History Main / AsbestosFreeCereal

20th Aug '16 6:43:51 AM Chabal2
Is there an issue? Send a Message


[[folder:Audio Play]]
* ''AudioPlay/MontyPythonsContractualObligationAlbum'' has the String sketch, where an advertiser is looking for a way to sell 122,000 miles of string... in 3-inch lengths. Among others, he describes them as pre-sliced, rust-proof, easy to handle, low-calorie, and free from artificial colorings. When he learns they're not waterproof, he switches to water-absorbent.
[[/folder]]



* Inverted on ''Series/TheDailyShow'', when a pediatrics group advocated against hot dogs, Aasif Mandvi gave "threats" about eating hot dogs, like "Eating hot dogs provides none of your daily fruit intake", "People that eat hot dogs have a 100% chance of dying", and "If you lined up all of the deaths from hot dogs, they would stretch some of the distance to the Sun"

to:

* Inverted on ''Series/TheDailyShow'', when a pediatrics group advocated against hot dogs, Aasif Mandvi gave "threats" about eating hot dogs, like "Eating hot dogs provides none of your daily fruit intake", "People that eat hot dogs have a 100% chance of dying", and "If you lined up all of the deaths from hot dogs, they would stretch some of the distance to the Sun"Sun".
4th Aug '16 12:37:36 PM Anorgil
Is there an issue? Send a Message


To protect us all from lies and fraud, the government makes sure that everyone only tells the truth in their advertisements -- in [[ExactWords the most literal, mundane sense of "truth"]]. However, that doesn't stop advertisers from trumping up neutral, insignificant or even negative aspects of their products as though they were positive, by using phrases like "real", "100%", "free from" and "pure". The things these ads say are ''true'', but not necessarily good things. It works because the standards for those products are esoteric or obscure: [[TheCoconutEffect if you hear it repeated often enough, you'll assume it actually is a good thing because you don't know any better]].

to:

To protect us all from lies and fraud, the government makes sure that everyone only tells the truth in their advertisements -- in [[ExactWords the most literal, mundane sense of "truth"]]. However, that doesn't stop advertisers from trumping up neutral, insignificant or even negative aspects of their products as though they were positive, by using phrases like "real", "100%", "free from" and "pure". The things these ads say are ''true'', but [[PureIsNotGood not necessarily good things.things]]. It works because the standards for those products are esoteric or obscure: [[TheCoconutEffect if you hear it repeated often enough, you'll assume it actually is a good thing because you don't know any better]].
8th Jul '16 7:55:18 PM AnoSa
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

*** The worst part is that one of the major reasons for the move away from "natural" pesticides was safety--many are quite effective against mammals, and there's a decent number of recorded ''human'' deaths from both accidental and deliberate poisoning. Meanwhile, many synthetic pesticides are pretty safe because you'd pretty much have to pop the container open and start eating it with a spoon to manage to die from it.
15th Jun '16 4:27:27 PM Doug86
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* [[http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=974#comic This]] ''SaturdayMorningBreakfastCereal'' comic.

to:

* [[http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=974#comic This]] ''SaturdayMorningBreakfastCereal'' ''Webcomic/SaturdayMorningBreakfastCereal'' comic.
21st May '16 1:59:33 PM Miracle@StOlaf
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* Seanbaby mocks the common use of "Fat Free!" on sugary candies in [[http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-ways-marketers-think-were-retarded/ this article]]:
-->" Are you insecure, candy? Because you don't see gravy bragging about being sugar free. This label is so irrelevant to consumer health that I think it's only there so doctors can laugh when they ask you questions about how you got diabetes."
10th May '16 4:32:58 PM OnGreenDolphinStreet
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* "Organic" food is perhaps the world's biggest scam in this particular field, to the tune of several ''billion'' dollars per year. The term organic in science merely refers to either living things, or, in the case of chemistry, carbon compounds; needless to say, ALL food is organic in this sense, with the exception of pure water and salt(s). "Organic" food does not use (or rather, is limited in the use of) synthetic pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, hormones, and antibiotics, and don't use [=GMOs=]. They are also frequently claimed to be better for the environment. However, they are free to use "natural" pesticides and frequently do so. This includes bt toxin, ironically the ''exact same chemical'' which is incorporated into some types of pest-resistant GMO plants, but in LESSER quantities in the [=GMOs=] because they don't have to be applied externally (and repeatedly - organic pesticides are no less toxic than their synthetic counterparts, and often linger for longer in the environment and have to be used more frequently due to lesser efficacy). Also, under limited circumstances, they can use synthetic pesticides on their plants anyway, to control pests. They use natural fertilizers, but because much of this is fecal matter, it increases the amount of e. coli bacteria found in organic foods. And worst of all, because of the lack of use of modern agricultural technology, organic farming is massively less efficient, requiring anywhere from 20% more to more than double the amount of land and water to produce the same amount of food, making it actually ''worse'' for the environment as the primary cause of damage to the environment caused by agriculture is habitat loss. The kicker? Studies have repeatedly failed to find that organic food is in any way, shape, or form better nutritionally, taste wise, or anything else than ordinarily grown crops or [=GMOs=]. Indeed, ironically, the safety of organic food is less well tested than that of the "artificial" food that they so frequently decry, as most of it has never been tested for safety.

to:

* "Organic" food is perhaps the world's biggest scam in this particular field, to the tune of several ''billion'' dollars per year. The term organic in science merely refers to either living things, or, in the case of chemistry, carbon compounds; needless to say, ALL food is organic in this sense, with the exception of pure water and salt(s). salt(s).
**
"Organic" food does not use (or rather, is limited in the use of) synthetic pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, hormones, and antibiotics, and don't use [=GMOs=]. They are also frequently claimed to be better for the environment. However, they are free to use "natural" pesticides and frequently do so. This includes bt toxin, ironically the ''exact same chemical'' which is incorporated into some types of pest-resistant GMO plants, but in LESSER ''lesser'' quantities in the [=GMOs=] because they don't have to be applied externally (and repeatedly - -- organic pesticides are no less toxic than their synthetic counterparts, and often linger for longer in the environment and have to be used more frequently due to lesser efficacy). Also, under limited circumstances, they can use synthetic pesticides on their plants anyway, to control pests. pests.
**
They use natural fertilizers, but because much of this is fecal matter, it increases the amount of e. coli bacteria found in organic foods. And worst of all, because of the lack of use of modern agricultural technology, organic farming is massively less efficient, requiring anywhere from 20% more to more than double the amount of land and water to produce the same amount of food, making it actually ''worse'' for the environment as the primary cause of damage to the environment caused by agriculture is habitat loss. loss.
**
The kicker? Studies have repeatedly failed to find that organic food is in any way, shape, or form better nutritionally, taste wise, or anything else than ordinarily grown crops or [=GMOs=]. Indeed, ironically, the safety of organic food is less well tested than that of the "artificial" food that they so frequently decry, as most of it has never been tested for safety.



* Anything which is labelled "all-natural". As there is no actual legal definition of natural in most countries, including the United States (after all, everything is made with all-natural atoms - well, unless you're eating plutonium, in which case, you probably have bigger problems on your hands), the term is meaningless.

to:

* Anything which is labelled "all-natural". As there is no actual legal definition of natural in most countries, including the United States (after all, everything is made with all-natural atoms - -- well, unless you're eating plutonium, in which case, you probably have bigger problems on your hands), the term is meaningless.



* Fast food companies who tout their "100% pure grade-A beef", which sounds great unless you happen to know that "grade-A" to the USDA just means [[http://meat.tamu.edu/beefgrading.html slaughtered before age 30 months]]. It has very little to do with quality. The meat of younger animals does tend to be a bit more tender than that of older ones, but the inherent characteristics that make a piece of meat good are more complex than just age. For beef in the US, you want to look at the descriptive scale, which runs: Prime (the very best meat; very expensive, with good marbling, typically makes up about 2-3% of the meat which is graded)-Choice (best you'll get at a decent price, makes up about 53.7% of graded meat)-Select (grocery stores/butchers sell it as stew meat)-Standard (put in better cans and mass-produced stuff)-Commercial (like Standard but worse)-Utility-Cutter-Canner (the last three are, [[UrbanLegends contrary to what some people claim]], entirely edible - if it wasn't, it would be rejected as food - but are not particularly appealing as cuts of meat; as such, they are typically used in ground or processed meat products, rather than sold outright to consumers). Very little meat is ACTUALLY rated US Standard or less, though, because grading it costs money, and if the meat is going to be lower grade, there's no point in spending the money having it graded.

to:

* Fast food companies who tout their "100% pure grade-A beef", which sounds great unless you happen to know that "grade-A" to the USDA just means [[http://meat.tamu.edu/beefgrading.html slaughtered before age 30 months]]. It has very little to do with quality. The meat of younger animals does tend to be a bit more tender than that of older ones, but the inherent characteristics that make a piece of meat good are more complex than just age.
**
For beef in the US, you want to look at the descriptive scale, which runs: runs:
***
Prime (the very best meat; very expensive, with good marbling, typically makes up about 2-3% of the meat which is graded)-Choice graded)
*** Choice
(best you'll get at a decent price, makes up about 53.7% of graded meat)-Select meat)
*** Select
(grocery stores/butchers sell it as stew meat)-Standard meat)
*** Standard
(put in better cans and mass-produced stuff)-Commercial stuff)
*** Commercial
(like Standard but worse)-Utility-Cutter-Canner worse)
*** Utility
*** Cutter
*** Canner
(the last three are, [[UrbanLegends contrary to what some people claim]], entirely edible - -- if it wasn't, it would be rejected as food - -- but are not particularly appealing as cuts of meat; as such, they are typically used in ground or processed meat products, rather than sold outright to consumers). consumers).
**
Very little meat is ACTUALLY rated US Standard or less, though, because grading it costs money, and if the meat is going to be lower grade, there's no point in spending the money having it graded.
10th May '16 2:36:03 PM Morgenthaler
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** A surreal example is '*EmpireEarth'', sold on the promise of containing "over 500 000 years of history". Five hundred thousand of those years are devoted to the Neolithic age, which a player can and probably will want to pass through faster than banging two rocks together, in order to spend more time in the more interesting ages adding up to nearly five thousand years beyond the advertised half a million.

to:

** A surreal example is '*EmpireEarth'', 'VideoGame/EmpireEarth'', sold on the promise of containing "over 500 000 years of history". Five hundred thousand of those years are devoted to the Neolithic age, which a player can and probably will want to pass through faster than banging two rocks together, in order to spend more time in the more interesting ages adding up to nearly five thousand years beyond the advertised half a million.
10th May '16 12:22:19 PM tbszgr
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Even more ironically, a lot of farm-raised pink salmon is fed red food ''dyes'' to achieve that color (wild salmon eat shrimp, which colors their meat pink; farm-raised salmon is usually fed cornmeal, which doesn't).

to:

** Even more ironically, a lot of farm-raised pink salmon is fed red food ''dyes'' to achieve that color (wild salmon eat shrimp, which colors their meat pink; farm-raised salmon is usually fed cornmeal, which doesn't). Undyed salmon advertised as such is probably just a question of time.
19th Apr '16 11:11:06 PM dsneybuf
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* Portland-based ''BANG! The Entertainment Paper'' had a parody of Sega Genesis' "Blast Processing" advertisements. It [[http://fav.me/d5bdfee boasts]] that unlike most electronic tablets, ''BANG!'' has "[a] solar-powered reflective surface, a recharge time of 0.0000, a higher-resolution screen than even the Retina display, [and] DRM-free content".

to:

* Portland-based ''BANG! The Entertainment Paper'' Magazine'' had a parody of Sega Genesis' "Blast Processing" advertisements. It [[http://fav.me/d5bdfee boasts]] that unlike most electronic tablets, ''BANG!'' has "[a] solar-powered reflective surface, a recharge time of 0.0000, a higher-resolution screen than even the Retina display, [and] DRM-free content".
1st Apr '16 11:47:53 PM Kid
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** The VideoGame/FootballManager series has turned its promotion of the [[CashCowFranchise yearly updates]] by claiming that the game has hundredss of changes. Football Manager 2014 is claimed to have over 1000. Of course, these changes include every single minor bug fix, change in UI, and any scrap of change, even if the change is for the worse.

to:

** The VideoGame/FootballManager series has turned its promotion of the [[CashCowFranchise yearly updates]] by claiming that the game has hundredss hundreds of changes. Football Manager 2014 is claimed to have over 1000. Of course, these changes include every single minor bug fix, change in UI, and any scrap of change, even if the change is for the worse.
This list shows the last 10 events of 317. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.AsbestosFreeCereal