This headline…may be a bit of an overstatement: "Soy Strawberry Frappuccinos are the latest threat to the vegan community." Vegans are feeling threatened(?) by the revelation that Starbucks Soy Frappuccinos contain insect juice. Specifically, cochineal insect extract used as a reddish food coloring.
Is there really "bug juice" in your Strawberry Frappuccino? Yes!
The Seattle Times has some good reporting on the story:
"The strawberry base for our Strawberries & Crème Frappuccino does contain cochineal extract, a common natural dye that is used in the food industry, and it helps us move away from artificial ingredients," said [Starbucks] spokesman Jim Olson. The base also is used in Starbucks' strawberry smoothies, he said, and the insect-derived extract is in some other foods and drinks the chain sells, including its red velvet whoopie pies.
Cochineal extract and a similar ingredient called carmine, also made from the insects, are bright red and can be found in fruit juices, gelatins and other foods, as well as many makeup products. ….Tropicana's website lists carmine as a colorant in its non-refrigerated ruby red grapefruit juice, and Dole lists cochineal extract as an ingredient in some of its fruit-in-gel products."
For entomologists, this isn't news. I explained the biology of cochineal insects in 2009, the last time that the public "discovered" that there were insect extracts in their food and lipstick. For non-entomologists, it may be slightly less obvious why Starbucks chose to use a dye made from squashed insects in their food.
Cochineal, or carmine, is a red dye produced from an insect (Dactylopius coccus) about the size of a lentil that spends her life sucking the juice of prickly pear cacti. When squished, her guts release a bright, intense red. This color has the ability to remain incredibly stable over time, is stable at high and low pH, and is non-toxic. In other words, it's perfect for processed food or makeup that needs to be colored pink or red.
The alternative to using cochineal is mostly Red 40, which is made from coal tar.
No, seriously. It's made from coal tar.
Or it used to be; looks like it's mostly made from petroleum these days. So, you can see why Starbucks might be looking for an alternative to an artificial dye.
Cochineal has been used by humans for hundreds of years, and provides an important source of cash for a lot of rural Central and South American people. There is some evidence the culture and sale of cochineal leads to more independence and higher female literacy in Mexico. It's entirely consistent with Starbucks' policy to sustainably source their products to use a natural product like cochineal.
There is a change.org petition condemming Starbucks for using insect dyes; I'm tempted to start one to praise them for it! The market for cochineal has been declining steadily, as more Western people discover what it is and freak the fuck out about insects in their food. That means less income traveling to our southern neighbors in the Americas.
I am a bit puzzled that people who willingly eat something called a Soy Strawberry Frappuccino, or [*shudder*] a Starbucks "Red Velvet Whoopie Moon Pie", are concerned about a tiny amount of insect extract. The reality is that anytime you eat processed food–including coffee and chocolate–you ARE eating insects. They may not be on the label, but parts of them are in there.
Americans (both vegans and omnivores) like processed foods, and foods that are fast and convenient. There is a price for having someone else process stuff in bulk–some things will fall in that you might not want to know about. (You SOOO do not ever want to go to a pickle factory. Trust me.)
The only thing that I would criticize Starbucks about in this episode is they need to be more open about the ingredients in their foods in general. Allergies to cochineal are very rare, but they do happen. Many people also want to limit their consumption of certain foods for religious or ethical reasons. (Some insects are considered kosher, but cochineals are not.)
I applaud Starbucks for choosing a sustainable, low-impact food-coloring source!
Now, how about selling bird-friendly coffee, too?
Additional Reading:
Oh, and I'm back (mostly) from my medical leave from Skepchick. Hopefully someone noticed I was gone!
I wonder if they use bug dye in pink slime.
And good to have you back Bug_Girl!
It is not used in pink slime, although some people have tried to suggest it.
Cochineal is actually kind of expensive–it's just not profitable to put it in a product that is already low quality/low price. Also, meat tends to be pink on it's own :)
I didn’t think it was. And even if they used it I wouldn’t have a problem with eating pink slime. It’s what pate’ and meat loaf have been made of for hundreds of years; and not using the trimmings from the butchering process would be very wasteful.
You actually think that for hundreds of years meatloaf has been made from heat and mechanically separated scrap beef that has been treated with ammonia gas or ammonium hydroxide to reduce the salmonella? Really?
You don't think that that material used to be used for pet food? Despite claims to the contrary?
Fine. I don't eat store-ground meat or any fast-food ground, processed meat, so I don't actually care what is put in it. You can eat ground anus all you want. For those who care, buy primal cuts and grind yourself or, you know, eat actual pieces of known meat.
I'll support your petition! but, if you're vegan (which I am not), and really passionate about no (or no known amount) of animal product in your diet, they have a right to know. Hopefully your posts makes the rounds, maybe some won't be so opposed to it. personally, I'm ready for more insects in our food, or even as our food!
Interesting. I didn't know any of this.
I'm not personally bothered by eating bugs (I've done it once or twice), but I don't think it's unreasonable for vegans to be annoyed about this. (Most) vegans don't consume any animal products at all. They don't eat them, they don't wear them, they don't use them in cosmetics, etc.
So, while I agree that it doesn't make sense to use petroleum and coal tar based dye (ick), I can see why they're mad. I think your point about disclosure of ingredients is what needs to be made here.
I guess what I'm saying is that vegans protesting this is not analogous to the general population being icked out by eating bugs or wanting their food to be perfect.
Vegans eat a lot of grains and vegetables. <b>They eat bugs.</b>
omg i keep forgetting i can't use tags!
There is a difference between eating bugs by accident and doing it on purpose. If I drive my bike through a lot of flies and swallow some by accident I am not too bothered (though my throat doesn't like it), but going out to kill insects to use them for a product is different to me. So yes, I avoid carmine.
That old "you can't keep ALL animal products out of your life, so why oppose them at all" is tiring.
You're also already eating bugs in your food.
And it's not like bugs are animals.
I just don't get it, I guess. I get wanting full disclosure, but the idea that bugs are on the same level as animals is, to me, crazy.
How do you mean, bugs are not animals? In what way? They are animals by definition. They are also highly fascinating, they have instincts, physical sensations, hunger, thirst, sex drive. So in what way are they not animals?
Some plants have those same characaristics!
Well, it is impossible to avoid ingredients that are not listed on food, I don't see how that means I can't try my best to avoid animal products.
This is a nice introduction to why insects are fascinating: http://blog.oup.com/2011/11/bug-pain/
Then you migiht want to stop eating plants, too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_perception_(paranormal)
See, my problem is that your argument is "But but … they *might* feel pain! So I won't eat them!"
Well, plants might feel pain, too!
It's just a silly, pointless argument to make against eating bugs.
I get a lot of why veg*ns don't eat non-bug animals, but bugs? Most (and I know there are exceptions) are not in any danger whatsoever of becoming extinct. Most bugs are pretty resilliant, *especially* the types of bugs discussed here. The ethical reasons not to eat animals just … aren't there when it comes to bugs.
Insects are most definitely included in the kingdom Animalia.
And the whole "plant perception" thing is pseudoscience at worst, pure speculation at best. And if you were to find some kind of a "shit non-vegans say" Bingo card, that argument about plants would be right on there with "Where do you get your protein?" It's a pretty tiring argument that's not based in any kind of good evidence.
I'm vegan because I have very good evidence that organisms with central nervous systems can experience suffering. Full stop. I don't have good evidence that other organisms can experience suffering, and I'm certainly not going to starve to death by not eating fungi, plants, algae, and bacteria based on mere speculation.
//Well, plants might feel pain, too!//
lol, pseudoscience.
//And it's not like bugs are animals.//
ORLY… read a biology book lately?
//It's just a silly, pointless argument to make against eating bugs.//
It's a moral argument "don't purposely kill members of the animal Kingdom", and it's not anymore silly/pointless a cause than feminism to us. You're certainly one that doesn't like it when people disrespect your causes blindly, so don't disrespect ours.
//I just can't get that bothered by people making light-hearted jokes about a very priviliged group of people. (If you can live a vegan lifestyle, you are indeed priviliged.)//
This coming from a privleged American white woman. Dude, my extended relatives back in India live a vegan lifestyle (for religious reasons). Their roof is made out of mud and they sell spices at street markets for a living. You can go buy a big pack of meat for $5 whenever you want a Wally World. Who's the priveleged one here?
COMPLETELY agree with this. I've been vegan for more than 15 years. Yes, I know I eat all kinds of animal products without my knowledge (like insects in produce). Yes, I know that tilling the ground results in the deaths of rodents. Blah, blah, blah. To me it's an ethical position, not constant pressure to be perfect. I will do everything in my power to avoid foods made with animal products, so of course that includes something made with cochineal extract.
Also, I really dislike food dyes to begin with. I've had dye-free relish, for example, and it is only SLIGHTLY more muted in color than other relishes. Having slightly brighter food isn't worth it to me.
As a former kosher eater, I must dispute your idea that some insects are kosher. There are currently no kosher insects because the one insect mentioned in the Bible as being kosher, a type of locust, is unidentifiable to modern folks.
Well, your rabbi needs to talk to my rabbi, then. I'm assuming you are referring to Leviticus?
The locust is widely considered to be a grasshopper. I don't really understand your argument–it's like saying since we don't know for sure what "kine" are, we can't eat any livestock.
Hmm. I suppose its a case of "interpretation". I.e., only one grasshopper is "kosher", not all of them. Though, by that standard, the same rabbi should be apposed to the wrong sort of *anything* if it can't be identified, or is a different species, from what they had in the Bible, which wouldn't leave them with a whole lot they could eat. But, yeah, the difference between 'locust' and 'grasshopper' tends to be swarms. Some never increase to sufficient population sizes to create swarms, so never transition into locust. Others, in the right conditions, will, and it triggers a physiological change in the insect, causing them to take on behaviors that they don't normally exhibit, such as eating everything in sight, including each other.
This was posted over at Consumerist and omg people were freaking out. "EW EW EW!"
People, we eat bugs all the time. It's normal.
I am not bothered by this at all and in fact this drink sounds delicious.
Well despite being vegan, I am with you that the public is rife with retardation over this issue. Most aren't disgusted because they're vegan, most are disgusted because they're idiots. They'll bitch and moan about this but go on to happily eat and wear tons of other things with insect products, poo, blood, skunk spray and other "gross" things in them.
In fact, these type of emotional reactions are exactly what campaigns and marketers target. There are strategists working night and day to push the public's buttons like this in order to sell shit or sway opinions.
Most aren't disgusted because they're vegan, most are disgusted because they're idiots. They'll bitch and moan about this but go on to happily eat and wear tons of other things with insect products, poo, blood, skunk spray and other "gross" things in them.
That's my experience at well. When someone says "I would NEVER eat insects/horses/rabbits" I always ask them why they feel it's so "obvious" that this is gross, but pig, cow and chickens is just "normal".
A good alternative is beet juice. Or not using a dye. Or, my personal favorite, not going to Starbucks.
I had a roasted beet margarita the other day in Sedona. It was fantastic. Or was that the taste of tequila?
I'm kind of ashamed of how eating bugs makes me feel. The crunch of chitin gives me chills. Knowing that it's just the fear/disgust training I recieved when I was younger and has no basis in anything reasonable bugs me.
I am right there with you. I'd like to think that in an (unlikely) emergency starvation kind of situation, I'd be able to overcome my grossout issue and eat bugs.
It also has the added benefit of being flavourless. Supertasters–self included–can tell you that the red M&Ms really do taste different! To me, red tastes bitter. My mom is a retired cake decorator, and she used to have food dyes called both red–the usual Red #40–and flavourless red–the carmine. More expensive, but useful when she had to do a large portion of the cake in red.
Huh,that's pretty interesting.
Erin W, I have to wonder: have you done a blind taste test?
That would be a cool experiement. Skepchick-wide blind taste test?
Frosting tinted red definitely tastes worse than frosting tinted other colors, at least when you dabble about in the Wilton's gels like I do (I'm no cake decorator). I'd just written off red altogether, and didn't know about alternatives. I don't think you need a blind taste test for this; it's not subtle at all. But I will definitely participate in a frosting-off if scientists really want to make sure.
I admit to having lacking taste, can barely taste the difference between whole and skim milk, no difference in diet sodas, etc. so, I may not have the best personal experience, but I've never noticed a difference in color (of the same thing, like M&Ms or icing dyed different colors).
I can't taste a difference in candies by color, either. The artificial flavors must drown it out.
Actually, I think you do need a double-blind test for this.
I've never noticed any difference between red M&Ms and other colors (and I've specifically tried to taste this), and that seems to be true of lots of other people. It could be there is no difference in taste, or that some people can taste it and others can't, or it depends on the quantity of food coloring, or the sugar and chocolate in the M&Ms masks the flavor. There are way to many possibilities for anything other than a double-blind test , including subjects who think they can detect it (such as you and Erin W), subjects who think they can't (such as me), and subjects who have no idea one way or the other.
A second reason for a double-blind test is that cognitive biases, especially about something as important as food, are incredibly strong, much stronger than most people assume, and need to be eliminated.
A third reason is SCIENCE!
And finally, the most compelling fourth reason, we get to eat M&Ms. Lots and lots of M&Ms! Sugar! Candy! Chocolate!!!!
Re "Chemical-free," I recently found a product in the herbicide aisle that boasted, "Contains iron, a natural element." As opposed to what, I wondered? Man-made elements such as plutonium perhaps.
Is there a market for a specialty bread that contains the natural elements, carbon, hydrogen and oxygen?
What about natural non-elements? I think dark matter based food wout be chemical-free. A couple of friends and I once tried to work out a new diet/health fad based on string theory. It mostly involved eating long, thin foods, like spaghetti, to make yourself take on the attributes of length and thinness. But all the foods were made of conventional baryonic matter.
I agree if you are ethically opposed to eating animals, including insects, and thus want to avoid them ( though it is virtually impossible to do so) it is a defensible position, even if I don't subscribe to it.
However, objections based on ickiness or some variation of the naturalistic fallacy are completely irrational, so it's ethically okay to mock them. :-)
P.S. for some reason my browser's speel-checker doesn't seem to be working in the new edit box. :-(
COTW for dark matter food :D
I understand your point but as a vegan I wish to *avoid* all animal derived ingredients as far as possible. I'm not obssessed with super clean or perfect food (I buy organic veg through a local box scheme and that's far from sanitised but I believe doing so to be the path of least harm to myself, animals and our environment), I just find it frustrating when an otherwise vegan friendly product includes "hidden" ingredients that are not. Why not just leave the colouring out altogether? For me there is a difference between purposely adding the ingredient and it ending up in there naturally.
YES to the last sentence.
Um. And that is why at the end of this post I said Starbucks should have been more transparent with the ingredients, so those that don't want to eat insects (or other animal products, or non-halal foods) can be informed and avoid what they don't want.
I know, it's just you seemed to be saying that as bugs find their way into our food anyway there was no point in trying to avoid ingredients derived from them.
For those suggesting going dye free, I absolutely agree with you, and think we should. BUT, I can understand companies wanting to put dye in, because our vision does influence our taste. That's why I asked Erin W above about the blind taste test, because color of products do influence how we taste them, as well as our others senses; our brain uses all available senses when tasting (as discussed not too long ago on The Skeptics Guide). I'd prefer to go dye free, because it just seems to keep us in this cycle. Eventually we'd be used to things not always being one certain color and it wouldn't make a difference on taste (I'm sure at first things would taste differently, but eventually you would get used to things not being so colorful). That is why companies often don't go dye free, they've tried it and it doesn't sell because people associate colors with taste.
As far as I can tell, carmine is also listed as "Crimson Lake", "Natural Red 4", "E120', "Natural Coloring". Pretty much everything else is Red 40 (E129, Allura Red, Food Red 17). Bug juice or oil juice. Take your pick.
For me, I'd rather have bug-based dyes. Am I the only one?
agreed, I think the bug based kind sounds better.
Et tu, Pickle?