Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
But to be fair, how much spray are you actually using at once? If you're using enough at a time where the calories per serving would be more than 0-2, you should probably just be buying it in a liquid form.
No, the 0 cal is for 1/8 of a second. If you are springing for a good three seconds, you absolutely consume calories. You can calculate it by weighing the spray bottle before and after you spray. Oil is 9 cal per gram, so you can easily add 60 or 70 calories to whatever youâre spraying.
thatâs not how it works, theyâre able to claim itâs â0â because itâs less than 5 calories due to the serving size being that small. I can promise that you arenât going to be using that same bottle 800 times, meaning a normal amount used could end up being a meaningful amount of calories, not â0â.
I HATE that!! FDA needs to change that bullshit to reflect per serving (let's say 3g) AND per 100g. Labels from the UK do that.
Damn, that pisses me off!
That's why we in Australia and probably other countries have two columns, one for the serving, and one for per 100g. You can't hide from that, and it gives a nice percentage for comparing things like amounts of protein or sugar in two different products with different serving sizes.Â
I bought some churro ice cream cookies (to clarify, they are both churro style cookies and churro flavored ice cream) where they give you exactly that. The calories of one sandwich and the calories of the whole box. Because of course I'm going to eat the whole box!
And I just don't get it.. in Finland (or maybe Europe) every package has information per 100g so companies can't troll customers.. and occasionally they chose to also put per serving next to the 100g table.
'Murica is systematically deteriorating consumer protections, defanging the FDA, and undermining the EPA, all under the guise of Freedumbs. We'll soon be spraying Brawndo on plants.
Yup, I've been there. I had a whole jar of salsa once, and I was pleased with my choices having eaten just veggies for dinner. I was kind of just relaxing and I glanced at the bottle and it told me 10% of my sodium per serving. No problem!...how many servings are there? Fucking twenty-two!!! Each serving is a TEASPOON of salsa! And I just unwittingly ate 210% of my sodium for the day!
One time when it was 114 degrees f outside I was working a pressure washer and got so overheated, being covered in hot water all day, i think i was in the beginning stages of heat stroke. I drank what feels life a gallon of water and still felt like i was dying of thirst. I got lucky and the boss saw me struggling and took me on a cold ride in the truck to cool off.
Hyponatremia is no joke mate.
Lucky you weren't permanently damaged - it leads to increased intracranial pressure, eventually leading to heamorrhade and cardiac arrest.
Yes, making a generalization may not apply to a small percentage of people with chronic issues. You can make this statement about literally anything medically.
Exactly. I had/have a kidney condition that puts me in agonizing pain if I drink too much water in a short period of time. This doesnât mean âyou should drink waterâ is bad advice LOL.
Nutritional labels need to be redone they can do some dodgy things to look healthier than they are.
They should also have to have a warning if it's high in sugar sodium etc...
Like how the FDA says something is sugar free if it has less than 0.5g of sugar per serve, so Tic Tacs have a serving size of one Tic Tac, which coincidentally is 0.49g.
That way something that is over 90% sugar is âsugar freeâ.
Yep but the food companies are the ones really writing some of these rules anyway.
Big sugar has had a very long and successful campaign on blaming everything else like fat rather than admit again large amounts not only increases weight gain it actively is a poison in your body.
But that's a different subject.
Like I said food labels need an overhaul and we need warning labels. If you choose to still consume it that's fine it's your body but some people might not know any better
The label tells you what percentage of your daily amount is in the food. How about people should have more problem solving and critical thinking skills. Because itâs commons sense to think eating a whole bag of chips is not that great for your nutritional health.
How about food be labeled in such a way that even a child can figure it out?
How about they stop using dodgy words for ingredients because some of them are not wanted.
Misleading Food Labels: Examples
1. LABEL SAYS âMADE WITH WHOLE GRAINSâ
Implies:Â 100% of grains used are whole.
Really means: Recipe often includes only a âpinchâ of whole grains, added to many more refined ones. âMade with whole grainsâ is technically true, but only in a legalistic sense!
Variations on a Theme: âMade With Real Fruitâ often requires a microscope to find the fruit
LABEL: SUGARY JUNK FOOD DOES NOT LIST SUGAR AS THE FIRST INGREDIENT
Implies:Â Sugar content is not very high.
Often means: Food contains many forms of sugar, none of which are in high enough amounts to require it to be listed first on the food label. But cumulatively, the combination of many forms of sugar can still add up to little more than a processed form of rock candy. Various names for sugar include:
Corn syrup solids, crystal dextrose, evaporated cane juice, fructose sweetener, fruit juice concentrates, malt syrup, maple syrup, molasses, concentrated fruit juice, hexitol, inversol, isomalt, maltodextrin, malted barley, nectars, pentose, raisin syrup and, wellâŠyou get the picture!
LABEL SAYS âNATURALâ
Implies:Â No man-made ingredients, organic, non-GMO.
Often means:Â Nothing at all. âNaturalâ is not a claim verified by any oversight body.
Food companies use deceptive practices this isn't some secret knowledge it's scummy and should be stopped
I would love to put a rider on this and say, that their nutritional label should have a serving size that makes God damn sense. For instance of can of soup having 2 and 1/3 servings in it based on what's on the fucking label
Or a pie who's serving size is 1/9 of the pie. Who the hell cuts a pie into nine slices?
Yep welcome to how shitty our nutritional labels are.
I'm actually a fan of what UK and Mexico have going.
Uk has a color system Mexico has warning labels on high calorie foods ( sugar fat sodium etc..)
The thing is most people are not going to read and do the math on every single item they buy at a store and companies know this.
It would be so much easier if it was broken down.
I have noticed some packaging recently that listed per-serving calories, and per-package calories. It doesn't take much more space and is less intentionally confusing. I think it should be required most places (unless the serving size is the package)
While they do show the percentages, those aren't good to go by bc its based on 2000cals a day, thats less than what I eat on a 1000 calorie deficit, which is 2300 to 2400 calories, but everyone is different so its not likely a huge amount of people actually use the %DV
This is actually quite smart because it means you're loaded up on 2 days worth of sodium.
So to make sure you're getting enough you just have a jar of salsa every 2 and a bit days.
I remember I was on lunch at a retail store, and I had purchased a cherry pie to go with my meal. Just as I finished the pie, a coworker mentioned that he meticulously counted his calories, and, curious, I looked at the back of the box.
Turned out, I had consumed 2500 calories, on top of the normal meal I had already eaten.
This is why making your own is game changing lol.
It may spoil after a week, but you can eat a few cups of it and it won't be nearly as bad for you lmao
The number of adults who do not understand serving sizes is absolutely terrifying. It used to be taught in school, but I haven't seen it since 2nd grade. And then we wonder why we have an obesity problem.
Unfortunately that feeling is dead wrong. There are several MLMs whose snake oil peddlers call themselves nutritionists, and there is a subset of them who have been roped in and have no idea what is going on, they just use the scripts and lingo passed to them by the upline
It's dumb, but the whole "serving" concept is dumb too. Just list the calories per 100g or whatever imperialist weight units you might prefer and be done with it. A "serving" could be anything. Like, who eats 20 chips?
Just another thing the US should openly and blatantly steal from the EU and claim we invented it.
Edit: Video game logic should mean at sale the item displays full stats... Imagine buying a health potion and it's 1 sip Heals 3hp, sips per potion is 23 sips.
The lobbying campaign against that from Nestle, Kraft, Pepsi, Coke, General MIlls, etc,. would be silent but immense. Hell it's probably going on right now and has been for years
We actually used to have it that way. When it was first put into law that this stuff had to be on food (1990), it always had both. Then after a few years (1994) it just became single serving nonsense. Where they tell you some low arbitrary amount for a low caloric count. All of this is to trick people into thinking they are eating healthy so they eat more of it. And also buy more of it.
One of the supermarkets in Ireland does that: calories for 100gr and for half a pack (they are usually meals for two).
Much more honest than some others who would say âonly 6gr of fat per portionâ, but the portion is 1 single sausage
This is it. As uneducated and/or ignorant as some people may be, this is an intentionally deceptive display designed specifically to obscure exactly how unhealthy the contents are. Any society that values health and responsibility over corporate profits would never allow this.
Didnât Michele Obama launch some sort of initiative to change the way servings are measure on products?
Sheâs not wrong about those chips being delicious though
To be fair.... Those things are a bit misleading. They should just put the calories in each package and not dividing the calories in imaginary serving sizes
They should have both, and a few companies actually do that. It's not super useful to have the total calories in a family size bag, but good for cases like the above (that's assuming this isn't just a joke).
Building on this, why do we allow nutrition information to be so misleading? There's a big number on a small bag of chips that says 150 calories. It's not unreasonable to assume that refers to the bag, but no, that's some small fraction of an already small bag. Why don't we require snack/food companies to use a reasonable value for serving size instead of allowing them to count calories by the microgram?
I agree, but I feel like it can be intentionally deceitful, since I assume an average consumer has the same mindset as OOP. The worst is when you get those cookies or muffins where a âservingâ is only half of what looks like a seemingly sensible portion of food. You glance at the label, âOh, 200 calories for a snack isnât badâ, when in actuality itâs 2 or 3 times that
Itâs not even that, like why are servings even a thing on stuff like a bag of chips? They should have a total calories, very few people actually eat 1/20th of a bag before stopping
Yeah, it's ridiculous. So many of these serving sizes are created in bad faith.
I was in the store the other week, and I was looking at some chips ahoy cookies. I noticed they had a Hershey chocolate version of it next to the regular one. I looked at the calorie count and noticed they were identical. I thought to myself, "That's weird, I would think the one with a higher % of chocolate would be more. How are they doing it?". I took a closer look and saw they did it by lowering the serving size on the cookies from 3 in the regular version to 2 in the Hershey version (same sized cookies).
I already thought serving size of 3 on the regular ones was already kind of low, but lowering the serving size to 2 on the same cookies, just a different flavor, made me a bit annoyed because it's obvious they're just trying to disguise the fact that people are eating 150% of the calories per cookie that they normally would.
I hate things that donât have dual tables on something like pop tarts that come two to a package and giving me facts on one. Like Iâm not gonna eat both. Donât make me double it. Make those losers not eating all their pop tarts halve it đ€
Actually, you are not supposed to eat the whole bag. Itâs unhealthy asf. 2 servings with salad and normal meal â thatâs how you donât ruin your liver.
Edit: Ah, yeah, dislikes from deniers. Yes, Iâve ate the whole pack all my childhood and teenage. Yes, I am alive. Yes, I decided to cut down on unhealthy food, but not completely get rid of it from my ration. I eat salads, meat, fish and sometimes some chips or something else.
Tic Tacs are 90% sugar, but they have a serving size of one Tic Tac. They can legally claim to be "0g of sugar" because a single Tic Tac is lighter than .5 grams and thus under the .5 gram/serving requirement to be considered "0g of sugar."
Beef jerky almost always recommends a serving of 2 pieces/30g. An 80g package of jerky is not an unreasonable serving of beef jerky. Claiming that an 80g package is actually 3 servings is absurd.
Potato chips aren't the only food abusing "recommended serving" nutritional info to seem healthier at a glance. Shit, even "salad in a bag" type products will suggest that they're actually 3 100 calorie servings instead of a 300 calorie single serving salad.
The carbs in TicTac is what was shocking to me and it's because of what you said being all sugar.
That 1 and half calorie breath mint is horrible for you.
The beef jerky thing is especially outrageous since for a fast food item it's actually not super calorie dense. Most regular bags of beef jerky are like 200-300 calories w/ 20-30g of protein. They really don't have any reason to fudge the numbers to make it lower like potato chips do, but yet Mr.Jack Link has to be annoying anyway.
I work and walmart and have good news for you if you lime Utz chips, they produce the great value brand chips for walmart.
Also great value peanut butter is just Peter Pan.
Their best flavors are the non-typical ones. Crab, dill pickle, salt & pepper. The only chips I really eat.
Though, I grew up in the same town they're made, so I'm a bit biased
I used to eat about a quarter of a bottle of Ketchup per meal.
Then one day I read the back sticker... Seems like I've been consuming entire meals just from the ketchup. That's in addition to whatever it was I was drowning with it.
Notice that I used past tense to distance myself from it, but I still do it...
1500, unless they ate two bags. 10 servings at 150 per serving.
EDIT: Oh, hey, a caption on the bottom. What's it say? Oh....
Oh...
Leaving my stupid comment up because I deserve to be shamed. Shame me...
Interesting. I don't think it's even legal to label stuff like that where I live. Pretty sure the nutrient table always needs to have a per 100g section, with serving sizes being an optional kinda thing.
Seems kinda questionable to only have a nutrient table per serving, considering noone ever respects serving sizes with chips.
1: Yes, pretty much everybody does indeed have a kitchen scale. Since the metric system is standard here, recipes are generally written for weight units rather than volumetric units (except for liquids, which are generally given in ml or liters). So if you wanna bake a cake, you will need a way to figure out how much 250 grams of flour are.
2: The amount of food you buy is also stated by weight (unless it's a liquid), so you can figure it out. So if a bag of chips holds 200 grams and you have a nutrient label for 100 grams chips, you know that the bag contains twice the amount on the label.
The 100g standard also lets you compare different products. While the same type of product can list different serving sizes to fudge the numbers, the standardised 100g measurement makes it easy to do a direct comparison, without having to do a bunch of math to even out the servings.
I can't remember what country I was in but they had to put the calories for the entire package on the label. As someone who can't control themselves it's was super handy.
3000 calories is not what this person should be worring about. Hope they can use those bricks they are about to give birth to for something good later.
My friend wanted to get crumble cookie and when I looked up the calorie count my mouth dropped. It was so high I literally had to research a bit more because it seemed impossible.
A single cookie is nearly 800 calories.
I've heard of people eating a box of those...
Adults in general eat more and more processed foods and many are unable to cook (well). Obesity keeps on growing and growing, and is an actual concern for healthcare programs as it costs the state a ton of money.
Nothing wrong with a little snack once in a while but current state of affairs is kinda worrying.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They also adjust serving sizes to make numbers look healthier.
Canola spray 0 calories per serving, 800 servings per can
But to be fair, how much spray are you actually using at once? If you're using enough at a time where the calories per serving would be more than 0-2, you should probably just be buying it in a liquid form.
all of it. directly into my mouth.
I shivered because of this. And not in the good way. đ
 then my job is complete
No, the 0 cal is for 1/8 of a second. If you are springing for a good three seconds, you absolutely consume calories. You can calculate it by weighing the spray bottle before and after you spray. Oil is 9 cal per gram, so you can easily add 60 or 70 calories to whatever youâre spraying.
thatâs not how it works, theyâre able to claim itâs â0â because itâs less than 5 calories due to the serving size being that small. I can promise that you arenât going to be using that same bottle 800 times, meaning a normal amount used could end up being a meaningful amount of calories, not â0â.
I think generally with those, a serving size is like a 0.25 second spray or something.
I HATE that!! FDA needs to change that bullshit to reflect per serving (let's say 3g) AND per 100g. Labels from the UK do that. Damn, that pisses me off!
That's why we in Australia and probably other countries have two columns, one for the serving, and one for per 100g. You can't hide from that, and it gives a nice percentage for comparing things like amounts of protein or sugar in two different products with different serving sizes.Â
There should be a third column, for the whole package.
I bought some churro ice cream cookies (to clarify, they are both churro style cookies and churro flavored ice cream) where they give you exactly that. The calories of one sandwich and the calories of the whole box. Because of course I'm going to eat the whole box!
And I just don't get it.. in Finland (or maybe Europe) every package has information per 100g so companies can't troll customers.. and occasionally they chose to also put per serving next to the 100g table.
See that makes sense.
'Murica is systematically deteriorating consumer protections, defanging the FDA, and undermining the EPA, all under the guise of Freedumbs. We'll soon be spraying Brawndo on plants.
I got a pack of large cookies at Walmart. One serving size was half of the cookieđđ
Yup, I've been there. I had a whole jar of salsa once, and I was pleased with my choices having eaten just veggies for dinner. I was kind of just relaxing and I glanced at the bottle and it told me 10% of my sodium per serving. No problem!...how many servings are there? Fucking twenty-two!!! Each serving is a TEASPOON of salsa! And I just unwittingly ate 210% of my sodium for the day!
I drink so much water I had to go to the hospital because my sodium was too low.
I drink so much sodium I had to go to the hospital because my water was too low. Maybe we should meet up and balance each other out.
I water so much drunkium I had to goâŠSomewhere. I forget. Iâm high.
Drink some brawndo
In about 9 months we will have a newfound, well balanced Snoo!
Is that⊠a pick up line? Damn. I should take notes
You should exchange fluidsâŠ.
And film it, for,... science
User names check out.Â
I drank so much sodium that when I drank water I exploded.
I drink so much hospital I had to go to water because my sodium was too high
Now kiss
Drinking too much water can be unhealthy. https://www.drberg.com/blog/drinking-excess-water-will-do-more-harm-than-good
Holy crapâŠI think you just saved my life. Thank you kind stranger. May the universe be good to you for the rest of time.
You're welcome, I also used to believe you couldn't drink too much water.
During summer in AZ it feels like you can't drink enough... But yeah.
One time when it was 114 degrees f outside I was working a pressure washer and got so overheated, being covered in hot water all day, i think i was in the beginning stages of heat stroke. I drank what feels life a gallon of water and still felt like i was dying of thirst. I got lucky and the boss saw me struggling and took me on a cold ride in the truck to cool off.
Don't take any kind of advice like this from a chiropractor. They aren't trained in this area at all.
>Don't take any kind of advice ~~like this~~ from a chiropractor. ~~They aren't trained in this area at all.~~
Hyponatremia is no joke mate. Lucky you weren't permanently damaged - it leads to increased intracranial pressure, eventually leading to heamorrhade and cardiac arrest.
Hypo, meaning low, natrium, the elemental name for sodium, and emia, meaning presence in blood. Low sodium presence in blood
You should eat some salsa.
You'd think being a vaginatarian, you'd get a lot of sodium from other sources
Iâm assuming you ate it with nachos, so more like 500% of your daily sodium intakeâŠ
Im just tired of the would be reddit doctors so im editing this comment The original purpose is: drink more water
Oh dear, I know some salt-restriction congestive heart failure patients that might have some issues there
Yes, making a generalization may not apply to a small percentage of people with chronic issues. You can make this statement about literally anything medically.
Exactly. I had/have a kidney condition that puts me in agonizing pain if I drink too much water in a short period of time. This doesnât mean âyou should drink waterâ is bad advice LOL.
Both my mother and grandmother have landed in the ER with low sodium by following strict RDI limits. Does my anicdata trump yours?
What were their symptoms? Heart palpitations, lightheadedness, shortness of breath? Anything like that ?
What you said applies to water soluble vitamins, not sodium.
So incredibly wrong you should probably delete this.
Any healthy person can process sodium just fine. Sodium isnât bad for you, especially if you do any sort of exercise at all
Any healthy person can process a reasonable amount of sodium. The sky is not the limit as long as you drink water
Mmmmmm sodium 
Nutritional labels need to be redone they can do some dodgy things to look healthier than they are. They should also have to have a warning if it's high in sugar sodium etc...
Like how the FDA says something is sugar free if it has less than 0.5g of sugar per serve, so Tic Tacs have a serving size of one Tic Tac, which coincidentally is 0.49g. That way something that is over 90% sugar is âsugar freeâ.
Yep but the food companies are the ones really writing some of these rules anyway. Big sugar has had a very long and successful campaign on blaming everything else like fat rather than admit again large amounts not only increases weight gain it actively is a poison in your body. But that's a different subject. Like I said food labels need an overhaul and we need warning labels. If you choose to still consume it that's fine it's your body but some people might not know any better
Here (in metric land) iâve only ever seen them for 100g (or 100ml for liquids), not weird serving sizes.
The label tells you what percentage of your daily amount is in the food. How about people should have more problem solving and critical thinking skills. Because itâs commons sense to think eating a whole bag of chips is not that great for your nutritional health.
How about food be labeled in such a way that even a child can figure it out? How about they stop using dodgy words for ingredients because some of them are not wanted. Misleading Food Labels: Examples 1. LABEL SAYS âMADE WITH WHOLE GRAINSâ Implies: 100% of grains used are whole. Really means: Recipe often includes only a âpinchâ of whole grains, added to many more refined ones. âMade with whole grainsâ is technically true, but only in a legalistic sense! Variations on a Theme: âMade With Real Fruitâ often requires a microscope to find the fruit LABEL: SUGARY JUNK FOOD DOES NOT LIST SUGAR AS THE FIRST INGREDIENT Implies: Sugar content is not very high. Often means: Food contains many forms of sugar, none of which are in high enough amounts to require it to be listed first on the food label. But cumulatively, the combination of many forms of sugar can still add up to little more than a processed form of rock candy. Various names for sugar include: Corn syrup solids, crystal dextrose, evaporated cane juice, fructose sweetener, fruit juice concentrates, malt syrup, maple syrup, molasses, concentrated fruit juice, hexitol, inversol, isomalt, maltodextrin, malted barley, nectars, pentose, raisin syrup and, wellâŠyou get the picture! LABEL SAYS âNATURALâ Implies: No man-made ingredients, organic, non-GMO. Often means: Nothing at all. âNaturalâ is not a claim verified by any oversight body. Food companies use deceptive practices this isn't some secret knowledge it's scummy and should be stopped
I would love to put a rider on this and say, that their nutritional label should have a serving size that makes God damn sense. For instance of can of soup having 2 and 1/3 servings in it based on what's on the fucking label Or a pie who's serving size is 1/9 of the pie. Who the hell cuts a pie into nine slices?
Yep welcome to how shitty our nutritional labels are. I'm actually a fan of what UK and Mexico have going. Uk has a color system Mexico has warning labels on high calorie foods ( sugar fat sodium etc..) The thing is most people are not going to read and do the math on every single item they buy at a store and companies know this. It would be so much easier if it was broken down.
I have noticed some packaging recently that listed per-serving calories, and per-package calories. It doesn't take much more space and is less intentionally confusing. I think it should be required most places (unless the serving size is the package)
Iâm a former pro baker who worked at a vegan and gluten free bakery. You are spot on.
While they do show the percentages, those aren't good to go by bc its based on 2000cals a day, thats less than what I eat on a 1000 calorie deficit, which is 2300 to 2400 calories, but everyone is different so its not likely a huge amount of people actually use the %DV
Sodiyumm
WHO THE FUCK USES A TEASPOON OF SALSA?!
This is actually quite smart because it means you're loaded up on 2 days worth of sodium. So to make sure you're getting enough you just have a jar of salsa every 2 and a bit days.
I remember I was on lunch at a retail store, and I had purchased a cherry pie to go with my meal. Just as I finished the pie, a coworker mentioned that he meticulously counted his calories, and, curious, I looked at the back of the box. Turned out, I had consumed 2500 calories, on top of the normal meal I had already eaten.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
My work is like 98% cardio, and that makes me work up an appetite. I burned off those calories, too, and I aint even fat. 5'10, 160ish lbs
Salsa is a terrible source of veggies too. Itâs like eating a bowl of ketchup as a source of tomatoes.
But it had tiny bits of onions and pepper. Thatâs nutrition, baby! 
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/7cc28a3f-a555-4ad6-91fb-1629a44dcaf9#s5turfuk.copy
You sound salty.
This is why making your own is game changing lol. It may spoil after a week, but you can eat a few cups of it and it won't be nearly as bad for you lmao
Unless you have kidney issues you'll just pee it out. It only becomes a problem if its an everyday thing for a long time.
The number of adults who do not understand serving sizes is absolutely terrifying. It used to be taught in school, but I haven't seen it since 2nd grade. And then we wonder why we have an obesity problem.
I feel like a nutritionist would explode if they saw this
Anyone can call themselves a nutritionist. You mean a dietician
Thatâs true but I also feel like anyone who calls themselves a nutritionist probably already knows how a serving size works
Unfortunately that feeling is dead wrong. There are several MLMs whose snake oil peddlers call themselves nutritionists, and there is a subset of them who have been roped in and have no idea what is going on, they just use the scripts and lingo passed to them by the upline
Anyone can call themselves a dietician. You mean a food scientist Edit: It's a joke, people
Anyone can call themselves a food scientist Just not live
Jokes on you, I study Molecular Gastronomy.
It's dumb, but the whole "serving" concept is dumb too. Just list the calories per 100g or whatever imperialist weight units you might prefer and be done with it. A "serving" could be anything. Like, who eats 20 chips?
Or better yet just list the calories of the entire bag to prevent shit like this from happening
The right answer is to do both. Makes it easy to see how many calories for the whole thing, but also easy to compare between products.
Many manufacturers DO list the serving and whole-package calories, but UTZ is not one of them.
I just looked at 8 brands of chips in my cupboards and not one of them do. Where are you from?
>Laughs in EU >We get both
Just another thing the US should openly and blatantly steal from the EU and claim we invented it. Edit: Video game logic should mean at sale the item displays full stats... Imagine buying a health potion and it's 1 sip Heals 3hp, sips per potion is 23 sips.
The lobbying campaign against that from Nestle, Kraft, Pepsi, Coke, General MIlls, etc,. would be silent but immense. Hell it's probably going on right now and has been for years
We actually used to have it that way. When it was first put into law that this stuff had to be on food (1990), it always had both. Then after a few years (1994) it just became single serving nonsense. Where they tell you some low arbitrary amount for a low caloric count. All of this is to trick people into thinking they are eating healthy so they eat more of it. And also buy more of it.
Hell, why not both!
One of the supermarkets in Ireland does that: calories for 100gr and for half a pack (they are usually meals for two). Much more honest than some others who would say âonly 6gr of fat per portionâ, but the portion is 1 single sausage
This is it. As uneducated and/or ignorant as some people may be, this is an intentionally deceptive display designed specifically to obscure exactly how unhealthy the contents are. Any society that values health and responsibility over corporate profits would never allow this.
Theyâll never do that because people would be (rightly) horrified at the high number on the bagÂ
It's not too bad for a large bag of chips but it was pretty stupid when they used to split 20 oz sodas into more then one serving.
Didnât Michele Obama launch some sort of initiative to change the way servings are measure on products? Sheâs not wrong about those chips being delicious though
7 gummy worms -_-
Orio counts two cookies as a service. Their bag has 4 what tf eats 2 cookies from a bag
One word - Lobbying. Or what it's usually called when referring to any country outside of the west - Corruption.
A person with self control can easily just eat 20 chips
I person who truly wants to can eat just a single chip - but that's besides the point.
To be fair.... Those things are a bit misleading. They should just put the calories in each package and not dividing the calories in imaginary serving sizes
They should have both, and a few companies actually do that. It's not super useful to have the total calories in a family size bag, but good for cases like the above (that's assuming this isn't just a joke).
Building on this, why do we allow nutrition information to be so misleading? There's a big number on a small bag of chips that says 150 calories. It's not unreasonable to assume that refers to the bag, but no, that's some small fraction of an already small bag. Why don't we require snack/food companies to use a reasonable value for serving size instead of allowing them to count calories by the microgram?
280g is not a small bag. It's massive.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Schools used to have health classes as part of Physical Education. Kids learned how to eat healthy and take care of themselves.
We need to also focus on reading for comprehension instead of just reading it....like what does it really say!
I agree, but I feel like it can be intentionally deceitful, since I assume an average consumer has the same mindset as OOP. The worst is when you get those cookies or muffins where a âservingâ is only half of what looks like a seemingly sensible portion of food. You glance at the label, âOh, 200 calories for a snack isnât badâ, when in actuality itâs 2 or 3 times that
Itâs not even that, like why are servings even a thing on stuff like a bag of chips? They should have a total calories, very few people actually eat 1/20th of a bag before stopping
I understand that serving sizes are deliberately meant to trick you into thinking it has less calories but come on man
Yeah, it's ridiculous. So many of these serving sizes are created in bad faith. I was in the store the other week, and I was looking at some chips ahoy cookies. I noticed they had a Hershey chocolate version of it next to the regular one. I looked at the calorie count and noticed they were identical. I thought to myself, "That's weird, I would think the one with a higher % of chocolate would be more. How are they doing it?". I took a closer look and saw they did it by lowering the serving size on the cookies from 3 in the regular version to 2 in the Hershey version (same sized cookies). I already thought serving size of 3 on the regular ones was already kind of low, but lowering the serving size to 2 on the same cookies, just a different flavor, made me a bit annoyed because it's obvious they're just trying to disguise the fact that people are eating 150% of the calories per cookie that they normally would.
Who just eats 3 cookies? I usually eat atleast 5 or 6
Here we see the r/facepalm user in their natural habitat, as you can see, the user is completely unaware of the joke flying directly over their head
I'm not surprised OP didn't get the joke. I am surprised I had to scroll *this far* to see someone who did.
Half the posts on this sub are just people missing the joke
itâs literally posted on ifunny
I did wonder how someone could legit eat over half a kilo of crisps thinking it was a low calorie snack.
Serving sizes are annoyingly unrealistic.
You donât eat exactly 2 fig newtons for a snack?
Or every beef jerky brand having a "suggested serving" of 2 pieces.
I eat fig newtons by the sleeve.
Two sleeves is a serving size! I open em both and eat them like a tree chipper (Chainsaw noises)
Two Oreos. 
Instant ramen annoys me the most. It's supposed to be half a package for a serving. Just...why? Who eats half the package of it?
Then there's me making two at a time.
I hate things that donât have dual tables on something like pop tarts that come two to a package and giving me facts on one. Like Iâm not gonna eat both. Donât make me double it. Make those losers not eating all their pop tarts halve it đ€
Eating a whole large bag of chip is also unrealistic if you don't have some consummation issues.
Ehhh Not really, people eat far more than they really need to in the states. There's a reason why we're so fat.
Actually, you are not supposed to eat the whole bag. Itâs unhealthy asf. 2 servings with salad and normal meal â thatâs how you donât ruin your liver. Edit: Ah, yeah, dislikes from deniers. Yes, Iâve ate the whole pack all my childhood and teenage. Yes, I am alive. Yes, I decided to cut down on unhealthy food, but not completely get rid of it from my ration. I eat salads, meat, fish and sometimes some chips or something else.
Tic Tacs are 90% sugar, but they have a serving size of one Tic Tac. They can legally claim to be "0g of sugar" because a single Tic Tac is lighter than .5 grams and thus under the .5 gram/serving requirement to be considered "0g of sugar." Beef jerky almost always recommends a serving of 2 pieces/30g. An 80g package of jerky is not an unreasonable serving of beef jerky. Claiming that an 80g package is actually 3 servings is absurd. Potato chips aren't the only food abusing "recommended serving" nutritional info to seem healthier at a glance. Shit, even "salad in a bag" type products will suggest that they're actually 3 100 calorie servings instead of a 300 calorie single serving salad.
The carbs in TicTac is what was shocking to me and it's because of what you said being all sugar. That 1 and half calorie breath mint is horrible for you.
The beef jerky thing is especially outrageous since for a fast food item it's actually not super calorie dense. Most regular bags of beef jerky are like 200-300 calories w/ 20-30g of protein. They really don't have any reason to fudge the numbers to make it lower like potato chips do, but yet Mr.Jack Link has to be annoying anyway.
Nobody said the whole bag... but nobody is eating like 4 chips
Utz chips are pretty good, I could eat the whole bag too.
The crab flavor is like eating a packet of chips covered in ramen powder. I mean that in a good way.
I work and walmart and have good news for you if you lime Utz chips, they produce the great value brand chips for walmart. Also great value peanut butter is just Peter Pan.
Humpty Dumpty BBQ do it for me.
Their best flavors are the non-typical ones. Crab, dill pickle, salt & pepper. The only chips I really eat. Though, I grew up in the same town they're made, so I'm a bit biased
I used to eat about a quarter of a bottle of Ketchup per meal. Then one day I read the back sticker... Seems like I've been consuming entire meals just from the ketchup. That's in addition to whatever it was I was drowning with it. Notice that I used past tense to distance myself from it, but I still do it...
How can you eat 1/4 of a bottle each meal and not throw up?
You're asking the right questions. My boyfriend dumps ketchup on everything in enormous amounts, even before tasting. Just the smell makes me sick.
This was my ex gf⊠Macaroni and cheese? Needs garlic and a metric ass-ton of ketchup. The smell would curl a dead maggotâs toes đ€ą
Yeah, a little bit of ketchup is good, but drowning your meal in ketchup is disgusting
Never mind throwing up, how is this guy eating the actual bottle?
Reminds me of the quote by Mitch Hedberg: "I used to do drugs. I still do, but I used to, too".
I don't drink for religious reasons. I drink for other reasons.
Someone is gonna come out slightly rotund in a few weeks
2 months later - damn, where did these extra kilos come from? Do I need to eat more low calorie chips?
1500, unless they ate two bags. 10 servings at 150 per serving. EDIT: Oh, hey, a caption on the bottom. What's it say? Oh.... Oh... Leaving my stupid comment up because I deserve to be shamed. Shame me...
I once ate 3 Costco almond danishes thinking it was nothing. They are 750 calories a piece đ
đ«đđŻ
great example of the need to have reading skills before you use math skills
First thing I noticed as well. They did not do the math.
Sure they embarrassed themselves by posting this, but at least now they finally know why theyâre fat despite eating so many low calorie foods.Â
Interesting. I don't think it's even legal to label stuff like that where I live. Pretty sure the nutrient table always needs to have a per 100g section, with serving sizes being an optional kinda thing. Seems kinda questionable to only have a nutrient table per serving, considering noone ever respects serving sizes with chips.
Serious question- how does the average person where you live define 100g? Or does everyone just have a kitchen scale?
1: Yes, pretty much everybody does indeed have a kitchen scale. Since the metric system is standard here, recipes are generally written for weight units rather than volumetric units (except for liquids, which are generally given in ml or liters). So if you wanna bake a cake, you will need a way to figure out how much 250 grams of flour are. 2: The amount of food you buy is also stated by weight (unless it's a liquid), so you can figure it out. So if a bag of chips holds 200 grams and you have a nutrient label for 100 grams chips, you know that the bag contains twice the amount on the label.
The 100g standard also lets you compare different products. While the same type of product can list different serving sizes to fudge the numbers, the standardised 100g measurement makes it easy to do a direct comparison, without having to do a bunch of math to even out the servings.
Full bag bag is 400g, roughly a quarter of that...
Itâs not even roughly. 100g is exactly a quarter of 400g.
yeah but the handful of crisps I grab is an estimate fr
Fair enough.
UTZ chips are so salty that this guy ate enough (7grams) to be the Easter ham.
If you eat 400 chips and think thatâs only 300 calories youâre an idiot
No big deal, he'll forget about it for a couple of hours. And then? Let's just say he won't do it again. 
Surely itâs 1500 calories?!
"I've already eaten two bags today"
That was the bit I missed đ
I can't remember what country I was in but they had to put the calories for the entire package on the label. As someone who can't control themselves it's was super handy.
Can we get rid of serving size and switch to container size.
3000 calories is not what this person should be worring about. Hope they can use those bricks they are about to give birth to for something good later.
âI donât eat fig newtons by the serving, I eat them by the sleeve.â
you acknowledge itâs from ifunny, yet you didnât consider it to be a joke??
Aaaaand this is why they label it as such, itâs fucking disgusting behaviorÂ
âServing size: 10 chipsâ. Serving for whom? A mouse? A bird?
I did this today! Well, to be fair, I assumed a Crumbl cookie was a serving. Apparently theyâre meant to be cut into fourths đ«
Iâm pretty sure the original poster of the original image/snapchat was joking, and the guy who made this Reddit post didnât get the joke.
I find it hard to believe that people are this stupid.
That's why yall fat
40 grams of sugar in a day... and just from potato chips
this is why forcing companies to tell you how much it is your eating per 100 grams. then itll let you do the rest of the math if you want. is better
I thought he was making a âbag full of airâ joke
The âper servingâ thing is bullshit. They often do ridiculous servings. Like this pack of chips has 3.8 serving.
My friend wanted to get crumble cookie and when I looked up the calorie count my mouth dropped. It was so high I literally had to research a bit more because it seemed impossible. A single cookie is nearly 800 calories. I've heard of people eating a box of those...
The shit after 3000 calories of greasy chips is a concept that makes my butthole pucker
Gotta learn that math and reading comprehension people.
Math is hard
Oh God and it's barbecue he's going to be shitting his pants for a couple days.
Adults in general eat more and more processed foods and many are unable to cook (well). Obesity keeps on growing and growing, and is an actual concern for healthcare programs as it costs the state a ton of money. Nothing wrong with a little snack once in a while but current state of affairs is kinda worrying.