Blatant Lies Printed On Product Labels

Every time you go down the aisles of a grocery or department store you see product labels vying for your attention, boldly claiming their products are new, improved and give you more for your money.

But you probably shouldn't listen to those labels- because many of them are telling lies.

They use words and phrases like "organic", "made with real fruit", "no cholesterol". "heart healthy" and "grass fed" to fool us into thinking we're paying more for higher quality products.

The use of deceptive wording has become standard practice on product labels, but the problem isn't just what the labels omit- it's the things they mention on purpose to trick us into choosing their brand over others.

See 23 Shockingly Blatant Lies Hidden On Product Labels here

We dish up more neat food posts at the Neatolicious blog

Comments (2)

Newest 2
Newest 2 Comments

The abominable practice of cutting honey with up to 50% filler such as corn syrup is a real danger to people with corn allergies. The FDA allows this polluting of honey as long as the filler isn't more than 50% AND the seller/supplier does not have to tell you about it.
Many companies will heat the honey and ruin the benefits of it because heating the honey to a high enough degree will prevent the honey crystallizing. Raw honey will crystalize but it can be liquified by putting the jar into a pot of hot water. It's a long process because it must be done slowly.
IMO, buckwheat honey is the best for people with allergies and for the darker, stronger taste which makes wonderful bread. Not everyone's a fan of it because it is so much darker and has a bit of an aftertaste. But people who like dark brown sugar and molasses will love it, I think.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Dear Natorama:

"Anglican.tk? That’s just a spam blog, guys!"

Actually, it's the former site of CaNN: Classical Anglican Net News-- a very popular Christian News & Commentary site. We've moved to:

http://webelf.wordpress.com/

Some idiot then pirated the .tk url, which we've been trying to re-establish.

Cheers,

Binks
CaNN/Anglican.tk/ Webelf Report
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Don Surber's blog is very good, but I quit visiting when he switched to using one or two sentences on the front page, with a "Click here to read more" button. That shit is highly annoying. But he gets linked to from lots of blogs that I do read every day.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Um, "important" to whom?

I read different blogs on different days, depending on what's happening in the world. Some days economics is important, some days politics is, some days it's fun stuff like Neatorama, some days it's catching up with my blog friends.

Important is a very loaded term.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Don Surber was last seen excoriating that poor kid Graeme Frost for receiving health care subsidized by public funds.

Oh yeah, we're winning in Iraq, too! Baghdad is safer than Paris!
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
@ ted #2: You get grouchyoitis, a common disease amongst commenters on blogs. :)

@ Binks #3: ouch, that sucks! I assume the domain registration expired and wasn't renewed in time ... I don't even know what remedy you can have b/c most registrars have a grace period where the original owner can re-register the domain name after its terms is up, but if you fail to do that, then it's fair game for anyone (including spammers) to register the name.

@skh.pcola #4: the list is skewed toward blogs that have lots of links but little content otherwise. Like instapundit and now Don Surber's blog.

@donna #5: "important" is my word, not theirs. The premise of their paper is that they did this analysis, which shows that if you read the blogs on their list (either top 21, top 100, or top 5000) then you're most likely to get exposed to more stories floating around on the blogosphere than if you were to only read Technorati's top 100 blogs. (see chart on their page which shows information captured vs. no of blogs read).

They claimed to be able to vacuum up more than 60% of all stories floating on the web by reading just the 100 blogs they listed. In comparison, by reading the Technorati Top 100 (which is ranked by in-links), you only "get" about 45% of the stories on the blogosphere.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I think they rely too much on algorythms and links in and out, and too little on actual content. If I were compiling such a list by my gut (and I monitor the internet for a living), I would divide the subjects more evenly. This has too much repetition in politics and not enough arts and literature, technology, education, religion, entertainment news, science, and international news. I would also select blogs with more content. For example, HuffPo and Daily Kos have tons of authors and content, those would cover left~wing politics by themselves. I'm sure you could find high~content blogs for right~wing politics and other subjects that would do the same. Science Blogs is good for that reason, but its not all~inclusive; there should be more science outlets.

Another caveat: I'm not familiar with all of these. If they'd posted the name of the blogs instead of just the URL, I might find it easier to understand.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I just realized that my webpage is the first result in google when you type in "the warehouse" - so I was pretty jazzed about that. As far as news blogs go I just skim Fark (which is far more informative than watching any news program). News stresses me out. I can't handle most of it.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Login to comment.
Email This Post to a Friend
"Blatant Lies Printed On Product Labels"

Separate multiple emails with a comma. Limit 5.

 

Success! Your email has been sent!

close window
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
 
Learn More