• Agent641@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    16 minutes ago

    You must consider, the info here isn’t random, it’s legally required by the FDA or state regulator. They have to follow the guidelines for packaging labelling requirements precisely. When the serving size is very small, the numbers are misleading. But some manufacturers also use ridiculous serving sizes to fudge the numbers.

    Thats why in Australia, they are required to publish two or three columns of data. Per Serving (which can be skipped if the item is clearly just one serving), per 100g (even if the whole thing is less than 100g net, it makes figureing out percentages easier) and sometimes per whole package.

    I’m not going to eat 12 seperate portions over several days from this bag of chips just because it says that many on the bag. I know this. The manufacturer knows this. The regulator knows this. We all know I’m hoovering that bag clean in 20 minutes. So the manufacturer is forced to give me a number that is easily mathable so I can’t hide the damage, even from myself.

  • _stranger_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    3 hours ago

    2.21 Kcal per gram.

    spraying it for a full second would be about 10 kcal, and overkill for anything less than a massive steak or making a 6 egg omelette, in other words if you’re using that much you’re either doing it terribly wrong or it’s a rounding error compared to what your actually making.

  • chunes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    lmao, that’s so shameless. Avocado oil is one of the most calorie-dense food in existence.

    • rmrf@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Say “one one-thousand two one-thousand” at normal pace

      Have you ever sprayed cooking oil for that long? I haven’t, and either way that’s only 18 calories

      I wouldn’t consider this terribly misleading, 0.25 second spray for 1 serving of food is very reasonable. Should it really say 2 calories? Yeah, I think it should. Does it matter that much, though?

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    And legally, they are right. One serving is very, very small, and therefore, one serving is considered to have no [whatever].

    Just like TicTacs. They are 100% sugar to a rounding error, but as the “serving size” is one TicTac, which weighs less than half a gram, it is legally considered “sugar free”.

    Which tells a lot about the real value of “legally”.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      The difference here is that I can reasonably believe the quarter second of spray being an accurate serving, but nobody has just one tictac.

    • notastatist@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      And who the fuck cares about calories in serving size?

      What about a better standard like calories per 100g?

      • 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        5 hours ago

        And who the fuck cares about calories in serving size?

        Calories per 100g would be highly misleading in a product like this. You might use a couple or few sprays, but you’re not going to use a significant amount.

        That said, listing calories-per-standard-amount as a secondary requirement I could absolutely get behind.

        The thing people need to remember about serving sizes is that they are 1) based on studies of what people actually consume, and 2) intended to be parts of a meal. You don’t eat “one serving” for a meal. You’d have a serving of several different things. It’s extremely unperfect, but at least it gives you something you can work with. I do specifically like them having to also provide “calories per container”, though - that’s a good attempt to help solve this problem.

        • Scrollone@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          All products in the EU must indicate all nutritional values both by serving size and by 100 g. Also as a percentage of the recommended daily dose.

          It’s not hard.

          • 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Did you stop reading after my first para and ignore my second? Also, please show me where I said it was difficult.

            This is why I hate Lemmy sometimes. People don’t fucking read and just go off the very tops of emotional response.

            It definitely makes me want to block this community if that’s all it’s gonna be.

            THIS THING GOOD

            THIS THING BAD

            NO NUANCE ALLOW, ME NOT HAVE BRAIN TO THINK OF MORE THAN ONE THING AT A TIME

            It’s not hard.

            Reading apparently is. To people here, not you or just you at least.

            • StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 hours ago

              JFC. The irony of this entire comment, but the best is…

              This is why I hate Lemmy sometimes. People don’t fucking read and just go off the very tops of emotional response… *Proceeds into emotional rant about stupid users*

              The lack of self-awareness here is nearly palpable.

    • 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Which tells a lot about the real value of “legally”.

      Maybe, but it’s also a reflection of the true usage in these cases. Okay, say they are legally required to list it as one calorie. That basically makes zero difference to how people consume these products - barring some sort of weird edge cases.

  • TomMasz@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 hours ago

    There are lots of US standards like this. You’d be surprised how much product a railroad tank car can contain and still be called “empty”. US industry has an outsized influence on the creation of standards.

    • SlightlyNormal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I don’t like that. Now I’m going to imagine that every “empty” railroad tank car has 100 gallons of dioxins sloshing around.

      • TomMasz@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 hours ago

        It came up in hazmat training when I was a volunteer firefighter. It’s like handling firearms, you always assume they’re loaded.

  • gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 hours ago

    that’s why it should say “calories per 100g” instead. no way i’m gonna just use 0.25g. that’s like eating a single potato chip then putting the package away.

    • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It’s spray oil to stop your real food from sticking when cooking at high temperatures. You wouldn’t want to use 100 grams. You might as well chug olive oil, and not the good olive oil at that.

    • lemmygarden@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I dislike the “calories per 100g” Just tell me how many calories are in the package and I’ll eat the whole thing.

    • 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      no way i’m gonna just use 0.25g. t

      The product pictured is an oil spray that you’d use in a pan or like baking sheet or something. If you’re using more than a couple or a few sprays, you are doing it very very wrong, and you need to just use a bottle of oil.

      • CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I own this stuff, I buy it at Costco, I don’t even think I could spray it for 1/4th a second it’s not got a very precise nozzle. There’s also a huge difference, literally magnitudes, between 1/4th of a second and a few seconds over a pan. I use cooking spray pretty regularly and have a few applications like my ornate Nordic wear pans where a bottle of oil would not work well and it would be nice to know what I’m adding to my food but I chalk it up to the caloric cost of cooking

      • hraegsvelmir@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I’ve also seen plenty of UK products that have 2 sets of calorie/nutrition facts side-by-side, one for calories per 100g, and another for either a more typical serving size, or sometimes the whole container, which really strikes me as a fair middle ground. Have a reference quantity that makes it easy to make overall comparisons across all food, but also a reasonable “preset” for displaying the info for the product in question. It lets you eliminate stupid promotional tags like this that let you claim a food is fat-free, calorie-free, or whatever else by requiring a reference standard that doesn’t permit the manufacturer to simply manipulate the serving size until whatever claim they want to make is technically true for the amount they’ve chosen, while also making it easy for people to track their calorie and nutrient intake. The number of canned products I see in the states that have no way to reasonable seal them again and prevent them from going off once you open them, like large cans of energy drinks like Monster, yet have multiple “servings” in the can so the nutrition facts label can claim a serving is actually somewhere around 200 calories is absolutely ridiculous when you considering most people will treat the cans as a single serving and consume double the amount indicated at a minimum.

  • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 hours ago

    It’s zero calories per serving, of which there are over 1500 in that can. It’s a rounding error. If each serving has say 0.2 calories, the whole can might contain 300.

    Also, “1/4 second spray”

    Are you using a fucking aerosol can of avocado oil? 🤨

    • BigDiction@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Sprays have their use cases for griddles and molds that need to be lubed.

      Not my daily driver for fats but I don’t see the problem.

      • forgetfulmeat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 hours ago

        I suggest getting a reusable 2-in-1 spray/pour bottle. Saves a little money if you’re buying two things of oil. If you’re as frugal as me then you buy the oil from a discount store too.

        • VelvetTinkerer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          9 hours ago

          The issue I have with plastic spray nozzles and units with oil is that they get gunky even if you clean them after every use. And most heads are not supposed run through the dishwasher. Which is highly impractical for us. For a while I bought a new one every year just to replace the top part.

            • rumba@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 hours ago

              My misto started doing a 50:50 spray stream after 5 years. I ran soapy water through it and it got better, does need some upkeep though. After 5 years, i might consider it worn out.

          • Semester3383@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            8 hours ago

            Sure, but they also clean very easily. It’s not like a clog kills them, unless you’re using a drying oil, something that turns into varnish inside the pump.

        • gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 hours ago

          what i don’t get is who uses that little oil that they have to spray it? i just pour oil all over it.

          • shalafi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            One example would be my 1960s egg poacher, about all I use spray for. I could use butter, and have!, but the spray ensures it hits the entire surface and the egg no stick. Yes, I could wipe it with a buttered paper towel, but that’s messy.

            Having said that, I refuse to pay the ridiculous price for spray oil. Only reason I use it is that my wife stocks it for whatever reason.

          • 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 hours ago

            You may not get it, that’s fine, but it is an extremely common cooking technique. What you’re saying is like saying “Why do people steam things? I don’t steam things, that’s just stupid” (I know you didn’t say it was stupid)

            Pouring oil will be right in some cases, but in other cases WAY more oil and WAY less distributed than desired.

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      It’s pretty good stuff. Plant based, easy to apply, higher smoke point than olive oil.

  • InvalidName2@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I’m glad that folks are in the comments factually educating others about this.

    But truly sad that there’s this amount of … ignorance, particularly of the willful kind. I thought that was for the nazis, pedophiles, and their supporters.

  • Thorry@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    232
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    14 hours ago

    In civilized countries the nutrition facts need to be stated in both serving size and 100 grams. This makes it easier to compare products with different serving sizes and also prevents bullshit like this.

      • jacksilver@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Serving size has a lot of use cases, especially when looking at things individually packaged or in separate units (cookies for example).

        Per 100g has fewer use cases in my mind as I’m not a scale and have no idea how to break down most products into 100g.

    • protist@retrofed.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      59
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I just have to disagree. On a product like this, if the nutrition facts for 100g are listed, then you’re going to have to do the math re: how much you’re actually going to use. Having it measured out in a realistic serving size makes more sense to me.

      There’s also pretty much no issue comparing products, as products in the same category usually all have the same serving sizes.

      Cooking spray just happens to be used so sparingly that its nutritional value when used appropriately is usually negligible

      • kungen@feddit.nu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 hours ago

        then you’re going to have to do the math re: how much you’re actually going to use

        Sure, you’re probably going to spray a couple seconds at the most, which would be like less than 30 kcal. Basically nothing that you’d really count, unless you’re on a super-strict diet.

        But the problem is that it’s misleading. Uneducated shoppers might choose that brand specifically because “I’m on a diet”, instead of buying a cheaper non-spray version. And/or proceed to put a ton on their food, without realizing avocado oil is almost 900kcal/100g.

        “usually all have the same” isn’t fully true either in my experience. Are you really going to eat just 1/3 of a candy bar? It says 100 calories in big letters, surely it’d be much healthier than the avocado oil bottle that says 120 calories per serving.

        “Serving size” numbers are bullshit and should be banned.

      • 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        then you’re going to have to do the math

        Why? It’s listed in both, so you know a spray is close to zero. If you’re using more than a couple or few sprays, you’re doing it wrong, so what’s even a few sprays? 5 calories?

        Your measuring inaccuracy on other ingredients is going to be WILDLY more than the calories from the oil. Baking and spray the baking sheet? When you measured your flour, did you get it to the nearest TENTH of a gram? Because a gram of flour is like 3.5 calories, so if you were off by a single gram - or your scale doesn’t even show decigrams, then the rounding error is likely more calories than the oil you use that adds to each ‘serving’ of the thing you’re making.

        So this is extremely unimportant.

      • Thorry@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        Oh no! Imagine having to do extremely simple maths… It’s calculus, hardly maths at all.

        The whole point is the “realistic serving size” is a myth. It’s like buying a bag of 30 sweets and having the serving size be 3 sweets. You know I’m going to eat the whole fucking bag in 1 go, so I would like to know the actual nutrition facts.

        And like I said, usually both are on the packaging, but the 100 gram one is required by law. And depending on where you live there are laws regarding the serving size as well and it may be required.

        • _chris@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Sorry, most people in the US can’t divide. The majority stop retaining around subtraction, and that’s giving the benefit of the doubt.

          I know people who whip out the calculator for 9+13.

          • arrow74@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            It’s not even that the labels are sometimes cryptic. Like sure I have 400g of cheese, but how many grams is a single slice? This information is not included on the brand I buy, nor the number of slices.

            So I either have to weigh a slice of cheese or count out the number of slices. Then do the math.

            In the US it simply says 1 slice is x calories.

            I won’t understand this backwards sense of pride in shitty labeling.

        • False@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          If it’s in the form of a spray, and I’m spraying it onto the cooking surface rather than the food, then yeah. I’d probably spray for like 2 seconds and only a fraction of that would actually end up on the food.

          • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            7 hours ago

            I’d probably spray for like 2 seconds

            I’d hate to break it to you, but that’s already 8 servings according to the label…

            • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 hours ago

              and only a fraction of that would actually end up on the food.

              Further, if you’re cooking, you’re probably making more than one serving at a time. 2-4 servings in the pan, and only consuming a fraction of what was initially sprayed, 1/4-second spray per serving is about right.

      • gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        the thing is that different people use different serving sizes. – written by somebody who pours lots of oil over salad.

        • purplemonkeymad@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          I’ve told people that it’s a percentage but they have a hard time understanding that and insisted on doing it from the serving size still.

    • hOrni@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      37
      ·
      14 hours ago

      That’s how it is stated in civilized countries. This is American bullshit. You wouldn’t get a serving size on something like oil either.

        • Buffalox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          13 hours ago

          No it’s not, oil does not have a “serving size”.
          Thorry wrote both would be required, but when there is no “serving size” it would only be the 100g stated on the label.
          Generally here (Denmark) we never see “serving size” because it’s bullshit, and probably considered misleading.
          And misleading labeling and marketing is illegal.

          • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            12 hours ago

            There is a point to having both - or at least giving an idea of how much an item typically weighs. One cookie might be 200g or 50g; people may typically reach for 1-5 cookies, for example.

            A misleading serving size (eg “per 1/4 cookie”) is indeed not helpful at all, but I don’t think it’s illegal.

            • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 hours ago

              So many single-use packets which barely contain enough for half a meal, yet say “contains 2 servings” so they can halve all the numbers on the nutrition label. Yes, this is in america.

              • arrow74@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                Okay, but let’s say you have 35g of sauce. It’s labeled as 2 servings that equal x calories. Easy math to figure out what you ate.

                When 100g is x calories and you have to do the math it’s a bit more annoying. Even worse when you have to break out the scale.

              • athatet@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                7 hours ago

                I don’t think a serving is supposed to be a meal. Pretty sure it’s talking about like, the food pyramid. It’s not a thing anymore but you gotta get a certain amount of grains and fruit and veg and dairy and you count the amounts by serving size.

              • anomnom@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                8 hours ago

                They had to stop doing this for drinks (at least). They now show the whole bottle contents and sometimes also servings for some sizes.

  • Sludgehammer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Yeah, the miracle serving sizes. Similar to how tic-tacs are advertised as “low calorie” when they’re basically flavored sugar.

  • ParadoxSeahorse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Can we talk about how Americans know the word “quarter” but constantly say “one fourth” like they are children relaying wheat yields in the 1700s

    • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      You forget, “quarter” also is the name of a coin here.

      (And quarter is also housing for redcoats in our homes (which we refuse) and mercy in combat, and a vaguely one-fourth chunk of human when ripped apart by horses bolting in the primary directions.)

      • ParadoxSeahorse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Apart from the coin that’s the same everywhere. And it’s because it’s “one fourth” of a dollar, which I mean, I’m not confused, who would be confused by that

  • TheFogan@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 hours ago

    basically all arosol’s do that as well, same for pam and just about every other spray, and yeah it’s shady as hell, it’s much like tictac’s are technically sugar free… in spite of being 90% sugar, because their serving size is 1 piece.

      • Taldan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        1/4th of a second is already more than 2 calories. You’re really underestimating how much oil is used at a time. No one is using less that 1/4th second sprays