|
Tiggum posted:Well, firstly, a cup is a measure of volume, not weight; a cup of feathers does weigh less than a cup of bricks. Second, different products fit more or less neatly, so a cup of each of two products made of the same exact ingredients but in different shapes would be different amounts. Unless the standard is 255 grams and you just happened to pick a product where that value matches with the amount that fits in a cup? Third, that's just the serving size and the serving size is different for every product, right? According to this: https://www.fda.gov/food/new-nutrition-facts-label/serving-size-updates-new-nutrition-facts-label it is primarily based on weight, and it only has volumetric for convenience since most Americans don't know metric that well.) That does not seem to be a complete list (for instance, I don't see things like potato chips on there) but it does confirm that weight is the primary serving size and any volumetric measurement is just an approximation to make quick measuring easier for some people. V V V They're allowed to do a lot of weird rounding. Tic Tacs, for instance, despite being almost 100% sugar can claim to be 0 calories because the serving size is so small (like 1 Tic Tac) they can round down the amount of sugar per serving to 0. 0 sugar = 0 calories. I don't know if that's still the case, since the FDA did just revamp the label guidelines a couple years ago, but it certainly was for decades. V V V DrBouvenstein has a new favorite as of 18:35 on Jan 11, 2022 |
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 18:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 13:07 |
|
|
The one that gets me is when the math doesn't work out for per serving vs. per container. Canned clam chowder, 2 servings per container, 230 calories per serving, 480 calories per container.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 18:28
|
|
|
I don't wanna have to do division, I'm not eating a family size bag of chips in one sitting, tell me how much is in 10 chips and I'll go from there
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 18:34
|
|
|
Killingyouguy! posted:I don't wanna have to do division, I'm not eating a family size bag of chips in one sitting, tell me how much is in 10 chips and I'll go from there Shameful goon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 18:36
|
|
|
DrBouvenstein posted:According to this: https://www.fda.gov/food/new-nutrition-facts-label/serving-size-updates-new-nutrition-facts-label it is primarily based on weight, and it only has volumetric for convenience since most Americans don't know metric that well.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 18:55
|
|
|
It's meant to be based around the amount a person would typically eat as a serving (even if it's totally wrong in most cases) rather than a standardized amount because Americans don't have kitchen scales to find out how much 100g of something is and most people aren't going to be comparing the nutrition facts between completely different categories of food anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 19:14
|
|
|
Dip Viscous posted:It's meant to be based around the amount a person would typically eat as a serving (even if it's totally wrong in most cases) rather than a standardized amount because Americans don't have kitchen scales to find out how much 100g of something is and most people aren't going to be comparing the nutrition facts between completely different categories of food anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 19:28
|
|
|
gently caress it, clearly this is too hard, let's go back to not having nutrition labels at all and thinking chocolate milk is healthy
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 19:33
|
|
|
No, I need to know how much vitamin D I'm taking in when I drink one of these 500ml bottles of hot sauce.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 19:43
|
|
|
On the nutritional tangent, advertising that you 'technically' don't have something. ex: 'No sugar added!' Especially when it has no bearing on the product, sure it doesn't have sugar added, but it sure has plenty of sugar from other sources present. I wish marketing and labelling laws would be more strict with bullshit technically-technically loopholes with products, it's just useless. The product isn't better because it has 50g of sucrose from a tasteless grapejuice concentrate, instead of 50g of sucrose from plain sugar. Marketing something as sugarfree and no-sugar-added are two entirely different things. I dunno how it is elsewhere, but I commonly see that poo poo here in Norway. This also extends to arbitrary marketing buzz like 'natural' and other completely unregulated terms.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 20:06
|
|
|
SubNat posted:On the nutritional tangent, advertising that you 'technically' don't have something. ex: 'No sugar added!' It is the same in the UK. 'all natural flavours' 'no added colours', '100% natural sugars' all that poo poo. What's worse though, is off the shelf medication and pain killers and what not. You can get three LITERALLY identical products, say paracetamol, where one is 50p, one is £1 and one is £3.50, and the only difference is brand. Or even sometimes the same brand, but one says it targets headaches or something. That should be illegal, as nothing but sheer ignorance sustains the expensive products.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 01:42
|
|
|
My personal favorite for a while has been "gluten free!" on products which a) never had gluten to begin with (e.g. corn chips) or b) remain unhealthy regardless of gluten content (e.g. Oreos).
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 01:57
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:Second, if they want to be allowed to continue putting serving sizes on the pack (in addition to per 100g and per whole pack) then there should be two simple rules: the serving size must be a whole number. None of this "3.6 serves" bullshit. And if the pack contains discrete food items, the serving size must constitute a whole number of them. No more "this pack of three sausages contains two serves". You're telling me you expect people to serve one-and-a-half sausages per person? Bull. poo poo. If I went to a friend's house for a meal, and they only gave me 1.5 sausages, that person would no longer be my friend.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 02:13
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:Well, firstly, a cup is a measure of volume, not weight; a cup of feathers does weigh less than a cup of bricks. Second, different products fit more or less neatly, so a cup of each of two products made of the same exact ingredients but in different shapes would be different amounts. Unless the standard is 255 grams and you just happened to pick a product where that value matches with the amount that fits in a cup? Third, that's just the serving size and the serving size is different for every product, right? bricks is heavier than feathers
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 02:20
|
|
|
Imagined posted:My personal favorite for a while has been "gluten free!" on products which a) never had gluten to begin with (e.g. corn chips) or b) remain unhealthy regardless of gluten content (e.g. Oreos). or c) clearly aren't gluten free and they're just gambling on nobody with celiac disease eating it, although that's poo poo I see pulled at grocery store deli sections rather than on packaged foods. Cod, clearly dredged in flour, "gluten free" sticker right next to the "made with WHOLE WHEAT" sticker.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 02:37
|
|
|
Margarine seems to have become "plant based butter" sometime in the last year and it's pissing me off
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 02:39
|
|
|
Nostradingus posted:Margarine seems to have become "plant based butter" sometime in the last year and it's pissing me off Crude oil is plant-based, I don’t understand the confusion?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 02:45
|
|
|
My peeve is that we haven't come up with a way to make real butter easily spreadable on the toast without microwaving it. Genetically modify a cow to put olive oil or whatever into their butter excretions so we can spread it on the toast straight from the refrigerator.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 03:01
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:My peeve is that we haven't come up with a way to make real butter easily spreadable on the toast without microwaving it. Genetically modify a cow to put olive oil or whatever into their butter excretions so we can spread it on the toast straight from the refrigerator.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 03:16
|
|
cowboy
|
FFT posted:I've highlighted the issue The box says keep refrigerated i'm not about to disobey a box.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 03:25
|
|
|
You should keep most of it refrigerated, but if you're using it daily on toast and stuff it's fine to leave a few day's worth out unrefrigerated in an airtight container.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 03:39
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:My peeve is that we haven't come up with a way to make real butter easily spreadable on the toast without microwaving it. Dip Viscous posted:You should keep most of it refrigerated, but if you're using it daily on toast and stuff it's fine to leave a few day's worth out unrefrigerated in an airtight container.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 03:44
|
|
|
I have a small plate of butter that I keep forgetting to throw out that still looks perfectly normal at least 8 months after I put it in there. I keep seeing it in there and thinking "just throw it out so you don't accidentally use it" but I kind of want to see how long it will take to get visibly gross.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 03:48
|
|
|
Nostradingus posted:Margarine seems to have become "plant based butter" sometime in the last year and it's pissing me off I don't know where you are, but often there is a technical definition for margarine. In Australia, I believe it has to have a minimum of 80% oil/fat to be called margarine. A lot of "margarines" have less fat than that, so everything is "table spread" now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 09:06
|
|
|
Dip Viscous posted:You should keep most of it refrigerated, but if you're using it daily on toast and stuff it's fine to leave a few day's worth out unrefrigerated in an airtight container. I have a butter bell, and I love it. Then again I use a ton of butter, so it's no thing for me to mash a new stick of butter into it every week or two. Other than when it's cold, it spreads like a dream.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 15:20
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:I have a small plate of butter that I keep forgetting to throw out that still looks perfectly normal at least 8 months after I put it in there. I keep seeing it in there and thinking "just throw it out so you don't accidentally use it" but I kind of want to see how long it will take to get visibly gross. It might not ever. The low water content keeps away most bacterial or fungal growth. If it's salted butter, then even more so. Not that NOTHING will ever grow, I'm pretty drat sure I've seen moldy butter, but I guess whatever common spores are floating around the average kitchen just aren't butter fans. When people say butter goes bad, they typically just mean it's gone rancid and tastes disgusting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 16:03
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:My parents have stored butter on a plate in the pantry for their entire lives (except in summer when it's hot enough to melt it) and they've never died from it. Yeah, I should clarify that pasteurized butter will basically never degrade to the point that it's unsafe to eat, it's just that after a week or two without refrigeration it still start to lose its flavor and then eventually taste kind of stale.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 16:04
|
|
|
Dip Viscous posted:Yeah, I should clarify that pasteurized butter will basically never degrade to the point that it's unsafe to eat, it's just that after a week or two without refrigeration it still start to lose its flavor and then eventually taste kind of stale. Nice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 20:52
|
|
|
YouTube videos that bleep out their own swears. Oh no, can't say "Bullshit" on my video! The PTA might get mad at me, so let me bleep it out! Except you're on a script, buckaroo. It's not like the naughty word just slipped out! Just don't swear in the first place, maybe, and you won't have to bleep it out and look like an idiot? The bleep on the bad word attracts much more attention than if you'd just said the stupid word in the first place!
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 02:59
|
|
|
YouTube legit will stop you from making money if you say certain things. It’s very weird. Very wholesome and not reactionary YouTubers like report of the week got videos demonetized because they mentioned Covid. You can’t even say the word without YouTube siccing their bots on you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 04:32
|
|
|
Silver Falcon posted:YouTube videos that bleep out their own swears. Oh no, can't say "Bullshit" on my video! The PTA might get mad at me, so let me bleep it out! The bleep gets around algorithms that automatically demonetize the video. They're not trying to not say "bullshit," they're trying to say "bullshit" and still make money. e:fb
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 04:33
|
|
|
It's even weirder than that because supposedly bleeping swears for the first two minutes and then swearing without bleeping for the rest of the video makes more money than not swearing or swearing without any bleeping. It's all bots and no, YouTube will not tell you the actual rules even after you get hit by them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 08:15
|
|
|
I have a youtube channel on which I talk about birds. I play a crow on these videos. I've gotten notices that videos in which I talk about a group of crows is demonitized. As are my videos on which I discuss tits and boobys. Just tryin to talk about birds!
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 13:56
|
|
|
A woodworking channel I watched years ago started getting everything demonetized for no apparent reason, until the creator eventually gave up and deleted the channel. Way later he managed to get an in person meeting at YouTube to ask why and it was because one time he showed how to use a checkering file on wood. There was concern that a checking file could be used for "firearm modification".
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 14:04
|
|
|
Dip Viscous posted:There was concern that a checking file could be used for "firearm modification". drat they need to get a grip! Just arbitrarily drawing hard lines like that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 14:14
|
|
|
One could certainly draw some parallels between the two cases.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 14:24
|
|
|
It's entirely frictional as a complaint. I wouldn't put much stock in a company that would handle things so clumsily.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 14:28
|
|
|
Dip Viscous posted:The one that gets me is when the math doesn't work out for per serving vs. per container. Canned clam chowder, 2 servings per container, 230 calories per serving, 480 calories per container. They round everything to the lowest 5. For example diet drinks besides plain soda water and artificial sweetener colas usually have a negligible amount of calories to produce the flavour. You can check it out on those coke freestyle machines. Pick something like powerade zero, the smallest size is 0 calories and the 64oz trucker mug has like 15. The reality is it's like 2.2 and 19. Now imagine how many millions of lobbying dollars were spent to make it this way instead of rounding to the nearest five. Edgar Allen Ho has a new favorite as of 16:56 on Jan 16, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2022 16:51
|
|
|
I'm glad they started listing the whole container's calories, instead of "2 and 3/4 cup serving size". It's better, but it still leads to snacks selling a silly Low Calorie Pack version with less chips. Best idea I can think of is printing calories per non-water weight. Easy comparison with any other product, no matter the size of the package or how much of it you're eating. I say non-water weight because just doing calories per weight would make soup or soda look really low calorie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2022 17:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 13:07 |
|
|
Peeve: People who let their dogs bark all day, every day. I work a graveyard shift, so I sleep during the afternoon. It is very difficult to get a solid eight hours. Even wearing ear plugs, I can still hear the dogs barking. ... I think that dogs are cool, don't get me wrong. But when they bark for literally twelve hours each day, it's like shut up yo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2022 15:38
|
|