Ripped off yet again!

[old man emu]

If your missus sends you down to the supermarket to buy 500 gms of mince and a 425 gm can of tuna, what will you come home with?

 

You know that you'll have 500 gms of mince because you can see the size of it on the tray it's on. Or if you get yours from a butcher, you will have seen it being weighed. But what about the tuna? Will you get 425 gms of fish flesh?

 

For lunch today, I opened a 425 can of tuna "in springwater". Not liking soggy tuna sandwiches, I drained the "springwater" from the can and used the lid as a piston crown to press out any remaining water that I could. Then I wondered how much tuna I had. Would you believe 250 gms? Now, clearly printed on the label, next to the name of the product was 425g. A reasonable person could take that to mean that the can held 424 gms of fish flesh. 

 

However, turn the can around to the nutrition information and ingredients and it states tuna 63%, springwater 37%. OK, they get away with not having 425 gms of fish flesh by stating that the can has 67% of it. But isn't that being deceitful? What if I had a recipe that called for 425 gms of fish flesh? If I took the weight printed on the front of the can, I'd be short 157 gms of fish flesh. 

 

At Coles, a similar can of tuna costs $3.35, and they say that represents a price of $7.88 per kilo. However, since there is only 250 gms of edible product in the can, it comes out at $13.40 per kilo.

 

Would it cause so much harm if the can was labeled "Contains a minimum of 250 gms of fish flesh"? 

 

 

[willedoo]

Is it because tuna is a very dry fish and needs a fair bit of water added to keep it edible? The canned salmon I buy lists ingredients as 99% salmon. Not a big amount of water in the can and maybe what's there has soaked out of the fish. But that's not to say they don't pre soak the fish to increase size and weight before canning.

[old man emu]

I'm not arguing with the canning method. What angers me is the deception that the can contains 435 gms of fish flesh, whereas it only contains 63%, or 250 gms. Take a look at a can of SPAM. It is 91% pork. The rest are things that you would normally use when cooking meat.

 

Ingredients. Pork (91%), Water, Salt, Thickner (1442), Sugar, Mineral Salts (339,508), Antioxidant (301), Preservatives (250). The thickener is a form of starch which was added to the mix a few years ago to prevent the formation of gelatin which happens normally when pork is cooked.

[onetrack]

OME - You'd probably be shocked to find out how much water is added to that mince that you buy.

[old man emu]

I see it when I cook it, but the more expensive mince is a lot drier.

[Marty_d]

"Pork" in Spam probably covers a multitude of sins.  I guess a pig's eyelids, snout and arsehole are all pork.

[nomadpete]

The use "Whole" pork in spam......

 

The only thing they leave out is the mud on its feet. And I'm not sure about that either.

[old man emu]

 

[red750]

How did that get through my spam blocker?

[old man emu]

10 hours ago, red750 said:

How did that get through my spam blocker?

If you don't like SPAM, 

 

[Fliteright]

I'll never fly a Cessna again after watching that😁

[facthunter]

Yeah I get the Cessna bit but Spam a delicacy? You've got to be kidding. They used to have Camp Pie here in Oz.  I reckon it's full of fat. Heat it up with a bit of added water and see what forms on the top when you cool it. It's mummified awful stuff. It would kill a black dog. Nev