Really we just need to standardize sizes for consumer goods. For example: drinks can come in 250, 500, 750, 1000, and 2000 mL sizes. Sold soap must be sold in units of 100, 500, or 1000 grams. And so on…
But then you get shrinkflation in the product itself. Less emulsifiers in the soap, drinks with corn syrup replacing sugar, and powders like cinnamon cut with lead powder.
Not saying it couldn’t be done, just that businesses are really incentivised to find the loopholes and exploit them.
In Australia we call this “skimpflation” because they aren’t shrinking the final product, they’re skimping on ingredients to lower production costs.
It’s the bane of my existence because brands I know and love will change their ingredients without warning and without changing anything on the packaging (sometimes not even changing the ingredients list! If the ingredients list has always just said “starch” they don’t have to change anything going from arrowroot starch to cheaper potato starch)
I have allergies and I’ve bought two boxes of the same product at the same time, and had an allergic reaction to one, but not the other.
I used to always blame it on my housemates not washing the cooking utensils properly, but I now use separate cooking equipment and I clean down the kitchen before I start and cook at odd times so I’m the only one using the kitchen.
I’ve started emailing companies after my allergic reactions to determine if they have changed an ingredient, and 90% of the time they confirm they have changed the ingredients. Usually they put some PR spin on it about the new ingredient being more allergy friendly or sustainable (they don’t clarify “environmentally” so I assume they mean “financially sustainable for the profits of our company”)
They already do that.
So no downsides for this proposal.
There was some article some years ago about how the taste of things like cookies changed because they went for cheaper recipe.
Less emulsifiers in the soap, drinks with corn syrup replacing sugar, and powders like cinnamon cut with lead powder.
Standard formulas for a given product. Anything that isn’t 40% sugar drink is “immitation soda drink”. Anything that’s under-emulsified can’t be called real soap.
I don’t think this is the ideal situation. The way food prices are advertised needs to be standardized: € / kg or $ / freedom unit. + size + unit price. I think it’s already the law in EU, but supermarkets try to hide the per kg price in a tiny almost unreadable printsize.
Really we just need to standardize sizes for consumer goods. For example: drinks can come in 250, 500, 750, 1000, and 2000 mL sizes. Sold soap must be sold in units of 100, 500, or 1000 grams. And so on…
But then you get shrinkflation in the product itself. Less emulsifiers in the soap, drinks with corn syrup replacing sugar, and powders like cinnamon cut with lead powder.
Not saying it couldn’t be done, just that businesses are really incentivised to find the loopholes and exploit them.
In Australia we call this “skimpflation” because they aren’t shrinking the final product, they’re skimping on ingredients to lower production costs.
It’s the bane of my existence because brands I know and love will change their ingredients without warning and without changing anything on the packaging (sometimes not even changing the ingredients list! If the ingredients list has always just said “starch” they don’t have to change anything going from arrowroot starch to cheaper potato starch)
I have allergies and I’ve bought two boxes of the same product at the same time, and had an allergic reaction to one, but not the other.
I used to always blame it on my housemates not washing the cooking utensils properly, but I now use separate cooking equipment and I clean down the kitchen before I start and cook at odd times so I’m the only one using the kitchen.
I’ve started emailing companies after my allergic reactions to determine if they have changed an ingredient, and 90% of the time they confirm they have changed the ingredients. Usually they put some PR spin on it about the new ingredient being more allergy friendly or sustainable (they don’t clarify “environmentally” so I assume they mean “financially sustainable for the profits of our company”)
Here they label this as “New Recipe!”. As if they’re somehow doing us a favour.
Oh gee I wonder what inspired you to change the recipe 🤔
They already do that. So no downsides for this proposal. There was some article some years ago about how the taste of things like cookies changed because they went for cheaper recipe.
Standard formulas for a given product. Anything that isn’t 40% sugar drink is “immitation soda drink”. Anything that’s under-emulsified can’t be called real soap.
You are seriously underestimating the complexity of products and how easy it would be for them to skirt such legislation
It would be a massive endeavour for regulators which companies may bypass by industry… This is not the right approach
Again, if the regulation process becomes too burdensome, sometimes the only practical solution is nationalization.
Nationalize every food production branch? Hmmm sure, that’s simpler
Wouldn’t be the first time the US has had to bailout and restructure the agricultural industry.
Ask John Steinbeck
I don’t think this is the ideal situation. The way food prices are advertised needs to be standardized: € / kg or $ / freedom unit. + size + unit price. I think it’s already the law in EU, but supermarkets try to hide the per kg price in a tiny almost unreadable printsize.