A nutty warning.

[baratron]

I think I am going to scream. Richard has just got back from the supermarket with a packet of nuts bearing the text "Due to the methods used in the manufacture of this product, it may occasionally contain nuts". Until now, I thought that wording was an urban myth. I would hope that a packet of nuts contained nuts more than just occasionally!

Comments

[kixie.livejournal.com]

Oh lord - yes, I've seen it before as well, on every packet of nuts there is usually 'Warning! Contains nuts!' - well DUH.

There's a whole bunch of other crazy things listed on foodstuffs, I used to have a list of them. Really should find that again. It's like on shampoo bottles - 'lather, rinse' - well, yes, I wasn't going to eat it. Or 'do not put directly in eye' - yes, because that is my common reaction to getting random bottles of things, to stick them in my eye.

They should stop idiot-proofing things. The consequences can only be an improvement - if you can't figure out what to do with shampoo, then you deserve everything you get. If you can't figure out that packets of nuts have nuts in them, then you deserve the silly allergic reaction you might get. Etc.

*sigh*

[johnckirk.livejournal.com]

Well, I agree that the warning about nuts is a bit silly, but I wouldn't say that the shampoo thing is intuitively obvious. If you'd never used it before (or seen other people use it), but been told "here, your hair's dirty, use this", then saw a dog-food advert ("gives your pet a glossy, shiny, coat!"), it would be vaguely logical to think that you're supposed to drink it...

Re:

[kixie.livejournal.com]

Yes, but would you put it in your eye? Most people don't go around putting foreign substances in their eyes - taste them, yes, I guess, but...putting them in your eye?

[johnckirk.livejournal.com]

Well, no, I'll give you that :) I'm just reminded of the scene in "Demolition Man", where the 20th century police officer is baffled by the shells that have replaced toilet paper in the future...

Re:

[kixie.livejournal.com]

You know I still haven't figured those out.

[mhw.livejournal.com]

*grin*

Did I tell you about the prescription of urine-test sticks Jus got from the pharmacy at Safeway with the label "Warning: may cause drowsiness" attached?

[lizw.livejournal.com]

*giggle*

[adjectivegail]

.... *blinks* *things really hard* um... what?

mind you, i've got a bottle of Night Nurse here on my desk that says on the front, "...and so aids restful sleep."
and on the little warnings leaflet that comes with it, says "night nurse may cause drowsiness. if you are affected, you should not drive or operate machinery."

[baratron.livejournal.com]

You see, I don't have a problem with "Nuts. Warning, contains nuts." That's the supermarket covering their asses, for the small handful of people who are so ridiculously stupid that they shouldn't be allowed to breed, plus the possibly quite large number of people who might not realise that pine nuts or macadamias can trigger anaphylaxic shock in some people, not just peanuts. What I have a problem with is the wording "May contain traces of nuts". I mean, it's a packet of nuts - "may" doesn't seem grammatically correct when the packet will contain nuts 100% of the time that it contains anything. It's the abuse of the English language rather than the sentiment that drives me completely insane.

Mind you, I was in the goddamned British Library today, and saw a sign "School's storage trolley". GAH! Schools', not School's. *hiss*, *spit*.

British Library

[baratron.livejournal.com]

The emphasis in that statement was, of course, supposed to be around the fact that in the British Library you rather expect to find grammatically-correct signs, not that I think there is anything wrong with the British Library itself! Actually, I think it's wonderful...

Re:

[kixie.livejournal.com]

Yes, what they have written on there is just plain dubious.

May contain traces of nuts - well I fucking hope so, for a packet of nuts!
What else would it contain - no don't answer that...