This Avocado Oil that claims to be “0 Calories” 🙄

We do have both on packages, per 100g and per serving, but we don’t have anything wich is a nanogram per serving containing a couple billion servings in a bottle unless it’s anti matter

Its at least more accurate than the maths of trying to multiply by the purported zero on a can of avocado oil.

Let’s be honest I’m guessing nearly every country does this

Like Europe uses?

And who the fuck cares about calories in serving size?

Calories per 100g would be highly misleading in a product like this. You might use a couple or few sprays, but you’re not going to use a significant amount.

That said, listing calories-per-standard-amount as a secondary requirement I could absolutely get behind.

The thing people need to remember about serving sizes is that they are 1) based on studies of what people actually consume, and 2) intended to be parts of a meal. You don’t eat “one serving” for a meal. You’d have a serving of several different things. It’s extremely unperfect, but at least it gives you something you can work with. I do specifically like them having to also provide “calories per container”, though - that’s a good attempt to help solve this problem.

Quarter of a second of spray is vastly less reasonable as a serving size, no matter how unreasonable you consider stopping at a single tictac.

I don’t use spray, but those that use it normally do four or five sprays. Or sometimes even more.

If the amount of [something] per serving size is below 0.5g, they can legally claim that the food is [something]-free.

At least with fat, protein, or sugar. Although the food industry would probably lobby for this to apply to lead or cadmium, too. Or any other chemical used in UHP foods.

WTF. Like, sure, if you say “no decimal calories needed” it would make sense at the time, and could lead to this by accident. But that’s just silly.

Ah so if I just use a table spoon then is still 0! Free oil! (Don’t tell Americans.)

What institution in your country ISN’T a piece of shit owned by Big Coconut Oil???

that’s how ferrero’s tic-tacs are 0 calories on the label in the u.s… serving size is one mint, calories and sugar content both get rounded down to 0.

That would do it. If that is in fact how the law works then they are technically correct, if disingenuous on the calories at least.

Well, what Agent641 left out is that manufacturers in the US are allowed to “round down” to 0 if the calories/amount per serving are below a certain threshold. So by claiming 1,532 serving, they can get away with saying the calories in each serving are tiny and write 0. Tick-tack uses this to claim 0 calories even though the are mainly sugar, simply by claiming a portion is 1 tick-tack. It’s just another ridiculous US regulation no one wants to fix.

It’s cooking spray.

I suggest getting a reusable 2-in-1 spray/pour bottle. Saves a little money if you’re buying two things of oil. If you’re as frugal as me then you buy the oil from a discount store too.

Why not pump-based spray? I thought we were done with aerosols…

Avocado oil isn’t the problem, but aerosol? I’ve never even seen that

Of course it matters. It’s oil, of course it has calories, and of course it contains fat. To claim otherwise is simply lying.

And I regularly spray cooking oil for at least two seconds when prepping a sheet tray for baked goods or to roast vegetables, prepping bowls for dough, or a whole host of other common cooking tasks. Don’t try and pretend a 1/4 second spritz is the norm, or a useful serving size for something like oil.

I own this stuff, I buy it at Costco, I don’t even think I could spray it for 1/4th a second it’s not got a very precise nozzle. There’s also a huge difference, literally magnitudes, between 1/4th of a second and a few seconds over a pan. I use cooking spray pretty regularly and have a few applications like my ornate Nordic wear pans where a bottle of oil would not work well and it would be nice to know what I’m adding to my food but I chalk it up to the caloric cost of cooking

I’ve also seen plenty of UK products that have 2 sets of calorie/nutrition facts side-by-side, one for calories per 100g, and another for either a more typical serving size, or sometimes the whole container, which really strikes me as a fair middle ground. Have a reference quantity that makes it easy to make overall comparisons across all food, but also a reasonable “preset” for displaying the info for the product in question. It lets you eliminate stupid promotional tags like this that let you claim a food is fat-free, calorie-free, or whatever else by requiring a reference standard that doesn’t permit the manufacturer to simply manipulate the serving size until whatever claim they want to make is technically true for the amount they’ve chosen, while also making it easy for people to track their calorie and nutrient intake. The number of canned products I see in the states that have no way to reasonable seal them again and prevent them from going off once you open them, like large cans of energy drinks like Monster, yet have multiple “servings” in the can so the nutrition facts label can claim a serving is actually somewhere around 200 calories is absolutely ridiculous when you considering most people will treat the cans as a single serving and consume double the amount indicated at a minimum.

no, but you’re not just comparing it with nothing, you might also want to compare it with other kinds of oil. The absolute number itself is barely relevant, what most people want to know is which oil products are healthier than others.

haha :)

but it’s also about price. do i buy the 200g package at 2,50€ or the 350g package at 4,20€?

having things broken down to “per 100g” helps me with that.

All 1,532 servings?

It came up in hazmat training when I was a volunteer firefighter. It’s like handling firearms, you always assume they’re loaded.