Pastry Ideale Gold Dust Reviews?

Decorating By taartenmaker Updated 26 Feb 2015 , 4:49pm by Dayti

taartenmaker Posted 24 Feb 2015 , 12:50am
post #1 of 35

i saw this gold dust on the internet and i was wondering if anyone has used it and if it looks nice or not?

 

 

34 replies
cakebaby2 Posted 24 Feb 2015 , 1:51am
post #2 of 35

Does it say "inedible"? You can buy edible gold leaf flakes on Amazon. That one looks nice but not much use except for cake dummies.

costumeczar Posted 24 Feb 2015 , 3:09am
post #3 of 35

I sell that in my shop...It's labelled decorative use only, but I would have no problem eating a piece of fondant that had some on it. I wouldn't chug it from the jar, but it's from Italy, and to go through the FDA process to get it labelled non-toxic is probably more trouble than they're interested in. Based on how it smells I think it has copper in it. If it was made in the US it would probably be labelled non-toxic, which is the same as any other luster dust.

 

It gives you a REALLY good gold shine, but it's seriously metallic smelling and I suspect that it would get darker if you left it on a dummy for any length of time. It would probably oxidize a little, 

 

On the topic of real gold, unless you get culinary-grade gold you're not going to get a truly "edible" gold. And any gold that you can dissolve and spread like paint isn't going to be 100% gold. I just bought some gold dust that arrived today and used some to see if I could get it to spread on like a paint, and it just doesn't work if you're dealing with 100% gold. It's a metal and metal doesn't dissolve, so you can't make a smooth paint unless you add other things to it. I was going to do a video tomorrow to show what different application methods look like, but the basic result is that if you can spread it like a paint it probably isn't 100% edible culinary gold.

costumeczar Posted 24 Feb 2015 , 3:13am
post #4 of 35

And if you're just planning on putting it on gumpaste, you can tell whoever you do the cake for not to eat it and it will be a moot point anyway :wink:

taartenmaker Posted 24 Feb 2015 , 3:16am
post #5 of 35

Quote:

Originally Posted by costumeczar 
 

I sell that in my shop...It's labelled decorative use only, but I would have no problem eating a piece of fondant that had some on it. I wouldn't chug it from the jar, but it's from Italy, and to go through the FDA process to get it labelled non-toxic is probably more trouble than they're interested in. Based on how it smells I think it has copper in it. If it was made in the US it would probably be labelled non-toxic, which is the same as any other luster dust.

 

It gives you a REALLY good gold shine, but it's seriously metallic smelling and I suspect that it would get darker if you left it on a dummy for any length of time. It would probably oxidize a little, 

 

On the topic of real gold, unless you get culinary-grade gold you're not going to get a truly "edible" gold. And any gold that you can dissolve and spread like paint isn't going to be 100% gold. I just bought some gold dust that arrived today and used some to see if I could get it to spread on like a paint, and it just doesn't work if you're dealing with 100% gold. It's a metal and metal doesn't dissolve, so you can't make a smooth paint unless you add other things to it. I was going to do a video tomorrow to show what different application methods look like, but the basic result is that if you can spread it like a paint it probably isn't 100% edible culinary gold.

thank you so much for your reply, it's so helpfull! i had my doubts about this product because its much cheaper than the gold highlighter from globalsugarart. could you maybe take a pic of this powder on a piece of fondant if its not to much trouble ?

costumeczar Posted 24 Feb 2015 , 3:49am
post #6 of 35

Looing at the Global Sugar Art one, I'd say that it's probably similar to the Ideal, maybe a little lighter. It says it's for decorative use only, but I really do think that most gold luster dusts are going to be labelled that way because they're not real food-grade gold, and the FDA rules are what they are.

 

I paid about $40 for a tiny bottle of 23.5K culinary gold dust, so there's no freakin' way that a 2 gram pot of anything that has real gold in it is going to cost $5, forget it. It's all fakey fakey no matter what anyone says. One of my friends had a luster dust tah said it was gold but it was labelled that way as a color, not as the real thing, so it was deceptive.

 

 

I took this to show the difference...These are the regular super gold luster dust on the left and the Ideal on the right. It's darker but it's still gold. For accents I'd use the ideal, but if I was going to paint a large area I'd mix the two together to lighten the color a little. The Ideal has a much better shine than the super gold. 

costumeczar Posted 24 Feb 2015 , 3:56am
post #7 of 35

It's definitely a little darker than the super gold is, but the shine is much better.

 

 

costumeczar Posted 24 Feb 2015 , 1:22pm
post #8 of 35

I've been looking up information on edible metallics today and I thought to check the labelling on the Ideal. All it says it "bronze-based powder" so it's copper and something else, probably tin or aluminum. Don't know why I didn't think to check that before, or maybe I did and since it wasn't more specific I ignored it.

Dayti Posted 24 Feb 2015 , 4:42pm
post #9 of 35

I did Nicholas Lodge's Craftsy class, the one about modern lettering and monograms, and this is the brand he uses. It looked super shiny in his class and Costumes photos show that it really is shinier than regular lustre dust. He used it to make pipeable metallic icing too, and that's what I really want it for. I tried it with his recipe from the class and regular lustre...just didn't turn out the same to be honest. Ideale looks the way to go.

costumeczar Posted 24 Feb 2015 , 8:02pm
post #10 of 35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dayti 
 

I did Nicholas Lodge's Craftsy class, the one about modern lettering and monograms, and this is the brand he uses. It looked super shiny in his class and Costumes photos show that it really is shinier than regular lustre dust. He used it to make pipeable metallic icing too, and that's what I really want it for. I tried it with his recipe from the class and regular lustre...just didn't turn out the same to be honest. Ideale looks the way to go.


I just did a video about gold dusts since there are so many people saying they're selling real gold dust and it's not. The Ideale says that it's for decoration only so I wouldn't put it in piped items, but honestly, based on the ingredients of most of the dusts out there it's no worse than the other ones, even the ones that say they're edible. The FDA makes you jump through hoops to get FDA approval to say something's edible, but if you don't you can label it non-toxic for decorative use only and still sell it from what I understand. It's very tricky.

maybenot Posted 25 Feb 2015 , 2:01am
post #11 of 35

Albert Uster sells the Ideale [auiswiss.com] and they're good at providing additional information about using their products. 

 

I believe that it's "for decoration only, non toxic", so it should be used only on decorations that will be removed before eating.

 

I've just been in contact with the FDA about the use of "unapproved food additives"--and this would qualify as such.  The agency was very clear that use of such things on food is a "violation of the FD&C Act and may be subject to enforcement action."

 

I know people like to dismiss such information with a lot of "reasons", but it is a fact and there can be future consequences.  If the item is going to be eaten, then an edible product should be used.

kayteetrudeau Posted 25 Feb 2015 , 3:13am
post #12 of 35

We used it at Sweet & Saucy when I was there, and while it works well, and stays on well when you touch it while its dry, its color is more of a rose type gold, and was rather difficult to match with truer golds, like gold leaf or even those gold glittery laser cut toppers that are in style. Now I'm at Sweet Fix and we are using Global Sugar Arts gold highlighter, and I much prefer the color, though it transfers horribly if you touch it while dry. Take the good with the bad, I suppose.

costumeczar Posted 25 Feb 2015 , 3:29am
post #13 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayteetrudeau 
 

We used it at Sweet & Saucy when I was there, and while it works well, and stays on well when you touch it while its dry, its color is more of a rose type gold, and was rather difficult to match with truer golds, like gold leaf or even those gold glittery laser cut toppers that are in style. Now I'm at Sweet Fix and we are using Global Sugar Arts gold highlighter, and I much prefer the color, though it transfers horribly if you touch it while dry. Take the good with the bad, I suppose.


Welcome to Richmond...The gold highlighter is another "not to be consumed, decorative use only" item.

 

The ingredients in all of these metallic dusts are questionable in one way or another. There's no food product that has that metallic look other than culinary gold, and you can't get culinary gold to spread like a paint unless you put other things into it, which then takes it from edible to non-toxic status. Even the things that the FDA approves for food use in the US are banned in other countries. I was trying to hunt down what goes into the pearl dusts etc (its in the video I made, it's up on youtube) and titanium dioxide is in a lot of them.  That's labeled as carcinogenic by Canada and banned in Germany. The US says it's okay. It's like not being able to get dragees in California. The easiest thing to do would just be to tell people not to eat anything that has the metallic paint on it.

costumeczar Posted 25 Feb 2015 , 3:44am
post #14 of 35

Quote:

Originally Posted by maybenot 
 

 

 

I've just been in contact with the FDA about the use of "unapproved food additives"--and this would qualify as such.  The agency was very clear that use of such things on food is a "violation of the FD&C Act and may be subject to enforcement action."

 

To me this is the most interesting thing in this thread so far...How did you manage to get a straight answer about anything from anyone at the FDA? I tried to get them to answer a simple question for me and after about three emails where they basically answered the questions by not answering it I gave up.

maybenot Posted 25 Feb 2015 , 4:17am
post #15 of 35

Quote:

Originally Posted by costumeczar 
 


Welcome to Richmond...The gold highlighter is another "not to be consumed, decorative use only" item.

 

...... The easiest thing to do would just be to tell people not to eat anything that has the metallic paint on it.

 

No one wants to hear this, but it's the absolute truth. 

 

We create works of art that are FOOD.  Because they'll be eaten, there are rules/regulations/guidelines that are in place and should be followed.  We may not like them, we may not agree with them, but if they're in place, then actions can be taken when people choose to violate them.

 

All of the things we make can be made with edible items.  There are edible luster dusts, edible glitters [NOT DISCO DUST, which is plastic], edible petal dusts.  No, they won't give the exact look of the inedible items, but you know what--that's just tough. 

 

If it can't be removed before being eaten--just like a candle or a plastic figurine--then it needs to be made edible.  If the client doesn't like that fact, then they shouldn't be your client because they have no right to cause you to be in a situation that could result in legal/governmental actions against you.

 

Deciding to rationalize, or minimize, the use of inedibles on food is not only wrong for the maker of someone's FOOD, it's also a slippery legal slope. 

 

The excuse that "it hasn't made anyone sick yet" is juvenile and not for a cake decorator, sous chef, pastry chef, bakery owner, or supply vendor to make.  There is an overseeing agency for that called the FDA and if they say it can't go on/in food................well, it can't.

maybenot Posted 25 Feb 2015 , 4:44am
post #16 of 35

Quote:

Originally Posted by costumeczar 
 

To me this is the most interesting thing in this thread so far...How did you manage to get a straight answer about anything from anyone at the FDA? I tried to get them to answer a simple question for me and after about three emails where they basically answered the questions by not answering it I gave up.

 

Oh, tell me about it!!!  I used the standard contact form, then emailed someone at the PR[?] division--I got pretty much a form letter there, and then I latched onto an email at the Ingredients, Packaging, & Labeling department. 

 

When I finally got to the right place, it only took 24hrs. to get a real person who gave me real info, along with several other options for contact.  The email I used was [email protected]  and this is the page where I found the info: http://www.fda.gov/Food/IngredientsPackagingLabeling/ucm081905.htm

 

The links on the left side of the page were very helpful.

 

As an aside, my question was about disco dust [non toxic, for decoration only, inedible plastic glitter]--yes, I know, that old chestnut.  I got my answer today--and the info I supplied in the earlier reply is directly from the email that I received from the FDA.  Suffice it to say that using disco dust on food that will be eaten is NOT a gray area:

 

"The answer to your primary question, “Is plastic, copolymer, mylar, or PET [polyethylene terephthalate] EVER an acceptable additive to food that will be eaten?”, is “NO”; these substances are not approved for consumption as direct food additives, and their use when directly added to foods is not considered to be GRAS.  Food manufacturers who use inedible glitter on food products are in violation of the FD&C Act and may be subject to enforcement action."

 

[bold & unline added by me; GRAS is an acronym for Generally Regarded As Safe]

 

If you decide to try again, good luck.

costumeczar Posted 25 Feb 2015 , 11:35am
post #17 of 35

Quote:

Originally Posted by maybenot 
 

 

 

 

All of the things we make can be made with edible items.  There are edible luster dusts, edible glitters [NOT DISCO DUST, which is plastic], edible petal dusts.  No, they won't give the exact look of the inedible items, but you know what--that's just tough. 

 

And what I found out when I looked into this yesterday is that there's no clear-cut definition of what's edible vs non-toxic vs, don't eat it at all. And with some of the ingredients in the "edible" glitters/lusters/etc being banned in other countries, you have to wonder who's making the decisions and why the country one border over bans something when your country doesn't. Some of the edible metallics that they sell in Europe aren't sold in every EU country because the dyes or other ingredients in them aren't considered safe everywhere, so they wouldn't be labeled as edible there. Some of the things the FDA approves aren't approved in other countries...So I'll keep telling people not to eat things that clearly aren't found in foods that grow on a tree or a plant or whatever. Real gold will pass through your system without being digested, but not all metals are like that. I'm not going to freak out if I eat a piece of fondant that has some gold cake paint on it, but I'm not going to make a habit of it either...

 

The point is to explain to your customers that some things are there for looks and they shouldn't be licking them off of the cake.

 

If you want to see something really weird, go to youtube and look up "crayon lipstick." You'll find many videos showing you how to use crayons to make your own cosmetics. (Hey, they're non-toxic!)

costumeczar Posted 25 Feb 2015 , 11:37am
post #18 of 35

Quote:

Originally Posted by maybenot 
 

 

Oh, tell me about it!!!  I used the standard contact form, then emailed someone at the PR[?] division--I got pretty much a form letter there, and then I latched onto an email at the Ingredients, Packaging, & Labeling department. 

 

When I finally got to the right place, it only took 24hrs. to get a real person who gave me real info, along with several other options for contact.  The email I used was [email protected]  and this is the page where I found the info: http://www.fda.gov/Food/IngredientsPackagingLabeling/ucm081905.htm

 

The links on the left side of the page were very helpful.

 

As an aside, my question was about disco dust [non toxic, for decoration only, inedible plastic glitter]--yes, I know, that old chestnut.  I got my answer today--and the info I supplied in the earlier reply is directly from the email that I received from the FDA.  Suffice it to say that using disco dust on food that will be eaten is NOT a gray area:

 

"The answer to your primary question, “Is plastic, copolymer, mylar, or PET [polyethylene terephthalate] EVER an acceptable additive to food that will be eaten?”, is “NO”; these substances are not approved for consumption as direct food additives, and their use when directly added to foods is not considered to be GRAS.  Food manufacturers who use inedible glitter on food products are in violation of the FD&C Act and may be subject to enforcement action."

 

[bold & unline added by me; GRAS is an acronym for Generally Regarded As Safe]

 

If you decide to try again, good luck.


that sounds about right...I emailed asking for a clarification of something on their website, and they first said they didn't understand the question (It wasn't difficult). Then they referred me back to the thing I was asking a clarification on. Then they stopped responding so I gave up.

costumeczar Posted 25 Feb 2015 , 11:45am
post #19 of 35

And just as an aside, I also found out that the titanium dioxide powder is considered potentially carcinogenic for lung cancer. Which really should come as no surprise to anyone who's dusted things inside and found themselves sneezing that color for the next two days. It isn't good to be breathing that stuff, especially since it's a mineral product and it will act as a lung irritant. Please get into the habit of doing your airbrushing and petal dusting outside and wearing a mask...I'm going to write about this on my blog this week (as I sit here with congested sinuses from a headcold, breathing is on my mind).

-K8memphis Posted 25 Feb 2015 , 12:42pm
post #20 of 35

Ahope you feel better soon, cc

also the allergic reaction to titanium dioxide is so bad it's ruinous/debilitating to your health and it is very difficult to diagnose because it is in so many products -- kind of rare i guess but i know two people who are --

dust mask and goggles are mandatory for safety for dusting and airbrushing -- even if the substances are edible it doesn't make them ok to breath or get into your eyes or on your skin

-K8memphis Posted 25 Feb 2015 , 12:52pm
post #21 of 35

Anot to mention safeguarding the rest of the family from the harmful effects of air particles loaded w/bad stuff -- not to mention further that we should have proper paint spray/dust chambers with fans & filters because it should not be let out into the atmosphere either -- doesn't have to be elaborate just has to work

kayteetrudeau Posted 25 Feb 2015 , 1:41pm
post #22 of 35

Thanks for the welcome, costumeczar, I'm stoked! It's a beautiful city!

 

And in regards to its being inedible, I could be wrong, but I remember it stating its being inedible on the bottle. That said, there are other options, such as gold leaf, for edible gold. But it's much more expensive and doesn't go on cleanly (which does look beautiful often, though). If you go that direction, be sure to buy the "transferable" sheets, as the application process is infinitely easier (the non transferable ones don't stick to their guiding sheet and blow away, sticking to itself with the slightest movement). Gold leaf is the same stuff you find at the bottom of a Goldschlager bottle. It's not amazing for you, I imagine, but it just courses through you, and it's FDA approved.

 

Otherwise, for an entirely gold tier that people want to eat, Wilton has a spray gold that's.... well, it's ok. Be sure to color your fondant a gold type color first, because you'll need all the help you can get. 

costumeczar Posted 25 Feb 2015 , 5:09pm
post #23 of 35

Quote:

Originally Posted by kayteetrudeau 
 

Thanks for the welcome, costumeczar, I'm stoked! It's a beautiful city!

 

And in regards to its being inedible, I could be wrong, but I remember it stating its being inedible on the bottle. That said, there are other options, such as gold leaf, for edible gold. But it's much more expensive and doesn't go on cleanly (which does look beautiful often, though). If you go that direction, be sure to buy the "transferable" sheets, as the application process is infinitely easier (the non transferable ones don't stick to their guiding sheet and blow away, sticking to itself with the slightest movement). Gold leaf is the same stuff you find at the bottom of a Goldschlager bottle. It's not amazing for you, I imagine, but it just courses through you, and it's FDA approved.

 

Otherwise, for an entirely gold tier that people want to eat, Wilton has a spray gold that's.... well, it's ok. Be sure to color your fondant a gold type color first, because you'll need all the help you can get. 

When I cover entire tiers in gold I definitely use gold leaf...it looks much better than any of the paints and yeah, it will just go straight through you.

maybenot Posted 26 Feb 2015 , 12:22am
post #24 of 35

Crayon lipstick......but did you see the one about.................OREO COOKIE MASCARA?????

 

I kid you not.  Some teen on the web telling people to take out the filling, mix the dark cookie dust with water, and put it in a container.  I will give her credit, though, because she did wipe out the little tin with some alcohol first to sterilize it--LOL.  Doesn't seem to understand how mold develops, though.......

 

I won't even pretend to understand the different rules between countries.  All I know is that the rules here apply to me.  If someone is going to eat it, it needs to be edible, not just non toxic.  If something is edible, then of course it's non toxic.  The reverse is not necessarily true.

 

Mica pearlescent powder is OK as a food additive in certain concentrations/percentages of weight.  Well, inhaled mica can cause scarring of the lungs, but I haven't found any evidence that small ingested amounts cause problems.  There are a lot of dichotomies like that, so I go with the best case scenario.

 

For edible metallics, I found this very, very helpful.

 

http://artisancakecompany.com/2014/11/the-best-edible-metallic-food-colors/

costumeczar Posted 26 Feb 2015 , 3:42am
post #25 of 35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dayti 
 

I did Nicholas Lodge's Craftsy class, the one about modern lettering and monograms, and this is the brand he uses. It looked super shiny in his class and Costumes photos show that it really is shinier than regular lustre dust. He used it to make pipeable metallic icing too, and that's what I really want it for. I tried it with his recipe from the class and regular lustre...just didn't turn out the same to be honest. Ideale looks the way to go.

I wouldn't put it in anything that you can pipe, because that's going to be eaten. Too tricky.

costumeczar Posted 26 Feb 2015 , 3:56am
post #26 of 35

Quote:

Originally Posted by maybenot 
 

Crayon lipstick......but did you see the one about.................OREO COOKIE MASCARA?????

 

I kid you not.  Some teen on the web telling people to take out the filling, mix the dark cookie dust with water, and put it in a container.  I will give her credit, though, because she did wipe out the little tin with some alcohol first to sterilize it--LOL.  Doesn't seem to understand how mold develops, though.......

 

I won't even pretend to understand the different rules between countries.  All I know is that the rules here apply to me.  If someone is going to eat it, it needs to be edible, not just non toxic.  If something is edible, then of course it's non toxic.  The reverse is not necessarily true.

 

Mica pearlescent powder is OK as a food additive in certain concentrations/percentages of weight.  Well, inhaled mica can cause scarring of the lungs, but I haven't found any evidence that small ingested amounts cause problems.  There are a lot of dichotomies like that, so I go with the best case scenario.

 

For edible metallics, I found this very, very helpful.

 

http://artisancakecompany.com/2014/11/the-best-edible-metallic-food-colors/

Based on what I found I think that the reason some of the edible paints aren't allowed in certain countries is because of the titanium dioxide, and because of a few of the food colorings used in them. One of the blue dyes had a laundry list of things that it might affect in children especially. I don't worry about eating the mica in small quantities, but I can vouch for how it makes my lungs feel for a couple of days after airbrushing the luster dusts. But there are plenty of things I wouldn't mind eating but wouldn't want to breathe in, like chili powder, for example.8O

 

My feeling on all of this is that if something gives you a really metallic shine it probably isn't good for you in one way or another. Shiny is one thing, metallic is another. In small doses it's probably no big deal but we shouldn't be painting it all over a cake unless you're going to tell the customer what's in it and giving them the opportunity to decide for themselves whether they want to eat it or not. The reason I brought up the other countries' regulations is that if one country thinks something isn't good then there's probably a reason for it, so I want to know about that so that I can make an informed decision for myself. If the reason is that this dye will make kids hyperactive, then okay, I don't worry about eating it myself because I'm slightly older than that, but I might not want to use it for a 4 yr old's birthday cake.

 

I had one bride come to me with a photo of a cake that was covered in disco dust. I told her that it was plastic and I wouldn't do it and she was all disappointed. So she said what about just a gold tier. I gave her the options for that but as soon as I said it had to be done on fondant she turned her nose up at that too. I think she settled on bling wrap at the base of the tiers and shiny flowers or something like that. But from my experience there are people in my area who will gladly shake the disco dust all over buttercream and call it a day, so I have that to deal with when people see that and want to know why I won't do it.:evil:

Victoria M Posted 26 Feb 2015 , 8:26am
post #27 of 35

Quote:

Originally Posted by costumeczar 
 


I just did a video about gold dusts since there are so many people saying they're selling real gold dust and it's not. The Ideale says that it's for decoration only so I wouldn't put it in piped items, but honestly, based on the ingredients of most of the dusts out there it's no worse than the other ones, even the ones that say they're edible. The FDA makes you jump through hoops to get FDA approval to say something's edible, but if you don't you can label it non-toxic for decorative use only and still sell it from what I understand. It's very tricky.

 

With the Ideale highlighter dust it's not just a matter of them not having bothered to get it certified by the FDA as edible; it contains bronze.  Bronze is not allowed to be added to food either in the US or in the EU.

 

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by maybenot 

 

For edible metallics, I found this very, very helpful.

 

http://artisancakecompany.com/2014/11/the-best-edible-metallic-food-colors/

 

I found that link helpful too.  Has anyone here tried the Rolkem Super Gold?  It says on the lid it consists of E175 (actual gold) and E555 (potassium aluminium silicate), but the artisan cake company post claims it's based on "food grade mica-Titanium Dioxide with a soluble food grade coating", so I don't know where they got that from.  I'm surprised it's not more expensive if it's made from actual gold with just an anti-caking agent.

costumeczar Posted 26 Feb 2015 , 12:14pm
post #28 of 35

A

Original message sent by Victoria M

I found that link helpful too.  Has anyone here tried the Rolkem Super Gold?  It says on the lid it consists of E175 (actual gold) and E555 (potassium aluminium silicate), but the artisan cake company post claims it's based on "food grade mica-Titanium Dioxide with a soluble food grade coating", so I don't know where they got that from.  I'm surprised it's not more expensive if it's made from actual gold with just an anti-caking agent.

Quite frankly, if anything says it's made from real gold and they're selling it for $8 I don't believe it. The little tiny pot of culinary gold dust that I bought was substantially more than that, and it obviously doesn't dissolve. Even with an anti-caking agent it's not going to spread and look like a paint. I'd just leave the metallic paints to decorative items like gumpaste and use gold leaf if you're working on the surface of the cake. Or do pieces that can be removed if they're going on the surface of the cake itself. The risk of any kind of damage from eating rhe amount that you'd be eating is negligible, but people should know that they should remove things from the cake before serving it. It's no different than putting real crystals on a cake and telling people to remove them before cutting the cake.

Like maybenot says, I think the bigger issue tha I run into is the plastic glitter on cakes and cupcakes. Nobody should be eating that.

And I was going to add that people are not very forthcoming when you try to find ou what ingredients are in the paints. I can see that it's a trade secret thing, but if it's really edible doesn't the FDA require that you list the ingredients? I cuoudn't find any specifics other than on one website that listed the ingredients, so that made me think they're not as edible as they're claiming. Non-toxic maybe, but not edible.

Victoria M Posted 26 Feb 2015 , 12:58pm
post #29 of 35

Quote:

Originally Posted by costumeczar 


Quite frankly, if anything says it's made from real gold and they're selling it for $8 I don't believe it. The little tiny pot of culinary gold dust that I bought was substantially more than that, and it obviously doesn't dissolve. Even with an anti-caking agent it's not going to spread and look like a paint. I'd just leave the metallic paints to decorative items like gumpaste and use gold leaf if you're working on the surface of the cake. Or do pieces that can be removed if they're going on the surface of the cake itself. The risk of any kind of damage from eating rhe amount that you'd be eating is negligible, but people should know that they should remove things from the cake before serving it. It's no different than putting real crystals on a cake and telling people to remove them before cutting the cake.

Like maybenot says, I think the bigger issue tha I run into is the plastic glitter on cakes and cupcakes. Nobody should be eating that.

And I was going to add that people are not very forthcoming when you try to find ou what ingredients are in the paints. I can see that it's a trade secret thing, but if it's really edible doesn't the FDA require that you list the ingredients? I cuoudn't find any specifics other than on one website that listed the ingredients, so that made me think they're not as edible as they're claiming. Non-toxic maybe, but not edible.

 

For the Rolkem, it's not even as much as $8.  Websites within South Africa, where it comes from, have it for much less - say here, www.mels.co.za/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage-ask.tpl&product_id=838&category_id=77&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=1 where it's 20 South African Rand for 10ml.  That's $1.75, or £1.13 - despite the fact that according to the label it should be at least 50% real gold (it gives 2 ingredients, and it's usual to put the highest mass one first).  When I first came across the Rolkem gold on the artisan cake company website it looked brilliant with the way it got such a good colour.  I'm having significant second thoughts having looked up what the ingredients claim to be, and having read through this thread.

 

The plastic glitter sold as "non-toxic"... :( grrrrrr.  That makes me cross.  Even if it was put on something removable, the nature of glitter is that it gets everywhere.

 

I don't think I've come across any UK edible lustre dusts that don't list ingredients.  The highlighter dusts don't, but then they aren't edible.

costumeczar Posted 26 Feb 2015 , 1:04pm
post #30 of 35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Victoria M 
 

 

For the Rolkem, it's not even as much as $8.  Websites within South Africa, where it comes from, have it for much less - say here, www.mels.co.za/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage-ask.tpl&product_id=838&category_id=77&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=1 where it's 20 South African Rand for 10ml.  That's $1.75, or £1.13 - despite the fact that according to the label it should be at least 50% real gold (it gives 2 ingredients, and it's usual to put the highest mass one first).  When I first came across the Rolkem gold on the artisan cake company website it looked brilliant with the way it got such a good colour.  I'm having significant second thoughts having looked up what the ingredients claim to be, and having read through this thread.

 

The plastic glitter sold as "non-toxic"... :( grrrrrr.  That makes me cross.  Even if it was put on something removable, the nature of glitter is that it gets everywhere.

 

I don't think I've come across any UK edible lustre dusts that don't list ingredients.  The highlighter dusts don't, but then they aren't edible.


I think that you can get away with not listing ingredients if you say that something is non-toxic or decorative use only in the US, but if it says that it's FDA approved and edible then I thought you had to list the ingredients, which a lot of people don't do.

 

There's one company here that's selling dusts called "18K gold" and "24K gold" but I think they're referring to the color, not the ingredients. That's really deceptive...I ordered some gold leaf last week and did get a tiny bottle of the gold dust to see what it acted like. It cost about $33 for a tiny bottle and there's no way that it would ever spread like a paint because gold is metal that doesn't dissolve. I mixed it with vodka and it obviously did nothing but sit there. Even adding other things to it would just push the flakes around, there's no way it would ever spread like a paint. If you ground it up and put a tiny bit into another type of spreadable colored paint that had mica in it it would be shiny, and I suppose you'd be able to say that it had real gold in it. Again, that would be pretty deceptive.

Quote by @%username% on %date%

%body%