Talk:Polyglycerol polyricinoleate

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Chemicals Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Basis[edit]

I am the original author of this entry and the use of PGPR to cut down on the amount of cocoa butter needed in chocolate is true. Here is one link that supports this (http://www.danisco.com/cms/connect/corporate/products%20and%20services/product%20range/emulsifiers/pgpr/pgpr_en.htm) and there are many others that you can find easily on Google.

Yes, it is also used as an emulsifier and while it is more expensive per ounce than soy lecithin, far less of it is needed in products; hence it is way cheaper. --Aaron Proot-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaronproot (talk • contribs) 15:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would consider removing the term "lower-grade". I first found the ingredient in the label for Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, and while it's not high-end chocolate by any means, it's not the waxy stuff you find in chocolate bunnies in the US around Easter time. Yarnover 00:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This obviously has been altered by a flack for the people who make PGPR. There are numerous articles about how PGPR is used to cut down on the amount of cocoa butter needed to make chocolate bars. The low grade chocolate bar reference refers to the fact that it's only used in cheap candy bars like those made by Hersheys and Nestle. You don't see it in higher end bars. --Aaron Proot-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaronproot (talk • contribs) 21:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation of Nothing?[edit]

"but no evidence has been presented that any commercially available PGPR products are made using animal-derived substances [citation needed]" - How can someone produce a citation of something not being presented? Unless evidence is presented, this sentence is correct. When and if someone does present evidence, that should be cited. ByteofKnowledge (talk) 13:12, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Vegan Society page for animal substances in food that includes PGPR E476 as a potential non-vegan ingredient (http://www.vegansociety.com/lifestyle/animal-substances.aspx) now includes a note at the bottom that states "The website www.food-info.net has a list of all e-numbers and details of whether or not they are suitable for vegans." Then if we go to that site, which is apparently compiled by several universities, and look up E476 (http://www.food-info.net/uk/e/e476.htm) we see that it says, "E476 can be consumed by all religious groups, vegans and vegetarians." This is a bit confusing but food-info.net does not provide their source either. Twocs (talk) 15:10, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging[edit]

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 17:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural references[edit]

I don't know if it makes sense to add cultural references for chemicals. I just wanted to point out here that PGPR is mentioned in the TV series Sherlock, episode "The Reichenbach Fall", where the hero concludes the location of kidnapped children being a disused sweets factory by analysing the kidnapper's shoeprint residues and finding, amongst other things, PGPR. I came here to check on what PGPR actually is. Cudos to the writers of the series for going into such detail. --92.105.89.67 (talk) 16:40, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get an unbiased account of this additive?[edit]

It is very apparent that this article was written by a person who is either involved in the making of this additive or its use is vital to the author. Therefore, I will be submitting it for review as a biased article. Wikipedia is not a place for marketing or PR, the fact that this additive causes significant swelling of the liver is not mentioned which led me to my original suspicion. Pookerella (talk) 22:39, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that info. Saves me from buying a Mounds bar that has this weird ingredient listed. It would also appear that Google has completely removed all indications of this being a carcinogen, a toxic ingredient and Google now lists nothing PAST page 14. ALL of Google is now completely biased and untrustworthy. All real results have been deleted from Google meaning we cannot find anything past p14. When are conservatives going to create a non-woke, non bull search engine?? 98.154.31.242 (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Polyglycerol polyricinoleate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150520131308/http://www.progressive-charlestown.com:80/2012/02/things-you-probably-dont-want-to-know.html to http://www.progressive-charlestown.com/2012/02/things-you-probably-dont-want-to-know.html/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:52, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]