Another ridiculous food label

Ignoramus17256 <[email hidden]> wrote:
:> This tasty herring in oil has one of the most ridiculous nutrition
:> labels that I have ever seen. Another one for my fine collection.
:>
:> http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/food/Herring-Food-Label/
:>
:> i

Over 1800 kcals per serving? Wow....obviously the carb/fat info is
wrong....sounds more like a screw-up than anything intentional, though.

Roger Zoul said:

Ignoramus17256 <[email hidden]> wrote:
:> This tasty herring in oil has one of the most ridiculous nutrition
:> labels that I have ever seen. Another one for my fine collection.
:>
:> http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/food/Herring-Food-Label/
:>
:> i

Over 1800 kcals per serving? Wow....obviously the carb/fat info is
wrong....sounds more like a screw-up than anything intentional, though.

I think that almost everything in that label is wrong. There is no way
100g of anything would contain as much kcals... Because the calorie
number is overstated, I also think that it is not an intentionally
deceptive label.

i

Ignoramus17256 said:

Roger Zoul said:

Ignoramus17256 wrote:
:> This tasty herring in oil has one of the most ridiculous nutrition
:> labels that I have ever seen. Another one for my fine collection.
:>
:> http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/food/Herring-Food-Label/

Over 1800 kcals per serving? Wow....obviously the carb/fat info is
wrong....sounds more like a screw-up than anything intentional, though.

I think that almost everything in that label is wrong. There is no way
100g of anything would contain as much kcals... Because the calorie
number is overstated, I also think that it is not an intentionally
deceptive label.

Given that, can you really trust they didn't pack a poisoned rat in
there, unintentionally?

In article <[email hidden]>,

DZ said:

Ignoramus17256 said:

Roger Zoul said:

Ignoramus17256 wrote:
:> This tasty herring in oil has one of the most ridiculous nutrition
:> labels that I have ever seen. Another one for my fine collection.
:>
:> http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/food/Herring-Food-Label/

Over 1800 kcals per serving? Wow....obviously the carb/fat info is
wrong....sounds more like a screw-up than anything intentional, though.

I think that almost everything in that label is wrong. There is no way
100g of anything would contain as much kcals... Because the calorie
number is overstated, I also think that it is not an intentionally
deceptive label.

Given that, can you really trust they didn't pack a poisoned rat in
there, unintentionally?

I think that would be visible through the glass jar.

Priscilla
--
"Inside every older person is a younger person -- wondering what
the hell happened." -- Cora Harvey Armstrong

Ignoramus17256 said:

I think that almost everything in that label is wrong. There is no way
100g of anything would contain as much kcals... Because the calorie
number is overstated, I also think that it is not an intentionally
deceptive label.

It also seem odd that they are using commas instead of periods on
the label. Maybe whomever wrote the label text was drunk at the time?

--
Annie

As of 11-04-05: 258/203.5/140 Standing at 5 foot 4.

54.5 pounds lost. 63.5 left to go. Started February/07/05

Come visit my weight-loss web site, Annie Takes Off.
http://webpages.charter.net/lenny13/DietFrontPage.html

Annie Benson Lennaman <[email hidden]> wrote:
:> Ignoramus17256 wrote:
:>
:>> I think that almost everything in that label is wrong. There is no
:>> way 100g of anything would contain as much kcals... Because the
:>> calorie number is overstated, I also think that it is not an
:>> intentionally deceptive label.
:>
:> It also seem odd that they are using commas instead of periods on
:> the label. Maybe whomever wrote the label text was drunk at the
:> time?

European?

Annie Benson Lennaman said:

Ignoramus17256 said:

I think that almost everything in that label is wrong. There is no way
100g of anything would contain as much kcals... Because the calorie
number is overstated, I also think that it is not an intentionally
deceptive label.

It also seem odd that they are using commas instead of periods on
the label. Maybe whomever wrote the label text was drunk at the time?

That's how it is done in Europe. They do not use commas to separate
thousands and instead use them as a decimal point. I actually like
that way better, it makes more sense.

i

--
223/174.9/180

DZ said:

Ignoramus17256 said:

Roger Zoul said:

Ignoramus17256 wrote:
:> This tasty herring in oil has one of the most ridiculous nutrition
:> labels that I have ever seen. Another one for my fine collection.
:>
:> http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/food/Herring-Food-Label/

Over 1800 kcals per serving? Wow....obviously the carb/fat info is
wrong....sounds more like a screw-up than anything intentional, though.

I think that almost everything in that label is wrong. There is no way
100g of anything would contain as much kcals... Because the calorie
number is overstated, I also think that it is not an intentionally
deceptive label.

Given that, can you really trust they didn't pack a poisoned rat in
there, unintentionally?

I would not buy it if it was not in a glass jar... I agree, any sort
of BS like that makes me quite suspicious.

--
223/174.9/180

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ignoramus17256 <[email hidden]> wrote:
:> This tasty herring in oil has one of the most ridiculous nutrition
:> labels that I have ever seen. Another one for my fine collection.
:>
:> http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/food/Herring-Food-Label/
:>
:> i

Over 1800 kcals per serving? Wow....obviously the carb/fat info is
wrong....sounds more like a screw-up than anything intentional, though.

unless of course they accidentally forgot to mention in the ingredients list
that it's actually herring flavoured textured potato starch or something
equally as dodgy! 😉