AI-generated editorial illustration of seafood-noodle product selection; not a product photograph, approved label or evidence of allergen status.
Choosing a scallop noodle instead of a shrimp noodle does not remove the EU allergen-information question. EU rules list both crustaceans and molluscs among the substances and products that require review. A purchasing decision based on a US seafood-allergen comparison therefore needs a fresh EU assessment before the buyer selects a product and approves its retail information.
This guide addresses that specific selection mistake. It does not approve either Noodle House Food product for an EU market or establish suitability for someone with a food allergy.
Start with the two actual catalog products
The 2026 company catalog lists Shrimp Noodle and Scallops Noodle separately. Both are shown as 454 g bags packed 30 per carton, but their seafood ingredient entries differ.
- Shrimp Noodle, page 6: the ingredient entry includes “Shrimp Extract/Roe.” The slash needs clarification; do not rewrite it as confirmation that both are used.
- Scallops Noodle, page 7: the ingredient entry includes “Scallop Extract.” Request the current component information rather than treating the short catalog phrase as a complete declaration.
Both catalog entries also list wheat flour, water and salt. Review the complete current formulation for the selected SKU; a seafood comparison does not settle every ingredient or allergen question.
Use the Shrimp Noodle and Scallops Noodle pages to identify the products being discussed. The catalog facts are a starting reference, not evidence that a finished label has been approved. The EU distinction that changes the selection decision
The European Commission's allergen guidance lists both crustaceans and molluscs among the allergens that must be indicated when used as ingredients in foods sold in the EU. The distinction between the two groups remains useful, but neither group disappears from this review. The guidance explains that allergens must be emphasized in the ingredient list. Have the responsible label reviewer determine the exact wording and applicable requirements for the confirmed formulation and destination. This guidance is a starting point for the comparison, not an approval of either product's final label.
Consequently, “choose scallop to avoid reviewing a listed seafood allergen” is not a sound EU buying rationale. Choose between the products for a supported commercial or menu requirement, then carry out the appropriate review for the actual ingredients.
Resolve a product switch before transferring the label file
Consider a hypothetical importer who originally shortlisted Shrimp Noodle and then changes the proposed order to Scallops Noodle. The pack weight remains the same, so the team plans to reuse the product-information file and remove the shrimp-related entry.
That change leaves an unanswered question: what information is required for the scallop-derived ingredient in the replacement product? Deleting one field is not a completed review of the new SKU.
Ask the supplier and responsible reviewer to connect:
- the selected product code and current formulation;
- the actual seafood ingredient and its component specification;
- the EU allergen review for that formulation;
- the retail text and artwork version that will accompany the order.
These are proposed purchasing records, not an official compliance form. Keep unanswered points visible until the relevant information is supplied. Do not fill them with the previous SKU's declaration or a generic description such as “seafood.”
Keep the commercial choice and approval decision connected
A buyer may still have a valid reason to choose Scallops Noodle: it is a different named seafood-flavored product within the catalog. This article does not establish a stronger flavor, higher demand, price advantage or safer allergen profile.
When requesting current product information, specify the selected noodle, EU destination, sales channel and the exact ingredient question. If the product changes during sourcing, flag the change to the reviewer before transferring the old label file. Final wording and market suitability must be assessed from current SKU-specific evidence.