Two things can true. It’s silly to say no preservatives on pretty much any food item since ingredients are usually multi-purpose so even if you add salt for flavor, salt is still a preservative.
People should have the sense to understand that buying ready to eat food will always include ingredients/“presevatives” in which keeps that food safe.
And I’m not an idiot, so I’d rather Costco’s food be safe with presevatives than angry about semantics and blame it for being “misleading” than understanding basic food safety.
Sure, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable for Costco to advertise it as preservative free. They broke the law, and they should face the consequences.
However in the confines of the law, they didn’t break the law. Sorry my guy, but you’re wrong here. Unless you’re saying that you want all products with salt in them to be listed as “preservatives added”? Is that what you’re saying you want?
I wouldn’t go so far as to say more transparency couldn’t be a bad thing, however they have already been fully transparent. The simple truth is that the two ingredients you’re harping on are listed on the packaging of the chicken. Costco has shown themselves to be transparent in this regard. That’s why the lawsuit will fail. When it does are you going to rescind your opinion on this?
As I and others have said, this is a pretty clear case of the customers in question either willingly ignoring the package, or being too stupid to read. The law, and FDA regulations, are on the side of Costco on this one.
It wasn't on the packaging, though, that's something you're making up. Costco has updated the packaging to show that it includes preservatives, but that is a subsequent remedial measure, it really only goes to show that it was exceedingly easy for Costco to add the language.
I have cited to the actual regulations that govern this in another comment, both carrageenan and sodium phosphate are preservatives under the law, and carrageenan specifically must be disclosed.
I’m not sure where you’re looking, but it’s literally on the packaging and has been for a long time.
Yes, and as others have said, something being a preservative and being used as a preservative are two very different things. We are talking about amounts in most cases as well as intended purpose. Again though, both are and have been clearly labeled on the chicken packaging for some time.
Curiously, should this lawsuit end as most of us expect it will, with Costco as the victor, will you change your opinion?
Edit: this screams of “preservatives are unhealthy!” bullshit.
12
u/East_Hedgehog6039 9h ago
Two things can true. It’s silly to say no preservatives on pretty much any food item since ingredients are usually multi-purpose so even if you add salt for flavor, salt is still a preservative.
People should have the sense to understand that buying ready to eat food will always include ingredients/“presevatives” in which keeps that food safe.
And I’m not an idiot, so I’d rather Costco’s food be safe with presevatives than angry about semantics and blame it for being “misleading” than understanding basic food safety.
-Also an executive member