Mars bars - Not for vegetarians

[danielf]

Originally Posted by bbc

Some of the UK's best-selling chocolate bars, such as Mars and Twix, will no longer be suitable for vegetarians.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6653175.stm

I'm not a vegetarian, and I don't eat Mars bars (or any others), but it seems a strange move to me. Why?

[TheBlueRaja]

HAHAHAHA!!

Classic move, all those vegetarian girls starved of chocolate.

Im sticking BIG cash on a lot of them caving in - now we will see how much they love the fluffy bunnies.

[Delta Whiskey]

It can only be on a cost basis, the animal rennet must be significantly cheaper than the vegetarian version.

[Chris]

Why is it strange? They have never pretended to be a manufacturer of vegetarian foods so why do they need to continue to ensure foods that are vegetarian by chance, continue to be so?

I dislike the quote from the veggie in the article, where they start talking about the 'provenance' of food. In his head, it seems, non-vegetarian ingredients are in the same category as non-organic, or GM. Yet that is not a view that is reflected or supported by society at large and it's a little disingenuous of him to imply otherwise.

I don't think this will affect a great many so-called 'vegetarians' - when I was a teenager, almost all the veggies I knew were faddy girls who made grand gestures out of refusing roast beef or chicken. But I'd lay real money on not a single one of them turning down a bar of chocolate just because somewhere down the line, a tiny quantity of the ingredients came from a cow's stomach.

I've always found principled vegetarianism a little strange anyway. If you avoid animal products as a protest (as opposed to dietary reasons), the logical position is full-on veganism. I don't hear the Vegetarian Society whinging about the milk content of the chocolate though.

[Xaccers]

Urgh the normal source of rennet for vegetarians is fungi or bacteria.
Oh that makes me feel sick. So glad I don't eat mars bars.
Animal rennet comes from the stomach of freshly slaughtered calves.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Chris T

I've always found principled vegetarianism a little strange anyway. If you avoid animal products as a protest (as opposed to dietary reasons), the logical position is full-on veganism. I don't hear the Vegetarian Society whinging about the milk content of the chocolate though.

There is a marked difference between using products derived from dead animals (meat, leather etc) and using products from live animals (milk etc).

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Chris T

Why is it strange? They have never pretended to be a manufacturer of vegetarian foods so why do they need to continue to ensure foods that are vegetarian by chance, continue to be so?

Obviously, they are not under any obligation to produce products suitable for vegetarians. It just seems strange to me to stop doing so (thereby cutting off part of market for your product). I would think the animal Rennet has to be considerably cheaper for it to be worthwhile.

It also seems to go against the trend for 'clean labelling'. People are becoming more concerned about the food they eat. I don't see this as something that would generally be perceived as a step forward.

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by TheBlueRaja

HAHAHAHA!!

Classic move, all those vegetarian girls starved of chocolate.

.

As well as muslims too, as the choccy will no longer be deemed halaal.

Watch out for the burning effigies of mars bar products.......

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

As well as muslims too, as the choccy will no longer be deemed halaal.

Watch out for the burning effigies of mars bar products.......

I suspect Hindus won't be too keen on it either.

Out of interest, does anyone know what percentage of the UK population is vegetarian?

[Nugget]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

As well as muslims too, as the choccy will no longer be deemed halaal.

Watch out for the burning effigies of mars bar products.......

Out of curiosity, are Mars products actually halaal? I always understood that the product / production line had to be blessed (but I'm happy to accept that I'm wrong )

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Nugget

Out of curiosity, are Mars products actually halaal? I always understood that the product / production line had to be blessed (but I'm happy to accept that I'm wrong )

For muslims the only stipulation is that the ingredients are halal. The production line should be 'halal' in terms of nothing thats not halal should be allowed to contaminate halal products. Generally most muslims I knowwill eat anything authorised by the vegetarian standards body as being marked as Suitable for vedggies as long as there is no alcohol content. The production line does not need to be blessed.

I think that for Jews (and for the product to be deemed Kosher) the rules are more stricter and I have known them to extend to the production line not being able to run on a Saturday, and Rabbis have been known to bless/check production lines.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by danielf

Obviously, they are not under any obligation to produce products suitable for vegetarians. It just seems strange to me to stop doing so (thereby cutting off part of market for your product). I would think the animal Rennet has to be considerably cheaper for it to be worthwhile.

It also seems to go against the trend for 'clean labelling'. People are becoming more concerned about the food they eat. I don't see this as something that would generally be perceived as a step forward.

Like the Veg Society you appear to equate public concern over issues of genetic modification, animal welfare and organic production with interest in vegetarianism. I don't think they are in the same category at all.

Labelling something as 'organic' or 'non-GM' or 'free range' definitely appeals to a significant proportion of the market, but does the 'suitable for vegetarians' label have quite the same impact? I don't think so, and clearly Masterfoods doesn't think so either.

I don't think this is a step backwards at all. Those who campaigned for free range, non-GM, organic products appear to have made their case well. Certainly well enough for producers and retailers to take it very seriously. The Vegetarian movement has not made the case for vegetarianism in anything like the same way, which is why I think it's a tad cheeky of them to try to ride on the coat-tails of these other campaigns by attempting to make this an issue of the 'provenance' of the ingredients - as if there is something dirty or unhealthy about ingredients coming from dead animals.

Companies do not generally take such big risks with their core product without being reasonably sure they aren't about to muck it up. Masterfoods clearly doesn't expect sales of the Mars Bar to plummet as a result of this.

[Xaccers]

Ooh hang on, talking of Kosher, if they're mixing milk with meat, then mars bars wouldn't be kosher!
Depends how rennet is viewed...

[Chris]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

There is a marked difference between using products derived from dead animals (meat, leather etc) and using products from live animals (milk etc).

Why is there?

I appreciate that's a nebulous question as people are veggie for all sorts of reasons. That's why I focused on 'principled vegetarianism' in my post rather than on those who have dietary concerns.

If the reason for being a vegetarian have to do with the sanctity of animal life or fears over exploitation, then surely modern factory farming methods should sit very uneasily with a vegetarian even if those methods don't actually involve killing the animal?

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Ooh hang on, talking of Kosher, if they're mixing milk with meat, then mars bars wouldn't be kosher!
Depends how rennet is viewed...

I think all these effect products will lose any form of Kosher/Halal credibility as such. My wife bought this story to my attention saying that the advantage of it would be I might lose some weight!