Ordinarily I would consider a suit like this frivolous and unworthy of the court's time , but is it false advertising if a product doesn't contain what it's generally assumed to contain ? I've never personally seen a single recipe for guacamole that didn't incorporate at least two avacados , the majority ingredient by far , so I would consider Kraft as having misrepresented their product .
Your thoughts ?
__________________
Kevin Haendiges
NAHC Life Member
NRA Member
Wildlife Forever Member
GOA Member
Buckmasters Member
http://hunting-indiana.com
Anyone capable of reading the label is just as capable of reading the ingredients on the back before they purchase it.
I often buy foods that arnt exactly what I thought they would be, I like to do something I call "not buying them again".Much less time consuming then a class action lawsuit and not nearly as stressfull.
I think she has a legit gripe, but I can't imagine any damages, other than the price of the dip. She should take it back to the store and get her money back. The lawsuit is frivolous.
We have so much junk in our food these days in the way of additives and preservatives, artificial flavorings, etc, that I really don't like reading labels anymore.
Where's the violation of "truth in labeling"?Â* The ingredients are listed on the package.Â* It's sold as guacamole-flavored dip.Â* Not as guacamole.
Before Kraft grudgingly changed the original labeling it was marketed as "guacamole" , not "guacamole flavored" . The facing label originally called the product "guacamole" , which I know from having seen it in the store myself , so it should still accurately reflect what's in the product IMO . The FDA has written standards that dictate how most products must be labeled as to their content , so why should this product be exempted ? For example: Pringles potato crisps are labeled as crisps because they don't contain enough potato to be classed as potato chips . Ice milk is so labeled because it lacks enough cream to be called ice cream . Why does "guacamole" that barely contains that dish's principal ingredient by accepted standard get a pass ? Enquiring minds want to know .
__________________
Kevin Haendiges
NAHC Life Member
NRA Member
Wildlife Forever Member
GOA Member
Buckmasters Member
http://hunting-indiana.com
Why does "guacamole" that barely contains that dish's principal ingredient by accepted standard get a pass ? Enquiring minds want to know .
Quote:
It is less than 2 percent avocado, which in traditional recipes is the main ingredient of the Mexican dish
There is Avacodo in it, its not a traditional recipe, so whats the point in a lawsuit?All it proves is people should read the ingredients if theyre worried about something not tasting Avocody enough.The ingredients are on the same label as the name of the product, theres nothing misleading about it.Its a ridiculous lawsuit.
Truth in labeling , does it really exist ?
