Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California bans sell-by dates

foodandwine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 288 posts

Re: California bans sell-by dates

#261

Post by skybrian »

akira2501 wrote: post #246
skybrian wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearby: Safeway, Lucky’s, Target, Trader Joe’s, Ranch 99, Costco, Walmart, Cardenas, Pak N’ Save, and I’m sure I missed some. Also, a lot of Asian food marts that aren’t chains. That seems like quite a lot of competition?

Safeway is owned by Albertsons. So is Lucky's. There are 58 total Ranch 99's in the USA. Costco requires membership up front. Cardenas is owned by KKR. Pak N Save is a subsidary of Safeway and also owned by Albertons. Walmart is not a grocery store. So, no, not a lot of competition. You really should look into grocery M&A's over the past few years. This is all easy to see if you care to _actually_ look.

Have you been to a Walmart recently? Many of their stores have groceries.

Re: California bans sell-by dates

#262

Post by darajava »

riffraff wrote: post #144
freedomben wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Geez, that is aggravating. Do they really think that a completely unsealed cardboard box with holes in it is keeping out all the germs? Sometimes I think we've really failed ourselves regarding basic biology and education requirements.

in Europe it's forbidden to sell washed eggs, so you're literally buying eggs covered in chicken shit, it's an interesting regulatory divergence.

I have never ever seen this in any European country.

Re: California bans sell-by dates

#263

Post by heavensteeth »

404mm wrote: post #259
gandalfian wrote: post #120

This sounds perfectly sensible and uncontroversial?

I’d prefer just one date: “Use By”. If something is still safe to eat but doesn’t taste great anymore, then that’s past the Use By mark for me.

Some people don't have the liberty of throwing out food because the clock struck 00:00. Similarly, some people don't want to.

Re: California bans sell-by dates

#264

Post by an_guy »

gruez wrote: post #258
guelo wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those cheap plastic water bottles should be banned. They’re one of the greatest sources of micro plastics in our bodies. (Not to mention unstudied nano plastics)

>They’re one of the greatest sources of micro plastics in our bodies. Source?

Have you ever drank from one of those bottles?? It literally tastes like plastic.

Re: California bans sell-by dates

#266

Post by magicalhippo »

RoyalHenOil wrote: post #240
ranger_danger wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that unwashed eggs preserve a protective layer that inhibits bacterial growth, which is why washed eggs in the US must be refrigerated instead. I think they are both valid methods. https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/09/11/336330502/wh...

Unwashed eggs can also be refrigerated, and they last an absurdly long time that way — much, much longer than either refrigerated washed eggs or unrefrigerated unwashed eggs. Once you refrigerate unwashed eggs, though, they need to stay refrigerated thereafter.

Here in Norway, farmers have been lamenting the EU rules of requiring a rather short "best before" limit of 28 days while our eggs are safe a lot longer[1], typically 4 months but can last over a year[2].

So they changed it to "best before but not bad after" and have been regularly running campaigns reminding people.

[1]: https://www.prior.no/artikkel/datomerking-av-egg

[2]: https://www.nrk.no/livsstil/eggene-varer-_nesten_-evig-1.759...

Re: California bans sell-by dates

#267

Post by OJFord »

sureIy wrote: post #107
hentrep wrote: post #52

Here’s the actual USDA article describing the difference between “sell by, “use by”, and “best by” terms: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/food-safety/safe-food-handling-and-... I don’t have time to find a source that supports this, but I understand that these dates also refer to the durability of the “food safe” container/packaging. Ever drink water from an unopened plastic bottle that has been stored for awhile? That taste…

I wish regulators stopped trying to be poetic and just use clear English. What's "best by?" You need to write "do not eat after." Nobody needs to be explained what that means.

None of them means 'do not eat after'.

Re: California bans sell-by dates

#268

Post by lupusreal »

an_guy wrote: post #264
gruez wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They’re one of the greatest sources of micro plastics in our bodies. Source?

Have you ever drank from one of those bottles?? It literally tastes like plastic.

Even if it's true that those bottles shed plastic and you can taste that plastic, that's not a source for the claim that the bottles are one of the foremost sources of the microplastic in our bodies.

Re: California bans sell-by dates

#269

Post by lupusreal »

RandomThoughts3 wrote: post #193
ranger_danger wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that unwashed eggs preserve a protective layer that inhibits bacterial growth, which is why washed eggs in the US must be refrigerated instead. I think they are both valid methods. https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/09/11/336330502/wh...

Yes it’s one of those weird American things. Like being extremely worried about chicken meat because the conditions chicken are raised in are so awful you can’t trust it’s not contaminated. I find it endlessly amusing that Americans are both extremely worried about food safety and apparently completely unable to pass reasonable food safety law.

It's largely a generational thing. Most baby boomers are afraid to eat eat even slightly pink beef. Arguments that millions of Americans eat hamburgers with the middle of the paddy still oozing blood and virtually nobody is harmed by it fall on deaf ears. Old dogs, new tricks, etc.

Re: California bans sell-by dates

#270

Post by lupusreal »

404mm wrote: post #259
gandalfian wrote: post #120

This sounds perfectly sensible and uncontroversial?

I’d prefer just one date: “Use By”. If something is still safe to eat but doesn’t taste great anymore, then that’s past the Use By mark for me.

Do you go by how it tastes, or by the printed use-by date? They're unrelated...
Post reply on HN