Spyke

Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.

View original on lemmy.zip

10 replies

feddit.uk

Well in their defence cows and fish are often found in close proximity. Given that they're both aquatic animals. It's an easy mistake they could have made.

7

if this is part of an effort to get beef recognised as a type of fish by the Catholic church, keep it up, this'll probably work.

2
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Can it still be called contamination if a seafood lasagne was mispackaged as a beef lasagna, or vice versa?

3
essellreply
lemmy.world

Yes, beef in a seafood lasagna (is that a thing) would be a contamination

3

Did you read the article?

I read it as the seafood lasagna was put into a beef lasagna box, rather than the beef lasagna having prawns in it.

3
feddit.uk

Can only guess.

But it seems logical that the rules would define contamination, as including any ingredients not listed on the packaging.

That said. Issuing an "Urgent ‘do not eat’ warning ". Seems like an over reaction. Rather than warning folks of the error. Returns will be refunded and listing the real ingredients.

2
talreply
lemmy.today

Issuing an "Urgent ‘do not eat’ warning ". Seems like an over reaction. Rather than warning folks of the error.

There are some people who have serious food allergies, though I agree that for the great majority of people, eating one dish rather than the other is probably not a big deal.

1

Hence why I said. Warn folks about the error..

If someone sees a don't eat warning. They will also see a potential allergy warning or contains fish warning. In. The same place.

So informing people of the error and refunding any returns. Is no more risk then the initial sale was. And also produces a little less food and packaging waste then this.

So save n humans. Or save the same number if humans plus kill the earth less.

1

You reached the end

Urgent ‘do not eat’ warning issued for popular meal sold in Tesco and Morrisons | Spyke