Sounds good, right? Tasty too! Made from reconstituted potato flour like
Pringles - everything is okay so far. "65% less fat than regular potato
chips" it tells you - still okay.

But in the "INGREDIENTS" section in fine print, under 'natural flavors,' it
lists CHICKEN! And a little further down it lists CHICKEN FAT. WTF?

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.

Just fyi.
--
Wilson 44.69, -67.3

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?
>
> 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.

I wonder how the big lawsuit against McDonald's came out.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=93386&page=1

On 06/23/10 3:14 PM, sometime in the recent past Mark Thorson 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?
>>
>> 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.
>
> I wonder how the big lawsuit against McDonald's came out.
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=93386&page=1
Yup, 'truth in advertising' is becoming it's own oxymoron.

--
Wilson 44.69, -67.3

On Jun 23, 1:38*pm, Wilson > wrote:
> Sounds good, right? Tasty too! Made from reconstituted potato flour like
> Pringles - everything is okay so far.

It is? Gah....

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.

On Jun 23, 1:38*pm, Wilson > wrote:
> Sounds good, right? Tasty too! Made from reconstituted potato flour like
> Pringles - everything is okay so far. "65% less fat than regular potato
> chips" it tells you - still okay.
>
> But in the "INGREDIENTS" section in fine print, under 'natural flavors,' it
> lists CHICKEN! And a little further down it lists CHICKEN FAT. WTF?
>
> 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.

Baked potato chips are crappy anyway, so who cares?
>
> Just fyi.
> --
> Wilson 44.69, -67.3

--Bryan

On Jun 23, 1:36*pm, Food Snob® > wrote:
> On Jun 23, 1:38*pm, Wilson > wrote:
>
> > Sounds good, right? Tasty too! Made from reconstituted potato flour like
> > Pringles - everything is okay so far. "65% less fat than regular potato
> > chips" it tells you - still okay.
>
> > But in the "INGREDIENTS" section in fine print, under 'natural flavors,' it
> > lists CHICKEN! And a little further down it lists CHICKEN FAT. WTF?
>
> > 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.
>
> Baked potato chips are crappy anyway, so who cares?
>
>
>
> > Just fyi.
> > --
> > Wilson 44.69, -67.3
>
> --Bryan

I agree...they always give me the shits.

On Jun 23, 4:12*pm, Chemo the Clown > wrote:
> On Jun 23, 1:36*pm, Food Snob® > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 23, 1:38*pm, Wilson > wrote:
>
> > > Sounds good, right? Tasty too! Made from reconstituted potato flour like
> > > Pringles - everything is okay so far. "65% less fat than regular potato
> > > chips" it tells you - still okay.
>
> > > But in the "INGREDIENTS" section in fine print, under 'natural flavors,' it
> > > lists CHICKEN! And a little further down it lists CHICKEN FAT. WTF?
>
> > > 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.
>
> > Baked potato chips are crappy anyway, so who cares?
>
> > > Just fyi.
> > > --
> > > Wilson 44.69, -67.3
>
> > --Bryan
>
> I agree...they always give me the shits.

I don't eat them because they don't taste good.

--Bryan

On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 20:33:40 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
> wrote:

> I've ever heard of is one friend who gets symptoms from eating pork but
> no other type of meat.

My son was sensitive to lamb. As soon as we stopped eating lamb once
a week, his headaches stopped. He can eat it occasionally now with no
ill effects.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

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

On Jun 24, 12:57*pm, Wilson > wrote:
> 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- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I don't get your complaint - the subject of your post doesn't say
"vegan" or "vegetarian" was promised by the package....did you even
read the ingredients?

N.

"Doug Freyburger" > wrote in message
...
>
> 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.

I know someone with a deadly allergy to chicken.

On 06/24/10 2:18 PM, sometime in the recent past Nancy2 posted this:
> On Jun 24, 12:57 pm, > wrote:
>> 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- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I don't get your complaint - the subject of your post doesn't say
> "vegan" or "vegetarian" was promised by the package....did you even
> read the ingredients?
>
> N.
Did you even read my post? You know, the one at the top, just before the
ones that start with '' that wasn't snipped by the first reader.

One shouldn't suspect animal products in potato chips. Simple as it gets.

--
Wilson 44.69, -67.3

On Jun 24, 1:33*pm, Wilson > wrote:
>
> One shouldn't suspect animal products in potato chips. Simple as it gets.

Why?

On Jun 24, 12:57*pm, Wilson > wrote:
> It becomes as silly as McDonald's defense 'that we never claimed our French
> Fries were vegetarian.'

You must be too young to remember when McDonalds (and lots of other
places) fried their French fries in tallow.

projectile vomit chick wrote:
>
> On Jun 24, 12:57 pm, Wilson > wrote:
> > It becomes as silly as McDonald's defense 'that we never claimed our French
> > Fries were vegetarian.'
>
> You must be too young to remember when McDonalds (and lots of other
> places) fried their French fries in tallow.

As I recall, it was a 50/50 mix of beef fat and lard.

If you eat French fries, you really shouldn't care
about that. Unless it's one of those new weird
fats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interesterified_fat

Wilson wrote:
> Nancy2 posted this:
>
>> I don't get your complaint - the subject of your post doesn't say
>> "vegan" or "vegetarian" was promised by the package....did you even
>> read the ingredients?
>
> One shouldn't suspect animal products in potato chips. Simple as it gets.

You expect a food that's clearly fried in fat to automatically be fried
in vegitarian or vegan fat? Given centuries long tradition of using
pork fat, duck fat, butter fat and so on at the best fats for frying I
find this a bizzare expectation.

Maybe if you stressed how cheap the chips were I'd think you expected
them to be fried in inexpensive oil and therefore plant oil. As these
are reconstituted potato that does suggest cheap.

Okay, not all that bizzare an expectation after all. Not what I would
have expected but not bizzare either. Time to go to the vending
machines at the office and see if I can salute you with some of them.
Cheers!

sf wrote:
> Doug Freyburger > wrote:
>
>> I've ever heard of is one friend who gets symptoms from eating pork but
>> no other type of meat.
>
> My son was sensitive to lamb. As soon as we stopped eating lamb once
> a week, his headaches stopped. He can eat it occasionally now with no
> ill effects.

My experience with a food intolerance - When I first started avoiding
wheat even a tiny dose would trigger symptoms. Several months in it was
a gravy where I could taste the added flour that triggered the symptoms
that taught me it was the wheat. Now a decade of avoidance later the
symptoms are much weaker. I can have soup thickened with a little flour
and not show symptoms these days. I still avoid wheat but I am no
longer fastidious about any possible contamination.

Based on my experience I suspect his reaction will continue to decrease
over the years. But it will remain beneficial for him to avoid his
intolerance trigger food.

Also thanks to Cheryll for the response. Yikes.

On Jun 23, 3:33*pm, Doug Freyburger > wrote:
> 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.


Barbecue flavored potato chips are kind of a weird idea in the first
place. Why would it have ever occurred to anyone to put powdered
barbecue sauce on a potato chip? Truth be told, the taste really has
nothing to do with the taste of barbecue. It's just salt and sugar
mixed until neither one stands out and combined with some vaguely
tomato-ish, reddish brown powdered stuff and thrown on hot fried
slices of potato. I don't know what it is, but it's really not
barbecue, or even barbecue related by any honest definition.

Christopher Helms wrote:
>
> Barbecue flavored potato chips are kind of a weird idea in the first
> place. Why would it have ever occurred to anyone to put powdered
> barbecue sauce on a potato chip? Truth be told, the taste really has
> nothing to do with the taste of barbecue. It's just salt and sugar
> mixed until neither one stands out and combined with some vaguely
> tomato-ish, reddish brown powdered stuff and thrown on hot fried
> slices of potato. I don't know what it is, but it's really not
> barbecue, or even barbecue related by any honest definition.

And it inspired me to smoke some Lay's potato chips
in my BBQ. I suppose I had some notion of getting
to the "real" BBQ potato chip flavor. The first batch
was burnt -- potato chips burn really quickly when
exposed to heat. The second batch was visually perfect,
but tasted awful and made me sick. When you smoke food,
you really need to let it have a long, slow heat to
drive off the noxious components of smoke. I couldn't
do that with potato chips, so they had a lot of the
early components of smoke, which are not good. They
have a bitter, tangy flavor, and make you feel sick.

On 06/24/10 3:10 PM, sometime in the recent past projectile vomit chick
posted this:
> On Jun 24, 1:33 pm, > wrote:
>>
>> One shouldn't suspect animal products in potato chips. Simple as it gets.
>
> Why?
I'm at a loss to explain it further.

--
Wilson 44.69, -67.3

On 06/24/10 3:12 PM, sometime in the recent past projectile vomit chick
posted this:
> On Jun 24, 12:57 pm, > wrote:
>> It becomes as silly as McDonald's defense 'that we never claimed our French
>> Fries were vegetarian.'
>
> You must be too young to remember when McDonalds (and lots of other
> places) fried their French fries in tallow.
1990 McD's stopped using animal fat to fry their fries and said they would
be using only veg. oil from then on.

Oh yes, way too young - why I would only have been 39 then.

--
Wilson 44.69, -67.3

On 06/24/10 3:23 PM, sometime in the recent past Mark Thorson posted this:
> projectile vomit chick wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 24, 12:57 pm, > wrote:
>>> It becomes as silly as McDonald's defense 'that we never claimed our French
>>> Fries were vegetarian.'
>>
>> You must be too young to remember when McDonalds (and lots of other
>> places) fried their French fries in tallow.
>
> As I recall, it was a 50/50 mix of beef fat and lard.
>
> If you eat French fries, you really shouldn't care
> about that. Unless it's one of those new weird
> fats.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interesterified_fat
I found the interesterified fat a couple of months ago and did the research.
You can't call this one 'new.' But they dug it up again after trans fats
were getting bad press.

--
Wilson 44.69, -67.3

On 06/24/10 4:08 PM, sometime in the recent past Doug Freyburger posted this:
> Wilson wrote:
>> Nancy2 posted this:
>>
>>> I don't get your complaint - the subject of your post doesn't say
>>> "vegan" or "vegetarian" was promised by the package....did you even
>>> read the ingredients?
>>
>> One shouldn't suspect animal products in potato chips. Simple as it gets.
>
> You expect a food that's clearly fried in fat to automatically be fried
> in vegitarian or vegan fat? Given centuries long tradition of using
> pork fat, duck fat, butter fat and so on at the best fats for frying I
> find this a bizzare expectation.

Yes. Doug, I guess I have to wonder where you are from because this was
settled back in 1990 when McD's stopped using animal fat to fry their fries
and said they would be using only veg. oil from then on. Why would Lay's or
other food purveyors try this same gambit at this late date?

I'm in the US where we have some scant laws against deceptive advertising.

>
> Maybe if you stressed how cheap the chips were I'd think you expected
> them to be fried in inexpensive oil and therefore plant oil. As these
> are reconstituted potato that does suggest cheap.
>
> Okay, not all that bizzare an expectation after all. Not what I would
> have expected but not bizzare either. Time to go to the vending
> machines at the office and see if I can salute you with some of them.
> Cheers!



--
Wilson 44.69, -67.3

On 06/24/10 2:27 PM, sometime in the recent past Cheryl posted this:
> "Doug Freyburger" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> 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.
>
> I know someone with a deadly allergy to chicken.
Thanks Cheryl, that's exactly why this deception irks me.

--
Wilson 44.69, -67.3

Cheryl wrote:
> "Doug Freyburger" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> 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.
>
> I know someone with a deadly allergy to chicken.

Someone with a deadly or serious allergy should be reading every
single label every single time a purchase is made. (The last
because ingredients can and do change.)

--
Jean B.

Wilson wrote:
> On 06/24/10 2:18 PM, sometime in the recent past Nancy2 posted this:
>> On Jun 24, 12:57 pm, > wrote:
>>> 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- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> I don't get your complaint - the subject of your post doesn't say
>> "vegan" or "vegetarian" was promised by the package....did you even
>> read the ingredients?
>>
>> N.
> Did you even read my post? You know, the one at the top, just before the
> ones that start with '' that wasn't snipped by the first reader.
>
> One shouldn't suspect animal products in potato chips. Simple as it gets.
>

Maybe not. But if one is concerned about such things, one should
read the label, IMO anyway.

--
Jean B.

Wilson wrote:
> On 06/24/10 2:27 PM, sometime in the recent past Cheryl posted this:
>> "Doug Freyburger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> I know someone with a deadly allergy to chicken.
> Thanks Cheryl, that's exactly why this deception irks me.
>
How is it a deception? It is a false assumption on the consumer's
part.

--
Jean B.

Wilson wrote:
>
> One shouldn't suspect animal products in potato chips. Simple as it gets.

Rethinking this -

Folks who want kosher, hallal, vegitarian or vegan products are
motivated to read the labels to confirm the products are what they want.
I would never expect a product to be kosher without being marked as
such. Even beer gets marked as kosher.

Who ever cares about such markings if you're not interested in keeping
kosher, hallal, vegitarian or kosher? There's no incentive to mention
any of those on a label if your target market isn't targeting those
products. It doesn't bother me at all if a product is kosher, hallal,
vegitarian or vegan.

Vegitarians look at the labels. Meat eaters don't care if their potato
chips are cooked with animal products. Also simple as it gets but with
the opposite conclusion.

Even though I don't keep kosher I do look for the kosher mark when I buy
hot dogs. Long ago I benchmarked hot dog brands for quality. All of
the kosher brands were near the top in my rankings. None of the
non-kosher brands beat any of the kosher brands in my rankings. Ever
since then I've bought kosher dogs and not worried about which kosher
brand. It's a simple method for chosxing better quality dogs that works
for me.

Christopher Helms wrote:
>
> Why would it have ever occurred to anyone to put powdered
> barbecue sauce on a potato chip?

Chilli and BBQ are good with starchy foods mixed in. Chilli on Fritos
or with beans. Using bread or mashed potatoes to sop up BBQ sauce. It
doesn't seem strange to me at all to see such a product. Even if its
cheap fake chemical immitation.

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 14:33:38 -0400, Wilson > wrote:

>One shouldn't suspect animal products in potato chips. Simple as it gets.

Huh? I often see chips with dairy. Dairy is clearly an animal product. You
mean other people "suspect" all chips to be vegan?

Don <www.donwiss.com> (e-mail link at home page bottom).

On Jun 24, 2:12*pm, projectile vomit chick
> wrote:
> On Jun 24, 12:57*pm, Wilson > wrote:
>
> > It becomes as silly as McDonald's defense 'that we never claimed our French
> > Fries were vegetarian.'
>
> You must be too young to remember when McDonalds (and lots of other
> places) fried their French fries in tallow.


I remember. That's when McDonalds french fries were really, really
good.

On Jun 24, 3:29*pm, Mark Thorson > wrote:
> Christopher Helms wrote:
>
> > Barbecue flavored potato chips are kind of a weird idea in the first
> > place. Why would it have ever occurred to anyone to put powdered
> > barbecue sauce on a potato chip? Truth be told, the taste really has
> > nothing to do with the taste of barbecue. It's just salt and sugar
> > mixed until neither one stands out and combined with some vaguely
> > tomato-ish, reddish brown powdered stuff and thrown on hot fried
> > slices of potato. I don't know what it is, but it's really not
> > barbecue, or even barbecue related *by any honest definition.
>
> And it inspired me to smoke some Lay's potato chips
> in my BBQ. *I suppose I had some notion of getting
> to the "real" BBQ potato chip flavor. *The first batch
> was burnt -- potato chips burn really quickly when
> exposed to heat. *The second batch was visually perfect,
> but tasted awful and made me sick. *When you smoke food,
> you really need to let it have a long, slow heat to
> drive off the noxious components of smoke. *I couldn't
> do that with potato chips, so they had a lot of the
> early components of smoke, which are not good. *They
> have a bitter, tangy flavor, and make you feel sick.


I don't know if actual barbecued potato chips are even possible.

> > You must be too young to remember when McDonalds (and lots of other
> > places) fried their French fries in tallow.
>
> As I recall, it was a 50/50 mix of beef fat and lard.
>
Both of which are animal products.

N.

Wilson wrote:
> Doug Freyburger posted this:
>
>> You expect a food that's clearly fried in fat to automatically be fried
>> in vegitarian or vegan fat? Given centuries long tradition of using
>> pork fat, duck fat, butter fat and so on at the best fats for frying I
>> find this a bizzare expectation.
>
> Yes. Doug, I guess I have to wonder where you are from because this was
> settled back in 1990 when McD's stopped using animal fat to fry their fries
> and said they would be using only veg. oil from then on.

Ah, different time perspectives. To me 1990, to you last week on
Sunday, based on how non-recent you seem to think 1990 was. The 1990s
have not yet made the recent events pages for most topics other than
the hard sciences that I tend to be interested in.

There's a place in the metro area that offers fried cooked in duck fat
on their Friday menu. It would never occur to me that they might use
vegitarian or vegan oils on other days.

That and you seem to pay more attention to McDonalds than I do. To me
they're some company with a big data center not too far away but as a
source for food information, not so much.

You also appear to have a very different attitude about food than I do.
I expect folks interested in minority issues to have the movitation to
check labels (I check for wheat) and eating meat is and always has been
a majority issue in western civilization going back farther than the
roots of classical western civilization.

"Jean B." > wrote in message
...
> Cheryl wrote:
>> "Doug Freyburger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> I know someone with a deadly allergy to chicken.
>
> Someone with a deadly or serious allergy should be reading every single
> label every single time a purchase is made. (The last because ingredients
> can and do change.)

You're right. I was just answering Doug's comment "who has a chicken
intolerance" as if it is a rare thing.

On Jun 24, 4:15*pm, Wilson > wrote:
> On 06/24/10 2:27 PM, sometime in the recent past Cheryl posted this:> "Doug Freyburger" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >> 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.
>
> > I know someone with a deadly allergy to chicken.
>
> Thanks Cheryl, that's exactly why this deception irks me.

What deception?

On Jun 25, 10:32*am, Doug Freyburger > wrote:
> Wilson wrote:
> > Doug Freyburger posted this:
>
> >> You expect a food that's clearly fried in fat to automatically be fried
> >> in vegitarian or vegan fat? *Given centuries long tradition of using
> >> pork fat, duck fat, butter fat and so on at the best fats for frying I
> >> find this a bizzare expectation.
>
> > Yes. Doug, I guess I have to wonder where you are from because this was
> > settled back in 1990 when McD's stopped using animal fat to fry their fries
> > and said they would be using only veg. oil from then on.
>
> Ah, different time perspectives. *To me 1990, to you last week on
> Sunday, based on how non-recent you seem to think 1990 was. *The 1990s
> have not yet made the recent events pages for most topics other than
> the hard sciences that I tend to be interested in.
>
> There's a place in the metro area that offers fried cooked in duck fat
> on their Friday menu. *It would never occur to me that they might use
> vegitarian or vegan oils on other days.
>
> That and you seem to pay more attention to McDonalds than I do. *To me
> they're some company with a big data center not too far away but as a
> source for food information, not so much.
>
> You also appear to have a very different attitude about food than I do.
> I expect folks interested in minority issues to have the movitation to
> check labels (I check for wheat) and eating meat is and always has been
> a majority issue in western civilization going back farther than the
> roots of classical western civilization.

You're exactly right. The OP is just being obtuse (and a bit silly,
really).