From the extremely entertaining “How to Become a Federal Criminal: An Illustrated Handbook for the Aspiring Offender” by Mike Chase.

We begin with the bread, the foundation of any ham and cheese sandwich. Bakery products fall squarely in FDA jurisdiction.

One regulation promulgated by the FDA, Title 21, Section 136.110, of the Code of Federal Regulations, is appropriately entitled “Bread, rolls and buns.” It sets the requirements for the most basic of bread products. For example, if the sandwich is going to be served on “egg bread,” the FDA is of the view that the bread had better contain at least 2.56 percent egg solids by weight. There are also other more nuanced bread regulations, like how raisin-y “raisin bread” must be (at least 50 parts by weight for each 100 parts by weight of flour), and that “milk buns” can’t contain any buttermilk.

Then comes the ham. Without it, we’re just going to end up with a cold cheese sandwich on our hands, and that would be sad. But this is also where the USDA enters the picture.

Ham is a meat product subject to regulation by the USDA under Title 9 of the C.F.R. Before it leaves the slaughterhouse, the ham has to be inspected by the USDA and approved for human consumption.

Next, it’s time to add the cheese to our crime sandwich. There are dozens of regulations governing the cheese itself. But whether the cheese is compliant with the federal regulations or not is only part of our concern. One slice of bread, some ham, and a piece of cheese technically make an open-face ham-and-cheese sandwich. Pursuant to the FDA’s Investigations Operations Manual, open-face sandwiches are in the investigative jurisdiction of the USDA. Once the meat-to-bread ratio hits 50:50 on a single slice of bread, the USDA calls the shots. Add a second slice of bread, however, and you now have a closed-face sandwich, and you’re back in FDA jurisdiction.

  • @nelly_man
    link
    English
    4
    edit-2
    56 minutes ago

    Along the same lines, because alcohol is regulated by the ATF and nutrition labels are a requirement from the FDA, alcoholic beverages don’t need to include nutritional information. As somebody who restricts their diet of certain ingredients, I find the lack of listed allergens or ingredients annoying.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      29 minutes ago

      As someone with allergies, it is fucking infuriating. I go by web searches and whether a drink is physically painful nearly immediately.

    • Flying SquidOP
      link
      156 minutes ago

      However, it is against federal law for alcohol sellers to suggest their product is intoxicating.

  • IninewCrow
    link
    fedilink
    English
    209 hours ago

    We’re heading backwards in regulations and we might as well apply tactics from a hundred years ago … don’t be the first in line to try a new eatery, let everyone test it first and wait a month to see what happens.

  • @Lost_My_Mind
    link
    7613 hours ago

    TLDR: Whatever the top layer is, that’s who regulates it. Throw some coaxel cable on top and the FCC would regulate it. Throw some internet on top, and the FCC would try their hardest to NOT regulate it.

    • @QuarterSwede
      link
      11 hour ago

      Seems like what it’s saying is the ratio is what matters. Who has the most regulatory jurisdiction? They’re the ones calling the shots.

    • pruwyben
      link
      fedilink
      95 hours ago

      If the USDA comes to regulate your open faced sandwich, just turn it upside down and they will no longer have any authority.

  • @MumboJumbo
    link
    6113 hours ago

    From Obama’s 2011 SotU Address: “The Interior Department is in charge of salmon while they’re in fresh water, but the Commerce Department handles them in when they’re in saltwater. And I hear it gets even more complicated once they’re smoked.”

    Source

    • @RizzRustbolt
      link
      109 hours ago

      Every regulation is written in blood.

      Really makes you think… about just how fucked up salmon production is.

      • Diplomjodler
        link
        125 hours ago

        Safety regulations are written in blood. But that doesn’t mean there have to be multiple agencies constantly fighting turf wars over who gets to regulate what.

  • Mayor Poopington
    link
    English
    2613 hours ago

    National Institute of Standards and Technology probably. Seriously, you can get NIST peanut butter. It’s stupidly expensive, but it is the industry standard of what peanut butter should be. I’m sure they have a definition for a ham sandwich.

    • metaStatic
      link
      fedilink
      913 hours ago

      It’s stupidly expensive

      I’d wager they don’t replace the peanut oil with cheap toxic waste seed oils like everyone else

      • @turmacar
        link
        26
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        It’s hundreds or thousands of dollars for a small jar.

        The point of NIST foodstuffs is to test industrial equipment / cleaning chemicals / etc. against a standard, not to eat. IIRC Tom Scott has a video about’m.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          1212 hours ago

          NIST peanut butter is the (analytical) standard, all tests are done with that stuff as a reference (or part of reference). That’s why it’s so expensive, it has to be very consistent

        • metaStatic
          link
          fedilink
          1113 hours ago

          oh, right, that stuff. heard about it before and it’s nuts.

          • @toynbee
            link
            44 hours ago

            He does, and the commenters had many varied opinions about it: https://youtu.be/crjxpZHv7Hk

            Veritasium also has a video on standards: https://youtu.be/esQyYGezS7c

            Tom Scott also has a video about it, but a quick search returns several possible results and (despite his probably being the best) I don’t remember enough about it to determine which is the correct one nor enough time to watch and determine.