140
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2024
140 points (96.7% liked)
Ask Lemmy
27210 readers
1531 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Warning labels that say shit like "Contains: Milk" on a carton of milk.
I hate to be "that guy" but in theee cases, it just makes more sense to have some extraneous labeling rather than have special clauses in the regulation dictating when it's obvious enough that the label can be omitted.
Keeping the rules as simple as possible reduces the chances of loopholes and ambiguity, at the expense of sometimes resulting in things like a jar of peanut butter stating "contains peanuts" on the label.
It makes no sense and it's a side effect of an over litigious society.
It only makes no sense until you stop and consider how to define and implement a better rule, when the only real benefit would be to prevent people snarking about milk having a "contains milk" labeling.
Labeling for ingredients and possible cross contamination concerns doesn't require that milk warns about milk.
Do you think that someone sits down and makes a list of all items that need to be labeled as containing X, which is then updated each time a new food or recipe hits the store shelves?
Or is it more likely that regulators simply state that all foods for human consumption containing more than some percent by weight of X must be labeled as containing X?
If your goal is to ensure that consumers are alerted to certain ingredients for allergy or other purposes, you care very much about a product not getting labeled properly, and you don't really care if something obvious gets the label.
I'm not really sure why this is so hard to grasp...
Egg carton that says "Contains Egss", like yeah, I sure hope so
Malk?
Did you hear about the butter recall for that?
C'mon nowadays you can market anything as anything, and you're never quite sure what's in there! :p
'Caution: Hot' on coffee.