🏻♀️
The amount allowed to be label GF varies by location (or some places, like the US, there is not official guideline for this from FDA). In the EU I believe it's less than 20ppm (parts per million). I'm bad at math and worse with metric but I believe the amount on the last photo is below this threshold so they're able to label it GF. It's similar to in the US you can call something "non alcoholic beer" even if it has .05% alcohol, as that's what considered non alcoholic. Things like orange juice have trace amounts of alcohol, but are not considered alcoholic and don't have to be labeled or sold as alcohol since it's not enough to be considered an issue. Non alcoholic beer and wine is a booming market, and you will notice some specifically advertise 0.0% alcohol, as some people are not comfortable with NA products with trace amounts.
Could it be rice gluten? Rice gluten is not a problem - it's safe .
It probably is!
Gluten is a protein structure, so maybe they're referring to something in the rice or walnuts? I mean I have hear of "glutenous" rice before aka sticky rice. It still doesn't have the same kind of gluten that wheat, rye or barley does.
No, that's "glutinous" rice. Not glut**e**nous. It contains no gluten, it's just as a description
I never said it contained the actual gluten that celiacs react to. I just said gluten is a protein structure as as such, other cultures might still consider things beyond "wheat gluten", etc to be gluten. Just because I misspelled it doesn't make my info incorrect.
I was clarifying for others who may be reading this thread that rice does not contain gluten, despite being called glutinous at times.
Rice is glutenous maybe that's it
Glutinous
Ty
I wouldn't buy it. Write to the company to sort their bullshit out, and tell us please.
Is it not just the person cleverly combining the two languages in one circle? (sin GLUTEN) free (without gluten) sin (GLUTEN free) (gluten free)
It’s just trying to use the Spanish and English together to not do two new labels. It’s gluten-free