Stupid Consumer Scams

[epepke]

I'd like to collect some, so please chime in with suggestions.

There's a brand of salt (I forget the name) that has less sodium per teaspoon because the crystals are bigger and so the intersticial spaces are larger.

There's Gwaltney's Low-Fat Bacon which has 40% less fat per slice because the slices are smaller.

[SteveGrenard]

Pizza cut into 6 slices because 8 slices are too many for you to eat

[BTox]

Some margarines were lower in fat by whipping in air.

[Zep]

Any and all products that are "X% Fat Free!". They just can't bring themselves to admit they are "(100-X)% Fat!"

[epepke]

Originally posted by Zep
Any and all products that are "X% Fat Free!". They just can't bring themselves to admit they are "(100-X)% Fat!"

I love that fat-free stuff. In the US, government standards for whole milk are 3.7% milk fat. (Whether that's volume or mass or whatever I have no idea). So, whole milk could legally be sold as 96.3% Fat-Free!

[geni]

The one where they take the fat out of your milk and sell it back to you a cream.

[Jeff Corey]

The claim, "He's a real medium" is not a rare oxymoron. But it's overdone by Grenard and others.











Ladybrook.

[BTox]

Originally posted by epepke


I love that fat-free stuff. In the US, government standards for whole milk are 3.7% milk fat. (Whether that's volume or mass or whatever I have no idea). So, whole milk could legally be sold as 96.3% Fat-Free!

Nope. FDA has regulations on milk labeling. Whole milk cannot be labeled as "low fat", neither can 2%. The other grades:

"2 percent milk will become known, for example, as "reduced fat" or "less fat" instead of "low fat"
1 percent milk will remain "low fat" or become, for example, "little fat"
skim will retain its name or be called, for example, fat-free, zero-fat, or no-fat milk." Jan 1, 1998 new labeling law, FDA

[epepke]

Originally posted by BTox


Nope. FDA has regulations on milk labeling. Whole milk cannot be labeled as "low fat", neither can 2%.

Nobody said "low fat." 96.3% Fat-Free is strictly accurate. I'd love to see a Supreme Court case over this one.

[SteveGrenard]

Nouvelle cuisine -- where they charge you more and give you less

[BTox]

Originally posted by epepke


Nobody said "low fat." 96.3% Fat-Free is strictly accurate. I'd love to see a Supreme Court case over this one.

I'd venture a guess FDA would not allow the terms fat-free on milk that contained fat, no matter what percentage is used (would consider it misleading).

[Wyvern]

How KFC is currently implying that their fried chicken is diet food because it is high in protein and low carb.

[Wyvern]

Btw, are we to read the name of this thread as 'stupid consumer' scams or as stupid 'consumer scams?' :D

[Zep]

Originally posted by BTox
I'd venture a guess FDA would not allow the terms fat-free on milk that contained fat, no matter what percentage is used (would consider it misleading). If not allowed on milk, why not apply this same standard to all other foods? Just curious...

[Agent13]

Originally posted by Wyvern
How KFC is currently implying that their fried chicken is diet food because it is high in protein and low carb. KFC Ending Ads Touting Healthfulness (http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/ap/ap_story.html/Financial/AP.V8904.AP-KFC-Ad-Complain.html)

[The Don]

A lot of soft drinks, particularly squashes (fruit flavoured syrups) are described as having "no added sugar" when they're simply bursting with artificial sweetners instead.

..... and don't even get me started on Sunny Delight. Paying fruit juice prices for reconstituted orange squash :mad:

[Matabiri]

Originally posted by The Don
A lot of soft drinks, particularly squashes (fruit flavoured syrups) are described as having "no added sugar" when they're simply bursting with artificial sweetners instead.


And, in return, cranberry juice touting itself as containing "no artificial sweeteners". If you check the ingredients, it's full of sugar instead...

I think the "I can't believe it's not butter" line should be extended to other products.

"I can't believe it's not meat" for vegetarian food.
"I can't believe it's not sugar" for artificial sweeteners.
"I can't believe it's not lard" for cooking oil...

[El Greco]

Originally posted by The Don
A lot of soft drinks, particularly squashes (fruit flavoured syrups) are described as having "no added sugar" when they're simply bursting with artificial sweetners instead.

This can't be classified as scam because artificial sweeteners have very small or inexistent caloric value, while sugar, like all carbohydrates, is 4 kcal/gr. A regular Coke can (with sugar) gives about 130kcal, while Coke light (with aspartame) is virtually calorie-free.

Oh, and artificial sweeteners are not dangerous in normal doses, contrary to what a few weirdos say. We have beaten this subject to death in nutritional fora, ask for links if you doubt.

[Ove]

What really annoys me is that every 6- 12 months they bring out a washing powder with "New improoved formular" that washes much better than the old one. BU**SH*T!!!!:mad: Off course it's the same stuff in a new box.

But don't get me started on the frauds like "Quick'nBrite" or that plate that "polishes" silver/brass/jewellery etc. (If it is that good than how come you get not one but TWO for the same price ;) ). Those people really should be ashamed of themselves.:(

[El Greco]

Ab-machines and home-gyms

"With 5 minutes a day, you will have washboard abs, arms like pillars and chest like a barrel"

[Powa]

Originally posted by Ove
What really annoys me is that every 6- 12 months they bring out a washing powder with "New improoved formular" that washes much better than the old one. BU**SH*T!!!!:mad: Off course it's the same stuff in a new box.


Oh, but you get all those cute green or blue soap shavings in it for the same price :D

[The Don]

Originally posted by El Greco


This can't be classified as scam because artificial sweeteners have very small or inexistent caloric value, while sugar, like all carbohydrates, is 4 kcal/gr. A regular Coke can (with sugar) gives about 130kcal, while Coke light (with aspartame) is virtually calorie-free.

Oh, and artificial sweeteners are not dangerous in normal doses, contrary to what a few weirdos say. We have beaten this subject to death in nutritional fora, ask for links if you doubt.

Sorry, I should have been more specific. What annoys me is that these drinks are marketed to parents as being somehow healthy. Children should be encouraged to drink as much water as possible IMO and avoid the sweet stuff.

Of course I did have something of a strict upbringing

[jimmygun]

Any product that has the lower limit of allowable substance can be called _____free. One cola product claims sodium free on the front of the can and in the ingredients is...sodium...65mg.

If you ever get a product that advertises 'Now...rat s**t free!' it will have the minimum amount of rat droppings allowed by law.

[Powa]

Originally posted by jimmygun
Any product that has the lower limit of allowable substance can be called _____free.

True. Where I live we have an alcohol-free beer with 0,23 to 0,39 % alcohol.


BTW, that rat s**t reference really made me think :eek:

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by geni
The one where they take the fat out of your milk and sell it back to you a cream.


If people really want low fat milk, they can just buy the ' whole milk ' product and add water..


You can really save a lot of ( milk ) money this way too..


Has anyone else noticed that the ' low fat ' stuff just looks like watered down milk anyway? I wonder if this is how they make it ' low fat ', by just adding water ?

[Skeptical Greg]

How about the way they like to tout:

Sodium Free !!
On soft drinks, like ' Sprite '. As if this somehow makes them more healthy than those nasty drinks that have salt in them, like V-8 or some such..

They also like to splash

Cholesterol Free!!

... on cookies and such.. Oh Yeah!! You can eat all of these you want, 'cause they don't have any cholesterol....:rolleyes:

[Powa]

Originally posted by Diogenes
I wonder if this is how they make it ' low fat ', by just adding water ?
This reminds me of a joke.

Some guy sees a farmer milking a goat. He asks him "Say, How much milk do you get from that goat?"
"Oh, about 5 liters" says the farmer.
The guy asks "And what do you do with so much milk?"
The farmer says "We drink 2 liters ourselves and sell 4 liters".

(Forum patrons of American persuasion will have to do the conversion themselves :) )

[The Don]

Another one that makes me cross are the various ways of saying "intensively farmed" such as:

- Fresh eggs
- Country fresh eggs
- Barn eggs (a little better I know)

Rather than providing free range. And while I'm at it, the definitions of free range which mean that one of the chickens once saw a glimpse of daylight through the tiny hole at the end of the huge chicken shed

[Rolfe]

Some time ago there was a case here of a brand of bread which was marketed to slimmers as having "x calories fewer per slice". They were forced to stop doing this by Advertising Standards when it was discovered that the only difference between this and the regular stuff was that the sices were thinner.

Rolfe.

[El Greco]

The greatest and most dangerous scam of all:

Advertising a product as healthy because it has "vegetable oils", but when you look at the label you see that the vegetable oils are "partially hydrogenated".

[hgc]

Originally posted by BTox


Nope. FDA has regulations on milk labeling. Whole milk cannot be labeled as "low fat", neither can 2%. The other grades:

"2 percent milk will become known, for example, as "reduced fat" or "less fat" instead of "low fat"
1 percent milk will remain "low fat" or become, for example, "little fat"
skim will retain its name or be called, for example, fat-free, zero-fat, or no-fat milk." Jan 1, 1998 new labeling law, FDA Ever wonder how cooking sprays, like PAM, work? I'll give you a clue. They're vegetable oil, plain and simple. How can it be non-fat, then? That's simple -- less than 0.5% of U.S. RDA (recommended daily allowance) of fat computes to "no fat," since it rounds down to zero. Of course RDA is computed based on the manufacturer's serving size. The serving size on PAM, in order to accomplish this, is 0.25 seconds of spraying time. How likely is that to be achieved?

This isn't really a criticism of PAM. An oil spray is an effective way to get lubrication with a very low fat content, but it's not zero fat.

[Starrman]

What about items that say things like '40% more free!' The cost per unit of measure is less but you don't get anything free.
I've always wanted to take it to the counter and ask if I can have only the free portion.

And speaking of abs, what about those electric belts that stimulate your ab muscles to give you the six pack. They claim you get a washboard stomach from sitting there getting your gut shocked. Those are about as blatant a scam as there is.

[Hamish]

Not quite in the same spirit, but I have seen one custard based desert which had on the packaging a small bar chart. The bar chart compared the fat content of the desert to a standard yoghurt desert. They were obviously very proud that their desert contained about three times more fat than a standard yoghurt.

That's the sort of endorsement I'd like to see more often!

[diddidit]

I Can't Believe It Ain't Butter spray was legally advertised as fat free. One "serving" was so tiny that it actually fell below the federal "calories from fat" cutoff point for a fat free food, despite the fact that the stuff is just flavored vegetable oil. I saw a great many people practically pouring the stuff on their bread, evidently thinking they were on the fast train to thin thighs.

Re the KFC chicken, I don't think there are regulations on the word "diet." Since there are so many people doing the "Atkins Diet" (which is interesting, since Atkins didn't call his thing a diet, he called it the Atkins Nutritional Approach), KFC is free to call their fat-laden but low-carb fried chicken "diet."

did

[phildonnia]

How about "100% juice", which is 90% white grape juice, a.k.a.: "a rather expensive and perverse form of sugar-water."

[Abdul Alhazred]

Originally posted by phildonnia
How about "100% juice", which is 90% white grape juice, a.k.a.: "a rather expensive and perverse form of sugar-water."

It makes a difference if you want to avoid corn syrup, which is the usual sweetener in commercially prepared "juice drinks" (in the USA).

[phildonnia]

Originally posted by Abdul Alhazred


It makes a difference if you want to avoid corn syrup, which is the usual sweetener in commercially prepared "juice drinks" (in the USA).

While I can think of a few good reasons to avoid corn syrup, none of them would suggest fruit juice as an alternative.

[c4ts]

Magnetic bracelets designed to heal sports injuries.

[Abdul Alhazred]

Originally posted by phildonnia


While I can think of a few good reasons to avoid corn syrup, none of them would suggest fruit juice as an alternative.

Corn syrup isn't Kosher for Passover. :D

[epepke]

Originally posted by Wyvern
Btw, are we to read the name of this thread as 'stupid consumer' scams or as stupid 'consumer scams?' :D

;) Yes, you are.

[epepke]

Originally posted by Wyvern
Btw, are we to read the name of this thread as 'stupid consumer' scams or as stupid 'consumer scams?' :D

;) Yes, you are.

[BTox]

Originally posted by Zep
If not allowed on milk, why not apply this same standard to all other foods? Just curious...

Probably because milk is consumed by a large percentage of the population, and, unlike many other foods, has a consistent fat content.

[ReasonedFaith]

Any of the dozens of bogus "fat burning" diet aid products which sternly warn in their ads;

"CAUTION: Use of this product could result in TOO MUCH, or TOO RAPID weight loss..."

[tim]

Originally posted by The Don
A lot of soft drinks, particularly squashes (fruit flavoured syrups) are described as having "no added sugar" when they're simply bursting with artificial sweetners instead.

..... and don't even get me started on Sunny Delight. Paying fruit juice prices for reconstituted orange squash :mad:

Won't argue on Sunny Delight - awful stuff.
"No added sugar" is fine as far as I am concerned, being diabetic. I look for that. I'm not over keen on sweeteners, but needs must when the devil drives..................

[nick]

Here's an almost accidental scam, at least in Europe, maybe an American reader can check.

Fat in milk is quoted as percentage of fat in the total package. Typically 3% or whatever.

Fat in cheese is quoted as percentage of fat in the dry residue, when all the water is taken out. Typically 60%, say.

This doesn't make for much of a problem because you aren't comparing the two.

But things get complicated when you start moving down the scale from milk, through yogurt, through curd cheese, cream cheese, cottage cheese, etc, to cheese. At some point, I can never remember where, you get a product which says, for example, 10% fat, which actually gives you more fat if you eat a 100 gramme package of it, than the next product along the line (which is subject to the "dry residue" calculation) and which says "15% fat". This happens because both are, say, 50% water, but in the first case you are getting 10% of 100 grammes = 10 grammes of fat, in the second 15% of half of 100 grammes = 7.5 grammes of fat.

[LTC8K6]

The 12oz. can is now 11.5oz.

The cracker that you like is now just a bit smaller than it used to be.

That bag of chips is mostly air, and it still weighs less than it did a couple of years ago.

Few people notice that they are getting a little bit less in what appears to be the same package.

[Blondin]

One of my favorites was the "Everlasting Light Bulb Company". I haven't heard about this one for a few years but it works like this:

First you go out and buy a couple dozen 60 & 100 watt light bulbs. Then you take some thinners and wipe off all markings. Take them to someones house and tell them you represent the Everlasting Lightbulb Company. Your story is that you have perfected a lightbulb that will never burn out. You tell them that the technology to do this is not very complicated or new but Philips and GE have been paying a team of lawyers to challenge and suppress all attempts to patent or market this product so the poor, gullible public will continue to buy "inferior" lightbulbs ad-infinitum. People love to believe all that "corporate conspiracy to suppress my invention" stuff. The only way to get your product to the people is by direct door-to-door marketing until the word gets out and those big corporate meanies are foiled for good.

For some "reasonable" fee you will replace all the lightbulbs in their house with Everlasting Lightbulbs and they will never have to buy a lightbulb again. After doing this swap you ask them if they have any friends or relatives that might be interested saving money and helping an underdog triumph. You then take all the light bulbs you removed from their house, wipe off all the markings with a little thinners, and proceed to the next sucker... sorry, consumer's house.

Apparently teams of hucksters would target small towns in the 50's & 60's and work the scam until basically everybody in town had swapped lightbulbs.

My all-time favorite, though, would have to be:

Laundry Disks (http://www.worldwidescam.com/indexld.htm)

[Psi Baba]

A while back there was a "Lite" pasta on the market which claimed to be lower in calories than ordinary pasta. A look at the cooking instructions revealed two curious points: You were instructed to use less pasta than you normally would, and you were also instructed to leave it in the water longer, which obviously causes the pasta to absorb more water, thereby bulking it up. So you end up with the same size portion on your plate, except it contains more water than usual. It turned out the pasta was indentical to that brand's regular pasta, except the Lite version sold at a higher price.