Comment on This Avocado Oil that claims to be “0 Calories” 🙄

HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

• Rothe@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Yup, the “serving size” nonsense is a US corporate lobbied loophole which basically allows them to put whatever they want on their nutrition information.

  I wouldn’t have expected anything else from the US “Corporations are people too” of A.

  source

  • jdr@lemmy.ml ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    EU has absurd serving size measurements too, but also 100g measuements

    source
  • observantTrapezium@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    In Canada we also have nutrition facts per serving bullshit

    source
• toynbee@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Supposedly this is why tic tacs, which are almost 100% sugar, can claim to be sugar free.

  source

  • Nollij@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    They don’t claim to be sugar-free, at least not the ones made of sugar. Instead, they claim to have 0g of sugar per serving. That is a critical difference.

    source

    • toynbee@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      My mistake.

      source
  • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    In that case, they are using synthetic sweetener instead of sugar.

    source

    • huppakee@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      If a tictac has >200 pieces in a pack, and you claim serving size is 1, then whatever it is made of has >0,5% per serving. It could be made of radioactive waste and they could put ‘a tictac cointains no radioactive waste’ on the pack. The game is rigged.

      source

      • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        For “calories per serving”, absolutely, but nowhere on the packaging does it say Sugar Free because that’s a completely different claim that would be completely false.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • toynbee@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      My mistake.

      source
• hhg@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Avocado oil should have 884 kcal per 100g, therefore one serving of 0.25g would be 2.21 kcal. Why is that allowed to be rounded to zero?

  source

  • Daedskin@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    It’s rounded to the nearest multiple of 10; it could be up to 5 (exclusively), and could still be listed as 0. It’s why so many lower-calorie products are listed with a zero-calorie serving size in the US. I’m not sure about the specifics of regulations — if any exist — on selecting serving sizes; this particular example feels a little fishy to me.

    source

    • fushuan@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      That’s an arbitrary rounding I’ve yet to see in packagings here. A lot of calorie numbers end in other values. Yeah the comma is usually rounded but that’s it.

      source
  • Squirrelsdrivemenuts@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    I think you can round down and be off by a certain percentage.

    source

    • jdr@lemmy.ml ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      What’s 20 or 50% between friends?

      source
  • huppakee@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Because it is 0g fat

    source

    • logi@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      They’re multiplying by the 0.25g serving size, then rounding the 0.25g of fat down to 0g and calculating the calories from that? I can barely imagine the apoplectic rage this would have triggered in my experimental physics professor.

      source
  • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Because they are allowed to do their own testing to determine caloric quantity and there is often some flubbing in the recipe during the testing. Kinda like how VWs used to have a different engine mode for emissions tests than normal driving.

    source
• fushuan@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  It’s still oil tho, 0.25g of product of oil has 0.25g of fat, regardless of how healthy that fat is.

  source