On 06/23/10 4:33 PM, sometime in the recent past Doug Freyburger posted this:
> Wilson wrote:
>>
>> But in the "INGREDIENTS" section in fine print, under 'natural flavors,' it
>> lists CHICKEN! And a little further down it lists CHICKEN FAT. WTF?
>
> So they don't taste as good as adding bacon fat would make them. ;^)
>
>> I'm not even a little bit vegan or even a tad vegetarian, but the only
>> warning of sorts says 'Contains Soy, Milk, and Wheat Ingredients.' But I
>> never expected to find CHICKEN products in what one might mistake for a
>> potato chip.
>
> Those warnings are because a lot of people have food intolerances known
> or unknown. Who has a chicken intolerance? The only meat intolerance
> I've ever heard of is one friend who gets symptoms from eating pork but
> no other type of meat.
>
> As long as it doesn't say vegan or vegitarian there's no reason to
> expect that it is. The word "barbecue" definitely gives an association
> with meat.
My point has nothing to do with warnings. It has to do with expectations.
When I eat something that is specifically made to look like something it
isn't and gets placed on store shelves right along side that which it's
trying to look like, it becomes deceptive and I don't like that.

'Barbecue' might conjure up 'meat' for you, but it means a style of cooking
to me which might also infer flavors. It doesn't mean 'meat' to me. In fact,
damn little of what is written on products means what it would appear to.
The word 'Natural' is case in point.

I didn't buy these, but they were in the snack basket at a conference I
attended. It wasn't until later that I found that it contained animal
flavorings or chicken fat.

It becomes as silly as McDonald's defense 'that we never claimed our French
Fries were vegetarian.'

--
Wilson 44.69, -67.3