Who thought apricot kernels made a great snack?

[Tri2Cook]

2 hours ago, pastrygirl said:

 

We should be able to trust that the items on the grocery store snack aisle are actually food and won't hurt us if we over-indulge.

 

That's a somewhat risky criteria. Almost everything can hurt us if we over-indulge. They may not all immediately hurt us but this didn't immediately hurt anybody either. His hospital trip and treatment were all precautionary according to the article. But I understand the point you're making and with this particular item, it probably would be in the best interest of the manufacturer and retailers to make the warnings more noticeable and market the product differently. Even if the product is 100% safe and the warning is entirely precautionary, it would just save them a lot of headaches and negative publicity in the long run.

[Duvel]

5 hours ago, quiet1 said:

 

So if they were selling drain cleaner in a bottle that looked like just another flavor of juice, on a shelf with nearly identically packaged juice, that would be just fine? 

 

I think there’s a pretty big spectrum between essentially the ultimate “buyer beware” and “consumers have no responsibility at all.”

I was under the impression we are talking about foodstuff here. Are you typically finding the drain cleaner you serve as a snack next to the other juices ?

How about 50% alcohol solutions, packaged irresponsibly in a regular bottle with a funny pirate on the cover ?  How about salt that is dyed pink to make it more attractive ? How about produce that is indigestible (at best, if not worse) if not cooked ? 

I just can speak for myself here: if I go to the shop I buy what I want to buy, not what is in the same shelf. If I eat somethIng or serve it to my family I do it because I know what it is. Rum, nitrate salts and dried beans are found in my household. I can handle all of them because I know how to, and that's why I bought them ...

 

[JoNorvelleWalker]

@Duvel -- help me to understand -- you bought a bottle of rum with a funny pirate on the cover?

 

[Duvel]

2 hours ago, JoNorvelleWalker said:

@Duvel -- help me to understand -- you bought a bottle of rum with a funny pirate on the cover?

 

Captain Morgan Private Stock ...

 

(they had it in the mixed soft drink / toilet desinfectant shelf in our supermarket and I got lured in by the label with said picture )

[quiet1]

6 hours ago, Duvel said:

I was under the impression we are talking about foodstuff here. Are you typically finding the drain cleaner you serve as a snack next to the other juices ?

How about 50% alcohol solutions, packaged irresponsibly in a regular bottle with a funny pirate on the cover ?  How about salt that is dyed pink to make it more attractive ? How about produce that is indigestible (at best, if not worse) if not cooked ? 

I just can speak for myself here: if I go to the shop I buy what I want to buy, not what is in the same shelf. If I eat somethIng or serve it to my family I do it because I know what it is. Rum, nitrate salts and dried beans are found in my household. I can handle all of them because I know how to, and that's why I bought them ...

 

 

‘My impression is that they are essentially claiming that they aren’t a foodstuff but more akin to a medication or supplement in terms of how they are meant to be consumed from this company. So perhaps drain cleaner isn’t the best example - one of the stomach meds I take looks and smells quite a lot like candy, would it be okay if that was on the shelf right next to almost identical packages of things that actually are candy? It is sold over the counter so they wouldn’t be dispensing illegally or anything, but if someone consumed a whole handful at once I’m sure it wouldn’t be any good for you.

 

There HAVE been debates in the past about using things like cartoons in advertising for certain products. Cigarettes used to have a whole thing with cartoon camels. And dried beans aren’t exactly easily edible unprocessed (unless you like to break your teeth?) and being pink certainly doesn’t make the salt taste less salty so people use heaps more of it. I don’t think those are quite the same as putting something that MUST be consumed in tiny amounts to be safe in the same packaging and on the same rack as something that can be safely consumed by the handful, especially not when the dangerous thing (apricot kernels) can very easily be eaten in quantity.

 

I’m not saying don’t sell them, I’m saying package things appropriately to help people not make mistakes. Because people WILL make mistakes, and I don’t see how we benefit as a society from people dropping dead because of easily prevented mistakes.

 

Should there not be signs up around raw meat about safe handling and proper cooking temperatures? Someone can look all that up.

[Duvel]

19 minutes ago, quiet1 said:

Should there not be signs up around raw meat about safe handling and proper cooking temperatures? Someone can look all that up.

 

Again, must be a regional (cultural ?) difference. If I buy my meat here in Hong Kong, last week in Spain or in my hometown in Germany, there are no signs nor oral warnings about safe handling or cooking temperatures. Maybe because if I buy a pound of raw minced pork the vendor can assune that I know how to process it - or in the case of buying it in my hometown, how to enjoy it raw with onions and a rye roll ...

 

(but then again maybe in these places nobody gets sued from a customer who can claim he got sick from a piece of meat that he prepared wrongly ?)

[Thanks for the Crepes]

13 hours ago, pastrygirl said:

If it is supposed to be a supplement or drug, they should be treated as such and go through all the FDA hoops for those categories.

 

I agree with this. We need protection from food fraud and adulteration for profit from unscrupulous vendors. This has always happened, is happening today, and I believe it is a great service that our government provides in ensuring the safety and purity of our food to the limited extent that is even possible. At least the dirty players have some motivation to stay within the lines of decency.

 

I also agree that the person who burned themselves at the drive thru with hot McDonald's coffee is ridiculous. Should the rest of us who can be more careful with hot drinks suffer through our mornings with lukewarm coffee because of this developmentally challenged person? I also don't like that we can't buy unpasteurized cheeses here. I probably wouldn't even like 'em, because I'm not a fan of stinky cheeses, but they have been produced for thousands of years and as far as I can tell, no one has been harmed by them. It is a complex issue. I think we can all agree that we need to keep baby formula free of melamine that tricks the tests for protein into registering higher. I think some folks were executed over that one.

 

The bolding on the word supplement in pastrygirl's above quote is mine.  Did ya'll know that the FDA does not test, or really regulate in any meaningful manner, dietary supplements? I didn't until I did a little recent research on vitamins that I need for bone repair. I tried to find out if the vitamin and mineral supplements added to food like breakfast cereals, breads, and Eggo waffles are tested and regulated by FDA, but apparently I was unable to word my query correctly to return any meaningful info. Does anyone know if supplements added to food are ever verified?

 

Bottom line is that especially with dietary supplements even with the FDA here, which does not oversee those, consumers should be especially vigilant when purchasing any supplement. You have to do your own research. That's why apricot kernels belong with the supplements and not the snacks, IMO.

[quiet1]

11 hours ago, Duvel said:

 

Again, must be a regional (cultural ?) difference. If I buy my meat here in Hong Kong, last week in Spain or in my hometown in Germany, there are no signs nor oral warnings about safe handling or cooking temperatures. Maybe because if I buy a pound of raw minced pork the vendor can assune that I know how to process it - or in the case of buying it in my hometown, how to enjoy it raw with onions and a rye roll ...

 

(but then again maybe in these places nobody gets sued from a customer who can claim he got sick from a piece of meat that he prepared wrongly ?)

 

In both the UK and the US signs reminding people about proper cooking are not uncommon, and usually there’s something on the package in addition if you get it from the shelf. (Stuff packaged for you from the butcher on request doesn’t get the same kind of labeling.)

 

As I understand it, they do that sort of thing because they’ve found that reminding people about such things actually distinctly reduces the rate of food poisoning, which means less drain on society (lost working hours, etc.) So it’s not just because they are afraid of being sued, it’s because it does actually improve the social situation to help people minimize mistakes in food prep. I don’t see the problem with that - people being sick and dying from easily preventable issues is wasted resources, if you look at it pragmatically.

[quiet1]

7 hours ago, Thanks for the Crepes said:

 

I agree with this. We need protection from food fraud and adulteration for profit from unscrupulous vendors. This has always happened, is happening today, and I believe it is a great service that our government provides in ensuring the safety and purity of our food to the limited extent that is even possible. At least the dirty players have some motivation to stay within the lines of decency.

 

I also agree that the person who burned themselves at the drive thru with hot McDonald's coffee is ridiculous. Should the rest of us who can be more careful with hot drinks suffer through our mornings with lukewarm coffee because of this developmentally challenged person? I also don't like that we can't buy unpasteurized cheeses here. I probably wouldn't even like 'em, because I'm not a fan of stinky cheeses, but they have been produced for thousands of years and as far as I can tell, no one has been harmed by them. It is a complex issue. I think we can all agree that we need to keep baby formula free of melamine that tricks the tests for protein into registering higher. I think some folks were executed over that one.

 

The bolding on the word supplement in pastrygirl's above quote is mine.  Did ya'll know that the FDA does not test, or really regulate in any meaningful manner, dietary supplements? I didn't until I did a little recent research on vitamins that I need for bone repair. I tried to find out if the vitamin and mineral supplements added to food like breakfast cereals, breads, and Eggo waffles are tested and regulated by FDA, but apparently I was unable to word my query correctly to return any meaningful info. Does anyone know if supplements added to food are ever verified?

 

Bottom line is that especially with dietary supplements even with the FDA here, which does not oversee those, consumers should be especially vigilant when purchasing any supplement. You have to do your own research. That's why apricot kernels belong with the supplements and not the snacks, IMO.

 

Apparenty the coffee thing isn’t as clear cut as it sounds, but I haven’t read about it myself in forever.

 

The supplement industry is, however, utterly ridiculous and SHOULD be regulated better than it is.

[cakewalk]

41 minutes ago, quiet1 said:

 

Apparenty the coffee thing isn’t as clear cut as it sounds, but I haven’t read about it myself in forever.

Yes, it does go back quite a while. IIRC, that particular McDonald's had been told by customers several times that their coffee was too hot. Apparently they ignored this. The woman who burned herself was, IMO, an eejit. I also seem to remember that there was an appeal, and although she won the original case she lost on appeal. 

[kayb]

10 hours ago, Thanks for the Crepes said:

 

The bolding on the word supplement in pastrygirl's above quote is mine.  Did ya'll know that the FDA does not test, or really regulate in any meaningful manner, dietary supplements? I didn't until I did a little recent research on vitamins that I need for bone repair. I tried to find out if the vitamin and mineral supplements added to food like breakfast cereals, breads, and Eggo waffles are tested and regulated by FDA, but apparently I was unable to word my query correctly to return any meaningful info. Does anyone know if supplements added to food are ever verified?

 

Bottom line is that especially with dietary supplements even with the FDA here, which does not oversee those, consumers should be especially vigilant when purchasing any supplement. You have to do your own research. That's why apricot kernels belong with the supplements and not the snacks, IMO.

 

No. There's very little, if any, regulation on dietary supplements/"natural" remedies, etc. There is also, fwiw, next to no regulation on personal care products, which means that whoever's claim that your shampoo is all-natural, etc., is worth somewhat less than the .01 second of your time it took you to read that on the label.

 

There's a fairly vigorous movement out there it toughen the standards. But it's a big industry to fight, and it is, I'm sure, not anxious to be regulated. Caveat emptor.

[GlorifiedRice]

Okay, heres my take. I think bans on food are ridiculous..

 

If you buy steak and raw eggs from Dollar Tree expecting to chop it up and make Steak Tartar and survive, you are a dumbass.

 

All these warnings are ridiculous! Its like having a natural crack in your sidewalk from tree roots and having someone trip and fall and sue you. WATCH WHERE YOU ARE GOING!

 

If you are a dumbass and eat apricot kernels by the bag and you start feeling ill, maybe you should look at the bag? My local healthfood store sells em behind the counter FYI.

 

Let Haggis and Konnyaku free!

[chromedome]

17 minutes ago, kayb said:

 

No. There's very little, if any, regulation on dietary supplements/"natural" remedies, etc.

Yeah. I'm always amazed/amused by those who harbour a deep and vocal suspicion of Big Pharma, but give Big Supplement a pass. Both are multi-billion dollar industries, but one spends billions on research while the other just has to say "may help with..." or "traditionally used for [X]". 

[gfweb]

12 minutes ago, chromedome said:

Yeah. I'm always amazed/amused by those who harbour a deep and vocal suspicion of Big Pharma, but give Big Supplement a pass. Both are multi-billion dollar industries, but one spends billions on research while the other just has to say "may help with..." or "traditionally used for [X]". 

 

And "nutritional supplements" have been pushed away from FDA by Congress. But still FDA tests when there is a complaint and has a long list of banned "supplements" that contain real drugs that are not listed on the label.