British allergen labelling is better than it was, and still easy to misread. The law is designed so that a person with an allergy can see, in one place, whether a food contains one of fourteen specified substances. It is not designed to make marketing departments comfortable, and it is not a substitute for a kitchen that knows what it is doing.

This is a field guide, not legal advice. If you are labelling food for sale, you need a qualified process. If you are buying food for someone who can be harmed by an allergen, you need the habit of reading the back of the pack every time — recipes change.

The fourteen

UK retained food information law (aligned with the EU list that shoppers already know) requires emphasis — usually bold — on these allergens when they are used as ingredients:

Oats appear on that list as a cereal containing gluten. A product can still be labelled gluten-free if it meets the legal threshold and the oats are controlled. The bold word “oats” on an ingredients list is a prompt to check the claim, not an automatic veto.

What bold type does — and does not — mean

Bold means: this ingredient is, or is derived from, one of the fourteen. It does not mean “this is the dangerous bit and the rest is fine”. It does not grade severity. It does not tell you about cross-contamination in the factory.

Precautionary “may contain” statements are voluntary. They are not standardised. “May contain milk” and “made in a factory that also handles milk” are not legally equivalent to an ingredient. For some people they are, in practice, a reason to put the pack back. For others, with clinical advice, they are a risk to be weighed. A serious brand treats them as a last resort after a proper assessment, not as a legal umbrella sprinkled on every SKU.

Natasha’s Law

Since October 2021, food that is pre-packed for direct sale (PPDS) in the UK must carry a full ingredients list with allergens emphasised — the baguette filled in the shop and wrapped, the salad box assembled behind the counter and put in the fridge. Natasha’s Law was named for Natasha Ednan-Laperouse, who died after eating a baguette that did not declare sesame.

It does not cover food packed by the customer, or food served on a plate. It does cover a great many of the things a hurried person grabs at lunch. If a packed sandwich has no ingredients list, it is not compliant, and it is not a bargain.

Gluten-free, dairy-free, and the thresholds

A “gluten-free” claim in Great Britain generally requires the food as sold to contain no more than 20 mg/kg of gluten. “Very low gluten” is a separate, less common claim. “Dairy-free” is not defined with the same numerical neatness; milk is an allergen that must be declared when used as an ingredient, and residual milk in a dark chocolate, for example, is a matter of process and testing, not of hope.

Vegan is not the same as milk-free. A vegan claim speaks to composition and, usually, to animal products. It is not an allergen control claim. Plenty of vegan foods are made on lines that also handle milk. If the need is clinical, read the allergen box, not the green leaf.

The safest label is a boring one: ingredients you recognise, allergens in bold, and a manufacturer who can be reached.

How we would label this shop

The archive products on this site are not for sale, so they carry no statutory pack. If they were commercialised by a future owner, the standard should be: full ingredients; the fourteen in bold; a plain-English free-from line that matches the testing; no decorative “clean” claims that duplicate the law; a contact address that is a person, not a void.

Labelling is part of the hospitality. It is also, in this category, part of the brand.

This essay is original to Free From Shop. It is not medical or legal advice. For clinical questions, speak to a qualified professional; for labelling a food business, take qualified advice.