Comment by znnajdla
1 month ago
That example of "shrinkflation" sounds like plain old fraud to me. Having a dimple at the bottom of a peanut butter container so it looks like it has more than it does should be illegal fraud, plain and simple.
1 month ago
That example of "shrinkflation" sounds like plain old fraud to me. Having a dimple at the bottom of a peanut butter container so it looks like it has more than it does should be illegal fraud, plain and simple.
the containers say how much volume they have and usually are sold with a unit price as well. seems like a much simpler and general solution than defining some legal shape of jars
The real issue is that those dimples prevent you from getting the last bit. I also find it very annoying that in Canada quantity is often reported in ounces. Aside from the troy ounce, i have absolutely no idea how much an ounce is and whether it measures volume or mass. The only reason we still have ounces is because of trade with the US. Since no Canadian should be buying US made stuff, we should just ban most non metric units at this point.
I don't remember the last time I've seen an item in a Canadian grocery store that doesn't also include a metric amount (possibly in parenthesis) on the label itself. Not to mention the shelf price has per unit, almost always per metric unit (except rarely meat being per lb).
Are you sure about what you are seeing, is it possible this is just for a few US imports and maybe you aren't looking at the shelf sticker? Or maybe it's a province-specific thing?
Edit: Found the regulation. In general,
> On consumer prepackaged foods, the net quantity must be declared on the principal display panel in metric units [221, 232, SFCR]. However, consumer prepackaged foods that are packaged from bulk at retail, other than individually measured foods, can declare the net quantity on the principal display panel in Canadian units [241.4(2)(b), SFCR].
https://inspection.canada.ca/en/food-labels/labelling/indust...
I saw a reddit post about somebody cutting up an empty (cant extract any more) squeeze tube of some beauty product and around half was stuck on the walls. I gained a new respect for those who silently chose transparent containers and dispensers.
moral Canadians should probably also refrain from participating in any American-run website like HN
We don't need to define a legal shape of a container. We can just make deceptive shapes illegal and let a judge/jury define what deceptive means on a case-by-case basis. In fact I don't think any new laws are needed for this, there must be some existing legislation for which a case can made for fraud here.
I don't know - its very easy to buy what looks like the same jar and find it has less. The consumer should not be expected to be some fucking food detective, constantly working to make sure that they aren't being ripped off. Packaging should be simple enough that the volume presented to the purchaser is the actual volume.
unit costs should be larger on the label. as large as the standard price
1 reply →
Customers should also be informed of quality/expectations differences between versions. For example, there was a car which got a facelift, but they cheaped out on everything inside so it can compete with cheaper cars but unsuspecting buyers had the wrong reputation in mind.