• Chozo@fedia.io
    29·
    3 months ago

    I disagree. We shouldn’t carve exceptions into the law for carelessness, IMO. If bones are making it through the deboning process, then the deboning process is inadequate. The solution is to do better at deboning, not to loosen the requirements on how you label the product.

    If anything, the legislation this should’ve brought about is one that puts a higher requirement on what can or cannot be called “boneless”. Words have meaning, and if we just pretend they don’t, people get hurt. Hell, we have a stricter legal definition for “cheese” than “boneless”. Nobody’s going to injure themselves on a slice of Kraft because they mistook it for real cheese, but you can seriously hurt yourself by eating something that was promised to be boneless and that turns out to be untrue.

    • Khanzarate@lemmy.worldEnglish
      26·
      3 months ago

      We aren’t really carving an exception though. The condition of something being free of another substance is always a percentage chance.

      My hand sanitizer only kills 99.99% of germs. Should it not be allowed to be called hand sanitizer because it cannot kill all of them? What should it be called? Hand almost-sanitizer? Those germs could get me pretty sick if I lose the cosmic lottery.

      There’s always a point in reality where “good enough” is actually good enough.

      I’m not actually saying this company has or hasn’t met that standard, I’m not an expert in poultry production techniques, but saying something needs to be 100% perfect to be sold doesn’t make things safer it just means it’d be illegal to debone wings without grinding up the chicken. I dunno the actual odds but it sounds like you’re already more likely to be struck by lightning than this occurring, and I’m still willing to go outside while its raining.

      • rudyharrelson@lemmy.radioEnglish
        8·
        3 months ago

        My hand sanitizer only kills 99.99% of germs. Should it not be allowed to be called hand sanitizer because it cannot kill all of them?

        I’d agree with this comparison if the ruling meant that they had to advertise their wings as “~99.9% boneless” the same way hand sanitizer labels itself as being ~99.9% effective.

        • Delphia@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          3 months ago

          The menu next week will contain a asterisk small print “customers are advised that while all care is taken, some bones may be present”

        • Khanzarate@lemmy.worldEnglish
          11·
          3 months ago

          That’d be funny and also still accurate. It’d end up being one of those asterisks.

          I think that’s a fair result.

          Either way, they’d be allowed to sell the 99.99% boneless wings, despite them technically not being guaranteed boneless.

      • Ookami38@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        5·
        3 months ago

        Your hand sanitizer doesn’t advertise germ-free, it advertises 99.9% germ free. It’d be a problem if they advertised it as germ free, and it wasn’t

        99.9% boneless wings, sure. That’s fine. You expect a leftover bone here and there. Who the fuck is gonna buy 99.9% boneless wings, though? No one. You know that, I know that, and advertisers know that. So they label it in a misleading factor to sell more.