Myth: gluten-free is automatically healthier

Learn pillar · Myth Buster series · International English (UK · Ireland · US · Canada · Australia · New Zealand) · 2026-09-13. Every market-specific fact below was independently checked against that market’s own regulator or national coeliac body, fetched and dated 2026-09-13.

---

The quick answer. No. “Gluten-free” on a label guarantees only one thing: the product meets that market’s legal gluten limit. It says nothing about sugar, fat, salt or fibre — and the legal limit itself is not the same everywhere. A UK comparison of 679 gluten-free and 1,045 regular products found the gluten-free versions more often high in fat, sugar and salt, more often low in fibre and protein, and 159% more expensive. For coeliacs, a gluten-free diet is the treatment for an autoimmune disease; for everyone else there is no proven benefit, and going gluten-free before testing can hide a diagnosis.

---

We inform, we don’t diagnose or prescribe. If you are wondering whether gluten is a problem for you, the right next step is a blood test while you are still eating gluten — not a new aisle. Your doctor orders it.

Why “gluten-free” and “healthy” got fused

You need gluten-free food. You did not ask for it to be sold to you as a lifestyle.

But it is, across every market this page covers. In the United States, gluten-related conditions affect less than 1% of the population, and gluten-free food sales still passed $15.5 billion in 2016 (Niland & Cash, Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 2018 — fetched 2026-09-13). The gap between those two numbers is the health halo: a medical label that became a wellness badge, and a category that grew by selling to people who do not need it — in Britain and Ireland as much as in Sydney, Toronto or Chicago.

That is worth saying plainly on a site written for people who do need it. The halo is not your fault, and it is not harmless to you either: it is why the free-from aisle is priced the way it is, why strangers tell you they “went gluten-free for a bit”, and why the word on the packet gets treated as a nutrition claim when it is only an ingredient claim — and, as the next section shows, the exact legal meaning of that claim changes at the border.

What packaged gluten-free substitutes actually contain

The claim	What the evidence actually shows
“Gluten-free food is automatically healthier.”	A 2018 UK comparison of 679 gluten-free and 1,045 regular products found the gluten-free versions more often high in fat, sugar and salt, more often low in fibre and protein, and 159% more expensive (Fry et al., 2018). “Gluten-free” is an ingredient claim, not a nutrition claim.
“A gluten-free loaf is an upgrade on the regular one.”	It’s a substitute, not an upgrade. Gluten is structural, so a gluten-free loaf rebuilds the crumb with starches, gums, extra fat and sugar; gluten-free eating tends to run lower in fibre and higher in saturated and hydrogenated fat, with a raised glycaemic index (Vici et al., 2016). Read the nutrition panel, not the front of the pack.
“‘Gluten-free’ means the same thing in every country.”	No. The UK, Ireland, US and Canada set the limit at no more than 20 mg/kg (20 ppm); Australia and New Zealand require no detectable gluten at all — a stricter bar. Gluten-free oats are permitted in the four 20 ppm markets, but no oats may be labelled gluten-free in Australia or New Zealand.
“Gluten-free bread carries the same added nutrients as wheat bread.”	Fortification law is written for wheat flour only — the rice, maize and potato starches behind gluten-free bread sit outside it. Swapping to gluten-free bread quietly removes an iron and B-vitamin top-up in the UK, US, Canada and (since 2023) Australia and New Zealand; in Ireland the top-up was never guaranteed by law, only by imported UK flour.
“Going gluten-free is a healthy choice for anyone.”	For coeliacs it is the treatment for an autoimmune disease, for life. For everyone else the evidence is thin (Niland & Cash, 2018; a 26-year cohort found no link between gluten intake and coronary heart disease, Lebwohl et al., 2017) — and going gluten-free before testing breaks the diagnosis: coeliac blood tests need gluten in the diet, so NICE advises eating some gluten in more than one meal a day for at least 6 weeks before testing.

Take the label at its word. “Gluten-free” is a statement about gluten. The rest of the panel has to be read like any other panel — and the comparison data say it is worth reading.

The most complete label-by-label study we have found is the 2018 UK survey by Fry, Madden and Fallaize in the Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics (fetched 2026-09-13). They pulled the nutrition panels and prices of 679 gluten-free foods and 1,045 comparable regular foods across ten categories from manufacturer and supermarket websites. What they found:

• Fat, saturated fat, sugar and salt. “More GF foods were classified as containing high and medium fat, saturated fat, sugar and salt than regular foods.” Gluten-free bread and flour in particular ran higher in fat and sugar; gluten-free crackers were the exception, lower in both.
• Fibre and protein. Gluten-free items were “more likely to be lower in fibre and protein content.”
• Price. Gluten-free products were “159% more expensive than regular (£0.44/100 g versus £1.14/100 g).”

The authors’ conclusion is the sentence this page hangs on: gluten-free food “is unlikely to offer healthier alternatives to regular foods, except for those who require a GF diet for medically diagnosed conditions.” The mechanism behind it is not a British quirk — a 2016 review in Clinical Nutrition (Vici et al., fetched 2026-09-13) describes the same pattern wherever wheat, rye and barley are removed from a diet: eating tends to be “poor in alimentary fiber due in particular to the necessary avoidance of several kinds of foods naturally rich in fiber”, with “a higher content of both saturated and hydrogenated fatty acids and an increase in the glycemic index”, and intakes of vitamin D, B12, folate, iron, zinc, magnesium and calcium often below recommendations. Gluten is structural — it gives dough its stretch and rise — so a gluten-free loaf rebuilds the crumb with starches, gums, extra fat and sugar wherever in the world it is baked.

None of that makes the free-from aisle a villain. It just means the loaf is a substitute, not an upgrade — and the panel, not the front of the pack, tells you what you are buying.

The label itself doesn’t mean the same thing everywhere

This is the part that changes at every border, and it is the single most important regional fact on this page.

• UK, Ireland, EU, US and Canada all set the “gluten-free” threshold at the same number: no more than 20 mg of gluten per kg of food (20 ppm). In UK and EU law this comes from Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 828/2014 (retained in UK law) — “the statement ‘gluten-free’ may only be made where the food as sold to the final consumer contains no more than 20 mg/kg of gluten” (fetched 2026-09-13) — and Ireland applies the same EU regulation directly as a member state. In the US, 21 CFR 101.91 defines “gluten-free” as a food where “any unavoidable presence of gluten in the food bearing the claim in its labeling is below 20 ppm gluten” (eCFR, fetched 2026-09-13). In Canada, Health Canada’s position under s. B.24.018 of the Food and Drug Regulations is that gluten-free foods with cross-contact “not exceeding 20 ppm” meet the intent of the law — but only for food “specifically processed or formulated” to remove or avoid gluten; a naturally gluten-free food cannot carry the claim at all (Health Canada, fetched 2026-09-13). The same 20 mg/kg figure anchors the international Codex Alimentarius standard (CXS 118-1979, rev. 2015 — fetched 2026-09-13).
• Australia and New Zealand are stricter, and differently built. Under the joint Food Standards Australia New Zealand Code, a “gluten free” claim requires no detectable gluten at all — not a ppm allowance. Coeliac Australia, quoting the Code directly, says a food carrying the claim “must not contain: any detectable gluten” (fetched 2026-09-13); testing (Sandwich ELISA) typically detects down to 1–3 ppm, so in practice the AU/NZ bar sits well below the 20 ppm used elsewhere.
• Oats follow the same split. In the UK, Ireland, EU, US and Canada, oats that are grown, stored and milled to avoid contact with wheat, rye or barley can be sold and labelled gluten-free — Health Canada issued a formal marketing authorisation for this on 29 May 2015, and Celiac Canada’s Professional Advisory Council backs uncontaminated oats as suitable for “the vast majority” of people with coeliac disease under a documented purity protocol (celiac.ca, fetched 2026-09-13). In Australia and New Zealand, no oats may be labelled gluten-free at all, regardless of how they were grown — Coeliac Australia is explicit that the Code’s “gluten free” definition additionally excludes “oats or oat products” outright (fetched 2026-09-13), and Coeliac New Zealand confirms the same rule and additionally “advises against the inclusion of oats in a gluten-free diet due to the risk of contamination”, noting roughly 8% of people with coeliac disease may react even to pure oats (coeliac.org.nz, fetched 2026-09-13) — a more cautious line than Coeliac Australia’s 2025 position, which now treats pure oats as tolerated by most and a matter to raise with your own medical team (coeliac.org.au, fetched 2026-09-13). If you shop in Australia or New Zealand, “gluten-free” on the pack always means oat-free too; if you shop in the other four markets, check the label — a gluten-free product may legitimately contain gluten-free oats.

The practical read: the same two words on a supermarket shelf mean a looser test in four of these six markets and a stricter, oat-excluding test in the other two. Neither is “safer” in the abstract — they are different legal bars, and worth knowing before you assume a product bought in one country would pass in another.

Fortification: the quiet gap, and it depends where you live

There is a second difference that never appears on the front of the packet, and it is set by law (or, in one case, by import patterns), not by the baker.

• UK. The Bread and Flour Regulations 1998 require calcium, iron, thiamin and niacin to be added to flour milled from common wheat, with wholemeal flour exempt (reg. 4, legislation.gov.uk, fetched 2026-09-13). A 2024 amendment adds folic acid at 0.250 mg per 100 g of non-wholemeal wheat flour in England, in force from 13 December 2026 (SI 2024/1162 — fetched 2026-09-13).
• Ireland. Ireland has no domestic mandatory fortification law of its own — the Food Safety Authority of Ireland states plainly that “there is no legal requirement to fortify flour in the Republic of Ireland” (fsai.ie, fetched 2026-09-13). In practice most bread eaten in Ireland ends up fortified anyway, because Ireland imports roughly 70% of its flour from the UK (49% from Great Britain, 21% from Northern Ireland), where fortification is mandatory — so the nutrient top-up an Irish shopper gets depends on where the flour was milled, not on Irish law.
• United States. Flour sold as “enriched flour” must carry, per pound, 2.9 mg thiamin, 1.8 mg riboflavin, 24 mg niacin, 0.7 mg folic acid and 20 mg iron (21 CFR 137.165 — fetched 2026-09-13).
• Canada. White (enriched) flour must contain, per 100 g, 0.64 mg thiamine, 0.40 mg riboflavin, 5.30 mg niacin, 0.15 mg folic acid and 4.4 mg iron under s. B.13.001 of the Food and Drug Regulations — and the regulation explicitly exempts flour sold for making gluten or starch, the very inputs behind most gluten-free products (laws-lois.justice.gc.ca, fetched 2026-09-13).
• Australia. Folic acid fortification of wheat flour for bread-making has been mandatory since September 2009, alongside thiamin fortification, under the Food Standards Code (FSANZ, fetched 2026-09-13).
• New Zealand. Folic acid fortification of non-organic, bread-making wheat flour has been mandatory only since 14 August 2023 — before that it ran on a voluntary code covering an estimated 25–50% of bread from 2014 (MPI / Bakeinfo, fetched 2026-09-13). So even though Australia and New Zealand share one food code and the strictest gluten-free labelling rule of the six markets here, they moved to mandatory fortification nearly fourteen years apart.

In every fortifying market, the fortification standard is written for wheat flour and no other cereal — the rice, maize and potato starches behind most gluten-free bread sit outside it, wherever you live. The practical version: swapping wheat bread for gluten-free bread quietly removes an iron and B-vitamin top-up in the UK, the US, Canada and (since 2023) New Zealand and Australia; in Ireland the top-up was never guaranteed by law in the first place, only by the accident of where the flour was milled. Either way, gluten-free bread is still usually the thinner grain (Vici et al. 2016 — fetched 2026-09-13), and the answer is the same wherever you live: build the plate around naturally gluten-free wholegrains, covered in the next-but-one section.

Coeliac disease is not a wellness choice

Here is the line that the halo blurs, and that we will not, in any of these six countries.

Coeliac disease is, in Coeliac UK’s words, “a serious autoimmune condition where the body’s immune system reacts to gluten” — “not an allergy or food intolerance and the only treatment is a strict gluten free diet for life” (fetched 2026-09-13). The scale is broadly similar everywhere this page reaches, and every figure below comes from that country’s own national body:

• UK — around 1 in 100 people have coeliac disease; only 36% are diagnosed (Coeliac UK, fetched 2026-09-13).
• Ireland — around 1 in 100, with newer estimates closer to 1 in 75; roughly two-thirds remain undiagnosed (Coeliac Society of Ireland, fetched 2026-09-13).
• United States — a general-population risk of about 1 in 100, rising to roughly 1 in 10 among first-degree relatives (Celiac Disease Foundation, fetched 2026-09-13).
• Canada — nearly 1% of the population, or about 1 in 114 Canadians, with roughly 90% undiagnosed (Canadian Digestive Health Foundation, fetched 2026-09-13).
• Australia and New Zealand — commonly cited at around 1 in 70 people in New Zealand, with many undiagnosed (Coeliac New Zealand, fetched 2026-09-13).

For those people — and for many with non-coeliac gluten sensitivity, wheat allergy or dermatitis herpetiformis — gluten-free is not a diet in the magazine sense. It is treatment, or symptom control, and it does not come with a finish line.

For everyone else, the evidence for going gluten-free is thin. Niland and Cash’s 2018 review puts it this way: “high-quality evidence supporting gluten avoidance for physical symptoms or diseases other than those specifically known to be caused by immune-mediated responses to gluten is neither robust nor convincing.” The largest long-term study on the heart question — 64,714 women and 45,303 men without coeliac disease, followed for 26 years — found gluten intake was not associated with coronary heart disease; if anything, the point estimate ran slightly worse for the lowest-gluten group, though the confidence interval crossed 1 (not a statistically significant difference), and the authors point to the fibre story above: “the avoidance of gluten may result in reduced consumption of beneficial whole grains” (Lebwohl et al., BMJ, 2017 — fetched 2026-09-13). Their closing line: “promotion of gluten-free diets among people without celiac disease should not be encouraged.”

And there is one way in which going gluten-free without a diagnosis actively does harm, in every one of these markets: it breaks the test. Coeliac blood tests look for the immune response to gluten, so they only work while you are eating it.

• In the UK, NICE’s guideline tells clinicians to “advise people who are following a normal diet (containing gluten) to eat some gluten in more than 1 meal every day for at least 6 weeks before testing” and not to start a gluten-free diet before specialist confirmation (NICE NG20 — fetched 2026-09-13).
• In Ireland, the Coeliac Society is just as direct: “it is best to continue to eat gluten until someone has been fully tested”; if you have already cut it out, “at least 2 slices of ordinary bread everyday for six weeks” beforehand is the recommended reset (coeliac.ie, fetched 2026-09-13).
• In the United States, the Celiac Disease Foundation states “you must be on a gluten-containing diet for antibody (blood) testing to be accurate” (celiac.org, fetched 2026-09-13).
• In Canada, the same principle holds — an antibody test needs gluten in the diet to be reliable, and the Canadian Digestive Health Foundation notes that even a partial cut can blunt the result, let alone full elimination (cdhf.ca, fetched 2026-09-13).

So if a friend says gluten-free “made them feel better”, the kind answer is not “you’re imagining it”. It is: get tested before you go any further, in whichever of these countries you live — because in every one of them, a large share of people with coeliac disease started out exactly the same way, undiagnosed.

What a balanced gluten-free diet actually needs

The good news is that the halo and the gap have the same cure, and it is not a supplement. It is where the plate comes from.

Build from naturally gluten-free whole foods. Fruit, vegetables, potatoes, rice, pulses, eggs, unprocessed meat and fish, plain dairy, nuts and seeds contain no gluten and need no label to prove it. What decides whether a food is suitable is the ingredient list — no wheat, barley, rye, malt — not a badge. A “gluten-free” mark is a convenience for processed or cross-contact-risk products like flour and oats, never a requirement for something that was never near gluten to begin with.

Go fibre-forward with the grains and flours. Coeliac UK’s target — 30 g of fibre a day for adults, 15–25 g for children over two — is a useful benchmark wherever you live, and it says outright that a gluten-free diet “can be low in fibre and wholegrains due to the removal of the cereals wheat, rye and barley” (fetched 2026-09-13). Naturally gluten-free wholegrains are your shopping list everywhere in this region: brown rice, corn, amaranth, buckwheat, millet, quinoa and sorghum, plus fruit, vegetables, pulses, nuts, seeds and dried fruit. Our Flour Library has entries on buckwheat flour, sorghum flour and quinoa flour — what each does in a dough and how to check the packet.

Know your market’s oats rule before you reach for them. In the UK, Ireland, US and Canada, gluten-free oats are a legitimate, fibre-dense addition — our coeliac alphabet entry on oats covers how the purity protocol works and what to check on the packet. In Australia and New Zealand, no product may be labelled gluten-free if it contains any oats at all, so a wholegrain shopping list there leans instead on brown rice, buckwheat, quinoa, sorghum and millet.

Choose the wholegrain version when you do buy the substitute. Gluten-free bread, pasta and flour blends exist and you will use them. Pick the wholegrain, multigrain or added-fibre versions over the white, and read the sugar and salt lines like you would on anything else (Fry et al., 2018 — fetched 2026-09-13).

Know your market’s fortification rule. In the UK, US, Canada and (since 2023) Australia and New Zealand, the everyday wheat loaf carries added iron and B vitamins that the gluten-free one usually does not; in Ireland the top-up depends on whether the flour was milled locally or imported from the UK. Either way, iron, folate, B12 and vitamin D are the nutrients a coeliac clinic checks at diagnosis and follow-up, and the plate above is how you cover them between blood tests. A supplement is a decision for the clinician who has your numbers, never a default.

Keep nutrition and cross-contact risk in separate boxes. Whether a food is low in cross-contact risk and whether it is nutritious are two different questions with two different answers. Our Cross-Contact 101 covers the first question — how kitchens handle shared surfaces, fryers and utensils; this page is the second. Our methodology page explains how we check every claim we publish, including the ones on this page.

FAQ

Is gluten-free food healthier than regular food?
No, in every market this page covers. The label guarantees only the absence of gluten above that country’s legal limit. In a 2018 UK comparison of 679 gluten-free and 1,045 regular products, the gluten-free versions were more often high in fat, sugar and salt and more often low in fibre and protein — and cost 159% more (Fry et al., J Hum Nutr Diet, 2018 — fetched 2026-09-13).

Does “gluten-free” mean the same thing in every English-speaking country?
No — this is the biggest regional catch. In the UK, Ireland, US and Canada, “gluten-free” means no more than 20 mg of gluten per kg of food (20 ppm), and gluten-free oats are permitted. In Australia and New Zealand, the Food Standards Code requires no detectable gluten at all, and no oats may be labelled gluten-free under any circumstances (Coeliac Australia; Coeliac New Zealand — both fetched 2026-09-13). A product legally “gluten-free” in London or Toronto is not automatically compliant with the Australian or New Zealand rule.

Can coeliacs eat gluten-free oats?
It depends where you are. In the UK, Ireland, US and Canada, oats produced under a documented purity protocol can be labelled gluten-free and are considered suitable for most people with coeliac disease, though a small minority react even to pure oats (Celiac Canada, fetched 2026-09-13). In Australia and New Zealand, the law does not permit an oats-containing product to carry the “gluten-free” claim at all, and Coeliac New Zealand specifically advises against including oats in a gluten-free diet, while Coeliac Australia’s 2025 position treats pure oats as an individual decision to make with your medical team (both fetched 2026-09-13).

Are there risks in going gluten-free without a coeliac diagnosis?
Yes, and it holds across all six markets: it can make coeliac blood tests unreliable, because the tests need gluten in the diet beforehand — NICE in the UK says at least 6 weeks; the Coeliac Society of Ireland and the Celiac Disease Foundation (US) say the same in substance (all fetched 2026-09-13) — and going gluten-free without medical reason tends to lower wholegrain and fibre intake (Lebwohl et al. 2017; Vici et al. 2016). Get tested first.

Does a “gluten-free” label mean the product is nutritious?
No — it means the product meets that market’s legal gluten threshold, and, as above, that threshold itself is not the same everywhere. Sugar, fat, salt and fibre are on the nutrition panel, not the front-of-pack claim, and that is where to look regardless of which of these six countries you are shopping in.

---

Sources (all fetched 2026-09-13)

1. Fry L, Madden AM, Fallaize R. An investigation into the nutritional composition and cost of gluten-free versus regular food products in the UK. J Hum Nutr Diet 2018;31(1):108–120, DOI 10.1111/jhn.12502.
2. Vici G, Belli L, Biondi M, Polzonetti V. Gluten free diet and nutrient deficiencies: A review. Clin Nutr 2016;35(6):1236–1241, DOI 10.1016/j.clnu.2016.05.002.
3. Lebwohl B et al. Long term gluten consumption in adults without celiac disease and risk of coronary heart disease: prospective cohort study. BMJ 2017;357:j1892.
4. Niland B, Cash BD. Health Benefits and Adverse Effects of a Gluten-Free Diet in Non-Celiac Disease Patients. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y) 2018;14(2):82–91.
5. NICE NG20 — Coeliac disease: recognition, assessment and management: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK343373/ — recs 24–25.
6. Coeliac UK — About coeliac disease: https://www.coeliac.org.uk/information-and-support/coeliac-disease/about-coeliac-disease/
7. Coeliac UK — Fibre: https://www.coeliac.org.uk/living-with-coeliac-disease/health-and-wellbeing/keeping-healthy/keeping-a-balanced-diet/fibre/
8. UK — Bread and Flour Regulations 1998, reg. 4: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1998/141/regulation/4
9. UK — The Bread and Flour (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2024, SI 2024/1162: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2024/1162/made
10. Coeliac Society of Ireland — Frequently Asked Questions (definition, prevalence, gluten challenge before testing): https://coeliac.ie/frequently-asked-questions/
11. Food Safety Authority of Ireland — UK flour fortified with folic acid Q&A (no Irish domestic fortification mandate; ~70% of flour imported from the UK): https://www.fsai.ie/consumer-advice/food-labelling/uk-flour-fortified-with-folic-acid-q-a
12. US — 21 CFR 101.91, Gluten-free labeling of food: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/21/101.91
13. US — 21 CFR 137.165, Enriched flour: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2024-title21-vol2/xml/CFR-2024-title21-vol2-sec137-165.xml
14. Celiac Disease Foundation (US) — Screening and diagnosis: https://celiac.org/about-celiac-disease/screening-and-diagnosis/screening/
15. Health Canada — Position on Gluten-Free Claims (B.24.018, 20 ppm, “specifically processed or formulated” test): found via https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/food-nutrition/food-safety/food-allergies-intolerances/celiac-disease/health-canada-position-gluten-free-claims.html
16. Celiac Canada — Oats position statement and purity protocol: https://www.celiac.ca/living-gluten-free/oats-statement/
17. Canada — Food and Drug Regulations, s. B.13.001, flour enrichment levels (and gluten/starch-flour exemption): https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/C.R.C.,_c._870/section-B.13.001.html
18. Canadian Digestive Health Foundation — Celiac disease (prevalence, testing note): https://cdhf.ca/en/digestive-conditions/celiac-disease/
19. Coeliac Australia — Making a gluten free claim (no detectable gluten; oats excluded; ELISA limit of detection): https://coeliac.org.au/for-business/making-a-gluten-free-claim/
20. Coeliac Australia — Oats and the gluten free diet (2025 position): https://coeliac.org.au/article/oats-and-the-gluten-free-diet/
21. Coeliac New Zealand — Position statement: Oats and coeliac disease: https://coeliac.org.nz/coeliac-nz-position-statement-oats-and-coeliac-disease/ (also cites ~1 in 70 NZ prevalence)
22. Food Standards Australia New Zealand — Folic acid fortification (mandatory): https://www.foodstandards.gov.au/consumer/food-fortification/folic-acid/mandatory
23. New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industries / Bakeinfo — Mandatory folic acid fortification of bread-making flour, in force 14 August 2023 (previously voluntary from 2014): https://www.mpi.govt.nz/food-business/bakery-and-grain-based-products/folic-acid-fortification-of-bread ; https://www.bakeinfo.co.nz/mandatory-fortification-of-bread-making-flour/
24. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 828/2014, Annex (“gluten-free” statement, ≤20 mg/kg): https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32014R0828
25. Codex Alimentarius — CXS 118-1979, rev. 2015 (20 mg/kg threshold): https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/sh-proxy/en/?lnk=1&url=https://workspace.fao.org/sites/codex/Standards/CXS+118-1979/CXS_118e_2015.pdf