John Fetterman Thinks You're Too Dumb To Understand That Vegan 'Milk' Isn't Dairy
The DAIRY PRIDE Act says it wants to protect consumers. In reality, it's trying to protect dairy farmers from economic competition.

Last week, Sen. John Fetterman (D–Pa.) wrote in a viral tweet that "Pennsylvania's dairy farmers are at the heart of our community and critical to our economy," adding that he's working to pass the DAIRY PRIDE Act, which would "protect our dairy farmers by prohibiting non-dairy products from using dairy names."
However, many quickly pointed out how ridiculous the bill's premise was.
"John Fetterman apparently thinks consumers are morons," responded Paul Sherman, a senior attorney at the Institute for Justice. "Everyone knows 'almond milk' is not a dairy product."
"Senator, that bill makes it illegal to market 'coconut milk' as 'coconut milk,'" added Shoshana Weissmann, digital director of the R Street Institute, a libertarian think tank. "That's moronic."
The DAIRY PRIDE Act, which was reintroduced in March after a first attempt in 2021, would prevent plant-based products from using terms often associated with dairy in their branding. So, should the bill pass, phrases like "oat milk," "soy yogurt," and "plant-based cheese" will be off-limits, forcing manufacturers to resort to awkward phrases like "oat beverage" when labeling their products.
The bill was reintroduced in reaction to a February decision from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to allow manufacturers of most plant-based dairy alternatives to continue labeling their products as "milk." The decision, according to the FDA's draft guidance, was made because the agency found that consumers consistently understood that plant-based milks aren't dairy products.
Unsurprisingly, dairy manufacturers were not so happy with the new rules—and neither were pro-dairy politicians.
"The decision to permit such beverages to continue inappropriately using dairy terminology violates FDA's own standards of identity, which clearly define dairy terms as animal-based products," wrote the National Milk Producers Federation in a February statement. "We reject the agency's circular logic that FDA's past labeling enforcement inaction now justifies labeling such beverages 'milk' by designating a common and usual name."
"For too long, plant-based products with completely different nutritional values have wrongly masqueraded as dairy," said Sen. Jim Risch (R–Idaho) in a press release following the DAIRY PRIDE Act's reintroduction. "This dishonest branding is misleading to consumers and a disservice to the dairy farmers who have committed their lives to making milk, cheese, yogurt, ice cream, and more nutritious products."
However, these concerns are overblown and disguise the real motivation behind calls to limit how plant-based products are labeled: a desire to limit economic competition for dairy farmers.
According to the Plant Based Foods Institute, an industry association, 40.6 percent of U.S. households reported buying plant-based milks in 2022, and 15 percent of all milk purchased in the U.S. is now plant-based. From 2019 to 2022, dollar sales of plant-based milk increased from $2.0 billion to $2.8 billion annually. In contrast, cow milk consumption has been decreasing for decades.
Contrary to pro-dairy talking points, it simply isn't true that consumers are particularly confused by plant-based milk labeling. According to a 2018 survey, 75 percent of respondents understood that soy milk and almond milk don't contain cow's milk, while only 9 percent said that the beverages contained dairy.
In fact, "milk" has been used to describe plant-based alternatives for centuries. According to Smithsonian magazine, recipes calling for almond "milk" were popular in medieval cookbooks, where the beverage was often used as an alternative to cow's milk during Lent.
Further, concerns that using "milk" to describe plant-based dairy alternatives could confuse consumers about the beverages' nutritional value are equally misplaced. While it's true that most plant-based milks (with the exception of soy milk) have much less protein and calcium per serving than cow's milk, this information is hardly hidden from consumers—it's printed on every product's nutritional label.
Even if dairy farmers and their political allies have a cow about it, plant-based milk is here to stay, and dishonest regulatory schemes are unlikely to change that.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
To be fair he did look sort of silly with his bucket asking where you milk the soybean.
I just watched a video where 20 random American adults couldn't find their own country on a map showing the outline of the worlds continents.
Are American adults stupid?
They are dumber than their own excrement.
Just more fine examples of what we've come to expect from government education.
I basically make about $16,000 to $20,000 a month online, and it's enough to comfortably replace my old job's income. What's even more remarkable is that I only work about 10-13 hours a week, all from the convenience of my home."
More infor... http://Www.Smartwork1.Com
I'm not so dumb as to not see that you are a troll asshole who likes to shit up the comments.
Fuck Off, Commie Troll!
You certainly are.
The DAIRY PRIDE Act
Does this mean celebrating a DAIRY PRIDE Day or Week or Month, with Rainbow-striped milk "From Contented Lesbian Cows?"
🙂
😉
Would celebrations include a beef version of Rocky Mountain Oysters and Chocolate-Covered Salty Balls from Gay Bulls?
Chef (Issac Hayes) Chocolate Salty Balls --Official Music Video
https://youtu.be/sjrdanK4LSY?si=5UaQOjsVqmyJnxcX
🙂
😉
And maybe Trans-Cattle will provide the best of both worlds?
🙂
😉
Well, most dairy cows have never had sex with a bull, thanks to the popularity of artificial insemination. Not sure that would make them lesbian. Non-binary maybe? Or ace?
Anything fetterman does should be ignored.
https://notthebee.com/article/john-fetterman-really-tried-to-dunk-on-a-heckler-by-saying-hes-had-a-stroke-so-he-cant-even-understand-what-the-heckler-is-saying
We should let him know on DAIRY PRIDE Day, Week, and Month that "Love Is Love" and that "Love Changes Everything" and that includes accepting Lyons' Nut Milk Bar too!
🙂
😉
Climie Fisher--Love Changes Everything
https://youtu.be/b8dy8tfUCEg?si=85lCuQmhLUhO7D2J
Opponents of Lurch will milk this for all they can. He really should be kicked out of the senate on his dairy-ere. A soyrry excuse for a legislator.
An udder digrace and a mooron to boot.
And Lurch is such a milquetoast. Just kick him oat. 🙂
Your post is utter disinformation.
Fetterman is a nut.
Casein point: the whey he handled the heckler in Minadin's link above.
What does he have to say about the situation with the Kurds?
And what is his answer to that timeless question: "What's a tuffet?"
🙂
😉
Bullwinkle's Corner--Little Miss Muffet
https://youtu.be/z5LGapKQXPo?si=m9zC68Rmrem-AwJD
What a boob.
It’s a tit for tat situation.
A churn for the worse. Butter late than never.
Whey to go!
Even without a stroke, he has a brain the size of a walnut.
Lady Macbeth would have approved of the way you worded your criticism, it shows that you are not by thy nature too full o' th' milk of human kindness ;o)
OT
Biden is envious
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-11-06/it-s-not-the-right-time-for-elections-in-ukraine-zelenskiy-says?srnd=premium#xj4y7vzkg
If Biden was envious of Fetterman, I could both see that and simultaneously wonder.
🙂
😉
According to Merriam-Webster, "The first known use of almond milk was in the 14th century."
Cow herders seem to be trying to undo 700 years of understanding of what almond milk is.
'"According to Merriam-Webster, “The first known use of almond milk was in the 14th century.”'
The oldest known mention of "almond milk" is in an Islamic text from the 8th century.
Which proves that there is something very stupid with the term "almond milk".
The law is clearly stupid and letting any government agency decide how products can be labeled is moronic.
Having said that I don't care how long some group has been calling juice from a plant source a term that should be reserved for an animal product. As Lewis Black said, there is no almond tit. Thus it is juice. Calling it milk simply identifies morons who can't use the language correctly.
Ok, so what is a woman?
The anti trans activists can't tell you that. But they want to sell non milk as milk. Hypocrites.
A human capable of producing nutritious milk for an offspring.
"Having said that I don’t care how long some group has been calling juice from a plant source a term that should be reserved for an animal product. As Lewis Black said, there is no almond tit. Thus it is juice. Calling it milk simply identifies morons who can’t use the language correctly."
Now do "hamburger." I hate to break it to you, but language evolves naturally. One might even say, "organically." Trying to control language is insane and fruitless. Ask the French government. Language evolves. Deal with it.
Then the very idea of our constitutional rights are a foolish idea since our language is "evolving" in a rather forced manner to redefine the words used so those enshrined rights no longer mean what they were meant when the document was accepted.
Nope. A history of the meaning of the specific terms in a contract, or a law, or a "constitution," must always be taken into account. "Almond milk" has been referred to as such for over a thousand years. That would seem a good "precedent," don't you think?
Next up harass, dairy farmers who sell skim milk without adding vitamins A & D. Oh wait...
I disagree. Libertarianism is about rationality and part of that is not twisting the definition of words. How many articles have there been here about men being men and women being women? Milk is "an opaque white fluid rich in fat and protein, secreted by female mammals for the nourishment of their young." I do agree that no one mistakes oat milk for a dairy product but that doesn't mean is should be sold as milk. Technically it's fraud. I think oat beverage is perfectly acceptable and doesn't take us further down the road of mislabeling everything to our detriment.
Correct. Milk is from animals. Not plants.
That said, the real problem here is that politicians of all stripes go to bat for powerful special interests because it helps them to win elections. The dairy industry knows that it will go under almost completely without government protection. Hence Fetterman. And Bernie Sanders. There is even an official Congressional Dairy Farmers Caucus.
And as bad as things are they may be about to get worse.
https://www.kcur.org/news/2023-09-28/farm-bill-deadline-missed-government-shutdown
The dairy industry knows that it will go under almost completely without government protection.
They won’t go under. People will still drink milk. Milk producers might have to be more competitive, that’s all.
They'll stop brazenly putting "NOW rBST FREE!" on the top of their bottles, that's for sure.
Why couldn't dairy farmers diversify their holdings and produce both dairy milk from moo-cows and goats and plant milk too?
Libertarians, of course, should equally fight against attempts to prosecute farmers for "restraint of trade" or horizontal monopoly if the Government attempts such prosecution.
The problem is that people are NOT drinking milk. At least not like in the past.
https://www.axios.com/2023/02/23/dairy-milk-oatmilk-soy-milk-fda
Fetterman is right but for the wrong reason. Dairy farms need to be allowed to go out of business because demand is not likely ever to return.
Uh, retard, your chart is showing liquid milk consumption, which is only a fraction of the dairy market. Butter, cheese, and dry milk products are up over the same time spans and your ignoring this fact is like Ron Bailey tipping his hand in saying "Once we have lab grown meat, we can return the ranch land to nature."
You don't care about regulations or nutrition or dairies or who owns what property and sells what goods to other people. You only care about selling the narrative that puts your preferred products and people in charge, even if they're worse products only made to seem better by harder market manipulations and lies.
Fuck off with your "Sleep in pods, walk to work, eat the bugs, drink the nut milk, own nothing, be happy." bullshit.
The dairy industry knows that it will go under almost completely without government protection.
This is retarded. About as retarded as saying the soy industry will go under almost completely without government protection of Monsanto. Slightly less retarded than saying the domestic almond industry would go under almost completely without state water regulation.
That is a definition of the word "milk". As the article already clearly documents, that has not been the only definition of "milk" for at least over 600 years and probably a lot longer than that. Words have meaning and it is in fact the dairy "purists" who are attempting to rewrite the definition.
Note, by the way, that the definition you cited is also scientifically wrong. Cows' milk is white but other species lactate in different colors (and even cows will milk in shades of orange-to-red depending on the amount of carotene in their diets).
They aren't rewriting the definition just demanding specificity.
Demanding specificity that does not already exist is rewriting the definition.
You just said the definition I gave was one of the definitions of milk?
So, if I ask you to clarify, I'm asking you to change what you said?
Sounds... brain damaged.
Merriam Webster recently redefined racism so as to eliminate the concept of blacks or Hispanics being racist because according to them there is no racism without an element of power. I don't think "well the dictionary says" is a defense since the dictionaries are being edited to push a specific political agenda.
If Merriam Webster accepts the leftist definition of woman will that mean women will include a man in a dress?
It's not fraud if it's not confusing or misleading, which you just said it isn't. They aren't seling it as milk, they are selling it as oat milk. Do you think Milk Of Magnesia is fraud too? The term "milk" has been used for a very long time to refer to thinks that are similar to milk in appearance and texture. It's really not novel or confusing. If people were trying to market these fake milk products simply as "milk" then you would have a good point.
And everyone thinks their political ideology is the most rational. A lot of libertarians are into finding a rational basis for their beliefs, but libertarianism itself isn't about rationality, it's about minding your own business and not using violence where it isn't necessary. One can be all kinds of irrational and be a fine libertarian as long as one doesn't try to force it on anyone else.
One can be all kinds of irrational and be a fine libertarian as long as one doesn’t try to force it on anyone else.
Goals. 🙂
As I said beverage is perfectly fine oat beverage, almond beverage. Maybe it should be peanut spread, apple spread. I saw a product today called strawberry spread I assume because it's not jam or jelly.
According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), a spread has to be made from at least 55% sugar to classify as a jam.
Maybe it should be peanut spread,
The Skippy "Natural" Peanut Butter Spread contains the "Spread" on the label because the Palm Oil means it's not Peanut Butter. Their "No Sugar Added" product is also identified as a Peanut Butter Spread. Their Creamy Peanut Butter is not noted as "Natural" but *is* identified as Peanut Butter even though it contains hydrogenated vegetable oils and added sugar.
I'm unaware of whether this is entirely self-inflicted or FDA mandated.
I'm kind of partial to "milk of the poppy" and I get the rest of my milk from milkweed.
Reason does this story or similar about every 6 months, and every time, I make a point that is about the same as yours. Thanks for saving me the effort, I'm getting tired of the argument.
Language is a product of spontaneous order. Government should not decree words to mean things other than what custom has gotten them to mean. We see what trouble that's produced with "dollar", "pound sterling", and now "marriage".
What do you want merchants to write instead of "peanut butter", "apple butter", "milk of magnesia" or "head cheese"?
So blacks and Hispanics can't be racist because the dictionary now says that racism requires an imbalance of power. When the dictionary defines woman as anyone who wants to be called a woman will that be truth?
Lines need to be drawn. Marketing people need to be dragged off to be horsewhipped for destroying all meaning of our words.
Dictionaries don't get to change the meaning of words either. There is no such thing as "The Dictionary".
Merriam Webster changed the definition in exactly that way. How can it be that we cannot dispute the use of the word milk but you can dispute the word racism when the same dictionary is being referenced?
I'm still offended that they got away with calling ground beef "hamburger." Where's the ham?
Better sophistry if you point out there is no cheeseburg Germany.
I think you really need the milk of human kindness to get over this fixation.
Words in living languages can be and are dynamic in their meanings and meanings can change over time.
When I was in the Second Grade 50 years ago, the word "Run" had literally and exactly 100 meanings in The Oxford English Dictionary. Now, in the Information Age, who knows how many meanings it has?
He's smarter than Biden - so there is that.
Cite?
Lol
Which state will be the first to elect a representative with down syndrome?
Any Biden press conference in the past 2 years?
John Fetterman doesn't think. He's been handed a card to read by a panel of milk lobbyists which has a campaign contribution check on the other side of it.
All he did was cowtow to a special interest group lobby.
And milk it for all it was worth in campaign contributions.
It's an udder travesty.
He really knows how to shoot the bull!
🙂
😉
Doesn't your article undercut your premise?
If only 75% of people realize that plant milk doesn't come from cows, and 9% think otherwise and 16% are unsure, then yes, Americans are too dumb to understand it.
That's 1/4 of Americans.
More victims of the public school system.
Just remember, these people vote..
You really need to read the article.
First, it’s 75% for soy and almond. As you move to more obscure sources like cashew, it falls to 70%.
Second, the numbers for actual dairy aren’t really any better. 26% of people weren’t sure if skim milk contained any dairy or not.
Third, nutrition, where it really matters to Liberteen Magazine’s hip-swiveling “What’s the big deal of calling it milk if it’s not hurting anyone?” gets punted on (somewhat understandably given the numbers) by the article.
There’s almost certainly some overlap but, by the article, “Up to 56% of Americans don’t know that cashew milk doesn’t contain dairy or that skim milk does.” is not a provably incorrect statement.
"John Fetterman apparently thinks consumers are morons," responded Paul Sherman, a senior attorney at the Institute for Justice. "Everyone knows 'almond milk' is not a dairy product."
The contest between a brain dead congress critter and K-street shyster as to who better represents the average consumer is one of those contests that best resolved with copious amounts of gasoline and a book of matches.
Well put
Are you using a gas fire to attract the climate activists? Smart. They've got their mitts in this fight so they can go in the pile with the rest.
Tbh, I'm getting tired of the amount of non-dairy products being mixed in with dairy at the store. Fake cheese is disgusting. Same goes for fake meat. They are marketed and packaged to look indistinguishable from the normal options and sometimes the labeling forces you to search more to figure out what it is.
Maybe I'm a lazy shopper, but it's really disappointing to accidentally get vegan foods
This fake meat crap has been in the local grocery store for several months now and no one, absolutely no one is buying it.
From what I've been reading fake meat is being rejected .
Up next: ze bugs!
Why is it so important for the makers of imitation milks, meats and cheeses to hide the fact that what they're selling is imitation milks, meats and cheeses?
They suck.
Sleep in pods, walk to work, eat the bugs, drink the almonds, own nothing, be happy.
Are they doing that? I have never been confused about whether I was buying actual milk or a vegetable derived substitute. Some of the imitation meat stuff does push the line a bit, I guess.
The common language is under attack. I was talking with my son about his Young Americans for Liberty activities and I found out all the terms we used 20 years ago have been so badly poisoned by efforts of both left and right that they have to use all new terms to avoid the stink on the old terms.
Like Conservative?
Another good example.
Yup. No conservative three decades ago would have supported Trump's kowtowing to Russia, starting trade wars, massively increasing corporate welfare to agribusiness, or massively increasing the national debt. Conservatives also used to be pro immigration and pro science.
Instead we now have a demented,corrupted, senile old man kowtowing to Ukraine for over $130 billion. Whose son is a deranged, drug addicted degenerate, and whose wife is trailer trash.
I don't disagree. But I don't think the labeling of milk alternatives is a particular area of concern. Lots of words have common meanings beyond their explicit original meaning.
Like "man" and "woman".
It's the camel trying to get its nose under the tent.
First they call it milk, then they work to outlaw the real stuff.
Like "gun control", it's not about control, the long game in prohibition.
Bingo. Words need to mean specific things. We are allowing the definitions to become so broad they no longer mean anything.
The left and right can no longer talk the same language.
Because words need to mean specific things or we don't have a common language.
The english language has not used "milk" to mean only 'the mammary secretions of mammals' since, well, as far back as our records go. Milkweed and other plant juices or saps described as "milk" date back to at least 1200. Milk of ... as a description of inorganic emulsions (such as milk of magnesia) go back at least to the start of the Industrial Revolution, maybe as far back as the Rennaissance.
Words do have meaning - but this particular word does not have the strict and sole meaning you are alleging.
The word milk has many uses
to draw or squeeze milk from the mammary glands of (a cow, etc.)
to draw out or drain off; extract as if by milking
to drain off or extract money, ideas, strength, etc. from as if by milking; exploit
to extract juice, sap, venom, etc. from
to draw out (information, etc.) as if by milking
Would you want to drink the result of milking a rattlesnake?
>>According to a 2018 survey, 75 percent of respondents understood that soy milk and almond milk don't contain cow's milk
and what the other 25% are more stupid than Senator Stroke Victim?
I've met grown-ass adults that didn't know that chicken nuggets didn't come from actual chickens. They were just named "chicken nuggets".
Nothing surprises me with American urbanites.
And people who are that incurious and ignorant will never have a clue, no matter how words on food packages are regulated.
LOL, about 110 years ago, my grandmother, a city girl always and forever, was visiting her cousins who lived on a farm. When asked why she was sitting on the fence watching the pigs, she said she was "waiting for the pigs to lay the sausages".
Like the old joke about the city boy scout on a hike who found several discarded milk bottles. He called all his friends saying "I found a cow's nest!".
My born, raised, lived and died on a farm/ranch grandfather never understood why they called pork a white meat. Pork, to him, was a red meat because you have to seriously mess with the hog diet to get low fat white meat.
I think they mess with the color with the genetics/artificial insemination. The modern corn/soybean high stress meat definitely doesn't help the final product though.
Wild boar meat is white.
I'm not entirely clear on what MrMxyzptlk is driving at, except maybe making himself look like a bad, second hand copy of a retard, but the "white meat" aspect of pork has nothing to do with the fat content.
There are people who somewhat* falsely assume red vs. white to be mammalian vs. non-mammalian but the biochemical nature of myoglobin (if present) is what, definitively, makes (e.g.) beef red and fish, foul, or pork white. This is rather obvious when, rather than cooking the myoglobin out of the meat, you cure it, pork is still pink, like chicken, rather than black/red like beef or blood pudding (where hemoglobin is the major color component).
Even if you could genetically engineer the pigs to produce beef myoglobin, a feat that couldn't readily be done by conventional breeding even today, it's not entirely clear you'd get the red meat because of the relative capillary patterns and oxygen distribution.
*"Somewhat" in the "Tomato is a fruit" fashion. Biologically, tomato is a fruit but no chef would put tomatoes in a fruit salad.
tomatoes are worse than Hamas.
From North Fork Wild Meat.
For centuries, wild boar meat has been a delicacy enjoyed by the aristocracy of Europe. Now produced in North America, it is increasingly sought after by chefs and consumers looking for a unique flavour. Although you may expect it to resemble pork, wild boar is a dark red meat. Unlike its domestic cousin, wild boar is also very lean and low in cholesterol. Wild boar is an excellent alternative to beef and pork for those who want food that is good for them without sacrificing taste and quality.
Fully living up to my "bad, second hand copy of a retard" assessment after the fact.
You sound an awful lot like someone who thinks they know what they're talking about but has never actually slaughtered either a domestic or a wild pig, cow, deer, elk, bison, rabbit, squirrel (or other rodent), pheasant, quail, chicken, duck, catfish, trout, salmon, tuna, etc., etc., etc. and is still, decades later and after the advent of the internet, confused by the same "puzzle" that his grandfather couldn't figure out.
My kids figured out the red meat/white meat mystery years ago and the youngest is 10.
My grandfather used to do a Christmas slaughter of every kind of avian we had on the farm and donate them to poor families through the church. We did turkeys, ducks and geese until the GFP officer told us we needed a license for each of those birds.
You're trying to dodge out of being WRONG by being even more WRONG. Pork is a red meat, unless you feed it the scientifically designed diet that the big pork corps want it fed to make a lean chicken like meat. They started that back in the 80s. My dad got out of raising hogs because of that. We still raised a handful for ourselves and the meat was red.
Wait, so the game warden said you couldn't slaughter the livestock on your farm without tags for each animal? Are you sure it was a farm/ranch and your grandpa wasn't just shooting animals in the wild? And all of this is in the 80s before or around the time farmers used science to feed their animals?
I'm not wrong but whether I am or not, you were pretty incoherent to start out with and continue to get more and more incoherent.
Myoglobin, made from dietary iron, is in fact the molecule that gives meat, virtually all, its red hue. Despite your retardation about "In the 80s farmers started using science to feed livestock." anyone can go back to color photos from the 50s and nutritional data from before then and see that pork, raw or cooked, was considerably lighter than beef and venison, cooked up lighter in color, and had, on average, considerably less iron/myoglobin. And, as someone who started castrating, inoculating, and feeding pigs in the 70s, I can assure you science was used to design pigs diets well before the 80s.
In addition to the incoherence, you're doing so needlessly. You could say "The USDA regards pork as red meat and that's the official definition." That wouldn't refute the fact that, the world around, other people and cultures don't regard it as red meat or that it does in fact contain myoglobin levels on par with other white meats, but it at least wouldn't be as self-defeating and retardation-inducingly idiotic as "Pork is red meat because the game warden on my Grandpas farm wouldn't let him slaughter fowl at Christmas without a licence."
Not only that but hunting feral pigs is great sport and helping out the farmers.
Feral hogs create a lot of damage to farm fields.
You'd be surprised the effect diet has on meat color, texture and flavor. The reason so many meats "taste like chicken" is those animals dine on what chickens eat... or ate for most consumers. Today's cage raised chicken has never seen an insect much less eaten one. The very specific diet they are kept on is to promote maximum growth in minimum time.
The chicken I ate when living on the farm would be around two years old and ate a wide variety of things. Today's cage raised chicken is 6 months old when slaughtered and eats only what it's corporate masters want it to eat.
Hogs must be raised in much the same way if the farmer wants the corporate slaughterhouses to buy them. That's why their meat looks like chicken. They are fed like chickens. Take the same pigs and feed them a "wild" diet and you get red meat. My brother raised a litter primarily off the contents of an old freezer filled with freezer burned venison along with windfall apples, kitchen waste and the same hay grain mix he fed the cattle. It was almost the same red as beef and was some of the best pork I've had in a long time.
It was almost the same red as beef and was some of the best pork I’ve had in a long time.
Says the guy who, two paragraphs before, struggles to tell the difference between chicken and pork like a 4 yr. old.
Like the BS with wine connoisseurs, It has been demonstrated a number of times that for the *vast* majority of people the distinction between grain fed, grass fed, pasture-raised, grass-finished, and grain-finished meats are moot. Especially when you get into the most productive and most-consumed ground and flame-grilled category but still very much true when chewing your way through the “dry aged”, “salt rubbed”, “smoked overnight” fare.
Similarly, the vast majority of people can tell the difference between commercially raised beef and pork and chicken commercially raised on “the same feed” and if you have trouble telling the difference then your pallet is less discerning than your average Big Mac consumer and your opinion should be regarded in similar esteem.
freezer burned venison along with windfall apples, kitchen waste and the same hay grain mix he fed the cattle
Lemme guess, your brother had hundreds of pounds of freezer-burned venison, the amount it would take to make up even 10% of a litter of pigs’ diet birth-to-slaughter, and despite the fact that windfall apples are generally dry and bitter it made the pork sweet, and despite the fact that hay and wild grazing dries meat across species and diet would have fuck all to do with it after the cut comes off the skillet or out of the oven the chops were as juicy as any you’ve ever had.
Again, your the kind of guy who looks at a picture of grass-fed pork chops like this online and thinks “OMG! They’re so red! Just like the person selling them says they are!” without recognizing that all the other colors in the photo are saturated to hell and that, really, the chops probably look a lot like the fresh ground pork, which, curiously, also looks like the pork sausage… except less color saturated.
The thing that makes the most sense out of all of it is that you own a farm-to-table restaurant, you’re one of the vegan-level zealous eco-paleo nuts, or both.
Sorry, I didn't realize you were an idiot. My fault for replying to you.
You're right, I was an idiot for even thinking you could manage farm-to-table.
It just seemed like, when I said you yourself hadn't raised and/or slaughtered anything and you replied with how your grandpa, and then your brother, and then your dad all raised and slaughtered things, maybe you were managing things. Instead, it really looks more like your assertion of "my grandpa/brother/dad did..." is really more like "Well, not me personally, but a guy I know..."
I mean, you do realize that the origin of “tastes like chicken” wasn’t to connote that two familiar foods tasted so much alike but that a wild, alien or unfamiliar food tasted like a domestic staple recognized around the world, right?
That you’re saying “Because lots of people think limes and oranges taste like lemons the same all tree fruits that grow in the same dirt ‘taste like lemons’ because they grow in the same dirt."
Your idiocy is so deep, you're fucking up the idioms.
Ever eat rattlesnake? It does actually taste a lot like the chicken we ate when I was young.
So would that be because of the scientifically-designed grain-based diet that you fed the rattlesnake?
You fucking retard.
You're a bigger fan of the half-educated, roundly bigoted, stale-thinking, parasitic, can't-keep-up residents of Idaho?
When the dollar blows up those folks in Idaho will still be feeding their families. Urbanites will starve after a week or two, depending on now many pets they are willing to eat.
That idiot thinks food comes from the grocery store.
You're so kind to claim he thinks.
And water from a tap (same grandmother as above didn't understand water conservation requests, even after seeing the final reservoir in the NYC system was badly depleted with her own eyes).
That is if any are left alive. The looting and general mayhem inside the city will soon spread to the suburbs.
No one will be safe unless they are armed...with guns including AR-15s with thirty round clips.
Is your flourishing cape capable of making food magically appear to help you flourish as well?
Carry on, Klinger! They have recipes on How To Serve Man in North Korea just for the likes of you!
If chicken nuggets aren't made from chickens, what are they made from? I can't find the hamburger on a butcher's chart but that doesn't mean they're not made from cows.
Hamburger is ground beef from several different primal cuts. Just like you can't find a Stew on the diagram of a cow, trimmings that aren't turned into ground beef are sometimes sold as stew meat if they have a uniformity of size.
If all the trimmings put into the grinder come from a single primal such as the chuck it is labeled ground chuck. It depends really on the preferences of your butcher and the volume of meat primals processed by their shop. If their daily bucket of trimmings isn't going to be large enough to bother with keeping the various primal trimmings separate then you wind up with hamburger.
If you buy you ground meat in the plastic tubes then it is often labeled hamburger because it was made at the slaughterhouse from the trim off all the primals they subdivide the animal into.
Ground chuck is $5.49/Lb. up here in northern Michigan.
I remember buying fresh hamburger for 1/3 of that.
My brother runs the family ranching operation. I buy my beef from him. Just filled the freezer last December and it's still got plenty. I know beef prices are high but I don't pay that much attention to them.
Who do you think elected him and Biden?
Biden defeated a crook and Fetterman defeated a quack grifter.
How about that a quack( Fetterman) defeating another quack. Fetterman who has never worked a single day in his entire worthless life has been a leech off everybody else. Today he's an even bigger leech.
Elected by a corrupted, crooked fake election...the same as Biden.
Have you personally ever bought a carton of soy milk only to realize it wasn't cows milk when you got home? Have you personally ever been confused by any of these products?
If not, why are you so quick to assume that nobody else is up to your intellectual capacity?
Apologies. That was supposed to be a reply to Azathoth a few threads up. Not sure why Reason posted this as a new post rather than a reply.
Because Reason hired all those reporters who 'learned to code'.
The interface is screwy. You have to pay attention before hitting Submit. It's happened to me several times. That's why I try for quick posts, the longer they are the more likely something will go wrong.
I bet Lurch and his D buddies are confused about dairy pride. Or maybe I am.
You would think Fetterman would be more pro-Vegetable
fuck yeah. love it.
John Fetterman Thinks You're Too Dumb To Understand That Vegan 'Milk' Isn't Dairy
Well, since only a total moron would WANT to drink "Vegan 'Milk'", he has a point there
"Milk" comes from mammals
Your fake "milk" isn't real milk. And that means calling it "milk" is a lie.
I understand that even you losers would rather be drinking real milk, and therefore want the name to help you pretend.
But it's a lie, and protecting people from lying businesses is actually one of the legitimate jobs of government.
So this time I'm with the vegtable
True, if we are going to have a government, and I doubt we will ever rid ourselves of the beast, it should have a purpose. Constitutionally ours is tasked with setting weights and measures along with promoting the general welfare. A mislabeled product affects the general welfare.
Somehow I’m not harmed by drinking almond milk, and knowing it comes from almonds. That's why I bought it.
The introduction (preamble) isn't the actual Constitution content.
There is no "promoting the general welfare" enumerated power.
Just clarifying that since it's such a wild misconception.
But weights, measure and coinage are explicit.
Yes they are 🙂 No misconception there.
Would that then include things like "Milk of Magnesia"?
The Milky Way?
Oh noes! All this time, I thought candy shelves were selling packages with 100 billion stars and 100 million Light-Years across on the inside!
🙂
😉
Is that product still on the shelves? I don't think I've ever seen it. Maybe it's only sold in a few markets.
I'm with fetterman on this. Milk comes from mammals. Nuts and beans don't give live birth. It's idiotic to call it milk. We should also regulate what can be called a chicken wing, there is no such thing as a "boneless wing". Grow the fuck up.
Lines do need to be drawn before we are left with a language where the words are so overbroad in their meaning that we may as well point and grunt at things.
Just the definition of milk "a fluid produced by female mammals to feed their offspring." has words some people want to destroy the meaning of female is being stretched to include anyone who feels like they want to use a woman's restroom. I suspect next mammal will be under assault because we shouldn't discriminate against reptiles.
You are drawing the lines in the wrong place. Words tend to have multiple definitions. Yeah, we should push back on the deliberately sown confusion about what certain words actually mean and the calculated redefinition of certain words. But that's not what's happening here. They are using words in a way that is common usage. People have been using "milk" to refer to things that resemble actual mammalian lactation products for centuries.
And yet most people manage to figure it out.
Nuts and beans are seeds, right?
Sounds like live birth to me.
Those are clumps of cells.
Any seeds that aren't allowed to sprout and grow new plants are vegan abortions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4klWmwC2ds
Ackshuyally, Gary Larson in The Far Side had a Boneless Chicken Ranch.
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/120612096243233805/
🙂
😉
Uh, peanut butter?
But really, any article whose headline starts, "John Fetterman Thinks" is itself misleading.
Very true. "John Fetterman is told to read from a cue card" is more honest.
If we are going for such strict definitions, can we amend the bill to outlaw the phrase "moderate democrat"?
I would like to see specific definitions of Fascist, NAZI, Liberal, Socialist and Communist instead of the catch all use of the terms to mean "people opposed to my ideology."
I get that language evolves. However that is a lame excuse for calling Nut Juice a milk just like some people want "could care less" to mean the same as "couldn't care less." Just because they've said it wrong all their lives and want us to adjust to their ignorance.
While we are at it clearly we need solid definitions of man and woman since the left wants to bend those words around until they mean nothing.
Lines in the sand need to be drawn. We let idiot news readers turn decimate to a synonym for devastate because they didn't know better. Milk being a product of a female mammal to feed their offspring is ground worth dying on.
He represents Pennsylvania, large stretches of which are desolate, can't-keep-up backwaters inhabited by a depleted human residue after generations on the wrong end of bright flight. His half-educated, superstition-addled, addiction-prone, economically inadequate constituents deserve an advocate, too.
You live in Scranton don’t you?
Isn't he a Democrat though?
And he was mayor of one of those backwater towns. That help him defeat the rich Republican elitist who lived in New Jersey. But because Trump endorsed the elitist, his Cult voted for the elitist.
This actually shows the attraction of Big Government. The dairy industry is dying and it is rushing to Uncle Sugar to protect it. Fetterman wants the votes of those who see that dairy means jobs in those backwater communities.
Donald Trump is ten times worse. His Cult looks back to the day when labor intensive factories employed a lot of people. Those days are long gone but Trump has conned people into thinking he can bring those days back via corporate welfare.
Fetterman and Trump are the same on this issue. 🙁
Philadelphia is among the most violent lawless cities in America. Kensignton Ave is a literal drug haven, with people bent over from fentanyl, barely alive, with a corrupted crooked D.A. , Larry Krasner (D) releasing violent offenders back onto the streets.
Philly is an absolute shit hole now thanks to the demoncrats.
The same morons who voted for uncle Festterman.
The folks providing definitions for milk in the comments are in the right church but sitting in the wrong pews. If anyone on this thread would care to read just how the Food and Drug Act was first considered they need look no further than milk. In the 19th century it was common for "swill milk" to be sold, particularly to people in the cities. This milk was gotten from diseased cows fed swill or the leftovers from the mashing process for making beer or whiskey. It was the result of distillers looking to profit from their trash. The milk produced by the cows is thin and has an unnatural, bluish tint (not enough protein). Vendors would add additives such as chalk, flour, eggs, and Plaster-of-Paris to achieve a white color and consistency.
So how do you define milk and what is a healthy cow? What should be in milk (the chemistry of the product) and what should not (adulterants). New York state took on the job initially and its code was a precursor to the US Food and Drug Act which prevented“the manufacture, sale, or transportation of adulterated or misbranded or poisonous or deleterious foods, drugs, medicines, and liquor.”
So there you have it. A business practice (producing swill milk) was instrumental in generating a regulatory response. Did consumers know the difference between normal and swill milk? No. Why? Because the vendors of swill milk misbranded the product (they called it Pure Country Milk) and how would anyone know a difference and could they even find a replacement?. According to libertarian thought, the market should have made a correction, but none such occurred. So the regulatory landscape gets defined: a manufacturer has to control a products production, know what the product is (a definition of what it does and does not contain) and label and sell the product accordingly. All of these are to provide consumers with the information and the confidence to make an informed choice.
Say what you will about the "intelligence of consumers" the advertising of alternative "milk" is counting on a certain equivalence if not out right confusion existing in the minds of consumers. Businesses do not deal in individual purchases, just an aggregate trend. And if the word "Milk" provides some value to increase uptake of the product they will use the word. Personally I am on the side of the dairy folks. Milk is a defined product. Plant or synthetic products have to find another term or definition.
How about veggie burgers?
Peanut butter?
White chocolate?
Fresh frozen?
Jumbo shrimp?
The milk of human kindness?
On and on……
More government rules for stupid shit isn’t going to make life better..
Given that we have a government, aren't going to get rid of it soon and the various departments have some actual jobs to do that are by and large beneficial to a majority of Americans the FDA does do what it can so when an American buys a 1 pound hunk of beef from a specific primal cut they are getting what they think they are getting. You can't sell chicken spray painted red as beef. You can't sell trout as salmon and you can't sell wheat flake cereal as rye flake cereal.
Yes, certain terms have snuck into our food vocabulary, often because English is a language that beats other languages up and steals their words. Thus ground beef may be also called hamburger but that is only when the beef comes from a variety of primals. If it is all trim from the sirloin primal it is labeled as ground sirloin. All trim from the chuck primal it is ground chuck. Etc.
Specific terms are mandated by the FDA for specific kinds of food. You can't call a chuck roast a rib roast. You can't call a peice of choice beef a prime piece. While the dictionary may mention every use that has ever been written down that doesn't mean we consumers can't ask the FDA to have food products labeled in a more clear manner.
After all just because you can milk a venomous snake doesn't mean you should drink what you milked, nor do we refer to such a product as milk. It remains venom. It will still kill you even if it is put in a carton and called Snake Milk.
There is no soy tit. There is no almond tit. No cashew, oat or coconut tit. These are juices. We don't call the squeezings of an orange "orange milk" so we shouldn't call other fruit and vegetable squeezings milk. It is dishonest marketing and should be discouraged.
Spot on logical. Everything has what is called a standard of identity. And those can be quite flexible, to the point of breaking. for instance. There was much ado about French dressing and how its standard was retired. French dressing must contain oil, acidifying ingredients and seasoning. It essentially acts as a baseline for all other dressings. But given history, French dressing came to include tomatoes (allowed under the standard), have a reddish color and be slighly sweet. Consumers expect these characteristics when purchasing products labeled as French dressing. Thus, since the establishment of the standard of identity, French dressing became a narrower category than actually prescribed by the standard. So the standard of identify was retired. It is entirely possible that the milk standard may be retired or rewritten in the same way. But as it stands, that is not what the plant "milk" folks are asking. So they have to get another name.
A true libertarian woudn't want the government to worry about dishonest marketing. The market will eventually rule out the fraudsters.
That at least is libertarian ideology. In practice, libertarians like big government as long as it supports their own beliefs.
If we had made a dent in the leviathan in the 30+ years I've voted Libertarian I'd agree with you. However as long as the FDA exists there will be no free market options for food grading and food safety. Thus the FDA is what we turn to to protect consumers from charlatans trying to push their chemistry set concoctions from plants as wholesome and nutritious milk.
The additive contents of "Swill Milk" sound like they would be unhealthy and dangerous no matter what it is called. Yeeech!
Just to be clear. There are well defined food "additives" that may be incorporated into a food without regulatory harm. Additives are clearly defined for use and with a specific purpose (eg improve shelf life), and are generally regarded as safe. Similarly there is food fortification (adding more nutrients eg Vit D to milk). In both cases the addition of the additive or nutrient is specified on the label. There can be a fine line between an adulterant and an additive. Example, chalk (calcium carbonate is a much better term) is added to bread flours to increase whiteness and to add calcium (a nutrient). Gypsum (calcium sulfate) may also be used. The key is intent: when added in specified amounts and clearly called out in the label they are given a regulatory blessing. The consumer has the information to make a decision. But, no labeling, no specification, that is an adulterant.
Words matter. They reflect intent and motivation.
Fetterman assessing intelligence?
You can't measure a building with a ruler.
"John Fetterman apparently thinks consumers are morons,"
Well, Fetterman and I agree on one thing.
Senator, I drink your almond milkshake! I drink it up!
I can’t believe I’m actually agreeing with Fetterman but I am. Soy or almond “milk” isn’t milk and should not be labeled as such. Calling soy “milk” milk is no different than calling tofu “meat.” Milk comes from the mammary glands of female mammals - nowhere else. Words have meaning which allows us to properly identify things.
“Words have meaning which allows us to properly identify things.”
The problem is the word ‘milk’ doesn’t allow us to properly identify whatever’s labelled as such. Is this milk from a cow or milk from a goat or some other mammal? We use the same word for both, even though they are distinctly different things. The Fettermans of the world may find this confusing.
Another question, given that Milk comes from the mammary glands of female mammals – nowhere else, but you don't say which female mammals. So you buy a carton labelled 'milk' and it turns out that it's milk from a dog or a possum or an otter. How do you rate you customer satisfaction, 1 very unsatisfied to 5 very satisfied.
A question for the linguists out there; I’ve always been fascinated by the Inuit language using a vocabulary that extends over 2 dozen different words to cover the one English word ‘snow.’ So does anyone know a language that uses multiple different words for milk from different mammals? In Japanese they mostly use variations on the Chinese nyu but also the word chichi which means mother’s milk and tit. Also, miluku, for Western cultural imports like adding milk to tea.
Milk from a goat is labeled "Goat Milk". Cow milk is, from the marketing viewpoint, the default mammalian milk product. But if it makes you happy I think the jugs should be labeled not only as cow milk but from what variety of cow. Gurnsey Milk as an example.
Here is a question for you. One of the definitions of "milk" is a verb referring to the process by which venomous snakes are relieved of their venom. Now, if one were to go and milk snakes, then put that product in a jar and sell it as "Rattlesnake Milk" then when some idiot drinks the venom and dies horribly should the person selling the product be free of blame and liability because they were using the word as the dictionary said it can be used and it was labeled as being from a rattlesnake?
"Milk from a goat is labeled “Goat Milk”
Milk from a goat is milk. A goat is a mammal and its milk comes from the mammary glands of the female. If you buy a carton labelled milk and it's actually milk from a goat, you have no grounds to complain, as it conforms to the definition Jeff Mason provided. Milk is a perfectly good word, but like many other words, there's room for lots of ambiguity. Use with care.
"One of the definitions of “milk” is a verb "
But the result is a noun. When the con artist milks the mark, he doesn't pocket the milk, he pockets the dough.
But they aren't labeling it as "milk". They are labeleing it as "soymilk", "almond milk", etc. It's not a new usage and it's not confusing anyone.
I'm on the fence and the repeated use of "It's not confusing anyone." isn't convincing me. Especially the source cited where between 1 in 4 and half of people can't tell you if almond milk isn't dairy *and* skim milk is.
I wholly agree that milkweed has been milkweed since whenever some half-German, half-French, half-English botanist named it, and, as such, almond milk should be fair game. However, in the context of Chicago opening state-owned grocery stores in food deserts because people, supposedly, can't get proper nutrition, I'm reticent.
Soy milk is riding the coat tails of real mammal milk. If they didn't want to ride those coat tails why not just call it soy juice? Why are all of these plant based juices using the word "milk" if it wasn't a concerted effort to ride the coat tails of mammal milk? Wouldn't at least a couple have chosen juice or beverage if the word Milk didn't have a positive value in the market place?
"If they didn’t want to ride those coat tails why not just call it soy juice? "
You're not thinking this through. Milk and juice are two different things. You don't add juice to your coffee. Juice is not used when you make pancake mix. In case you're not familiar with soy milk, it is used as a substitute for mammal milk. Unlike juice, it is added to tea or pancake mix. Calling it juice would be even more confusing. Apples, pears and oranges are juicy. Soy beans aren't juicy.
Soy Beans don't even make oil unless chemically treated. The end product has more in common with petroleum than any animal fats. To juice them you need to add water and puree until not totally gross.
Carrots aren't a squeezable vegetable, yet carrot juice is a thing.
"yet carrot juice is a thing."
If it were whitish and made a suitable substitute for milk in your coffee, then it would be called carrot milk. Otherwise, juice it is.
Yes but do you know what a female is?
In mammals, a milk producing parent.
Next the nut juicers will be demanding that we use their pronouns, and calling it hate/violence if we deadname their products.
The reason they can't be honest about this is because they know their product won't sell without deception. The "Impossible/Beyond" Burger doesn't work when you honestly call it a high-sodium lab-grown mungbean patty. The almond "milk" doesn't work when you honestly call it an enzyme-treated slurry made of unprocessed nuts.
It's not that anyone is too dumb to understand - I mean, maybe that's true for some people (hence why they put it right next to the milk in the dairy aisle) - it's that the deception is, in fact, an insult to our intelligence; as it panders to people who want TO be lied to about what they actually want and why. (And they're going to try this garbage when they start putting insects on the menu, mark my words.)
Vegans are basically the trans of the culinary world. They want to pretend something is what it isn't, and demand usage of a word that satisfies their delusion instead of simply admitting the reality of it all.
Just round them all up, put them in a padded room, and feed them thorazine for the rest of their lives. FFS. Stop making the normal people go through this song and dance.
Locking people up for having different thoughts is the path to freedom!
There's a pretty distinct line between "different" and "delusional."
"This thing that is clearly and provably not XYZ is something I will call 'XYZ'" - that's not "having different thoughts."
That's operating outside of reality. That's denying the most fundamental axiom upon which all knowledge is based.
If you're running around intentionally saying some variation of "A = ~A" - then yes, let's put you somewhere safe and get you some clearly needed help until you can get a firm grasp on reality again.
"That’s operating outside of reality. "
That's the beauty and freedom of language. It's probably the most fundamental human creation and we're free to do with it as we wish.
"If you’re running around intentionally saying some variation of “A = ~A”
Logic is another way of arranging symbols. Logic and spoken natural language are governed by different sets of rules. Logic can tell us something about the validity of an argument, but it tells us nothing about the validity of the usage of any particular word.
*slaps you in the face*
I just gave you a hug. Isn't language beautiful? Everything means whatever we want it to mean to fit the conclusions we want to reach! Left is right, dogs are cats, boys are girls, nothing means anything but what we want it to!
I just gave you a glaswegian kiss. Happy now?
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=glaswegian%20kiss
Language is not bound by logic. There's no irony in logic. Arguments are bound by logic. Logic doesn't dictate the meanings of words.
Look at the word 'cleave' for a good example. The dictionary gives us two meanings for the word:
1) to adhere firmly to
2) to split or separate
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cleave
Two meaning which are the opposite from each other. Cats are dogs, in other words. If you can find logic in this, please explain.
...the opposite of "cat" isn't "dog."
And language may not be bound by logic, but it is bound by our limited ability to accurately perceive reality and give it a meaningful definition.
I mean, forget cleave - let's take milk.
Are we talking about the liquid secreted by female mammaries? Or are we talking about the act of extracting a liquid from a creature? And don't forget the slang, as I milk this example for all it's worth.
The fact that a word can have multiple appropriate meanings doesn't justify its use when we're clearly talking about something it's clearly not.
Which is what's happening here. But we want to pretend it's something it's not, so we're intentionally misusing the word to keep up the deception. Like, when a wife-beater says he's only hitting her to show her how much he "loves" her.
So why even assert the deception? UNLESS A) you know that telling it straight will never be accepted; and B) you think you CAN fool people (especially people who want to be fooled.
"Which is what’s happening here. But we want to pretend it’s something it’s not, so we’re intentionally misusing the word to keep up the deception."
That is ridiculous. People who buy or make almond milk don't pretend that it's secreted from female mammals. It's used as a substitute for mammal milk. Put it on cereal, or in your tea, or whatever. Nobody is being deceived. Nobody is being victimized. Just like when you go to the gas station, you don't buy gas, but liquid petrol. Nobody is fooled. Nobody is deceived. Nobody is being victimized. Adult English speakers are well aware that words are slippery things that refuse to be nailed down.
I suspect this emotional outburst about the expansion of the definition of milk to include non dairy milk substitutes is motivated by spite and comes out of your contempt for vegans and their aversion to animal products. Nothing more.
No, they want to pretend they're drinking milk. Because asking for a tall glass of nut juice apparently embarrasses them.
Why include non-dairy in the dairy section at the store? Why include non-meat at the butcher's section?
Most stores have a Kosher section. And a Mexican and Asian section where they clearly distinguish those specialty products. FFS, mine even has a Plant-Based section (both coolers and shelves). Why not do the same for non-dairy/non-meat? UNLESS they're trying to subtly ingrain the idea that non-dairy and dairy (or meat and non-meat) are effectively the same thing.
No, it comes out of my contempt for them (and, more generally, the Church of Environmentalism) to try and ultimately force their aversions (which are less taste, and more "morality") on the rest of us. That's why they are trying to subtly ingrain these ideas. The WEF comes right out and admits their goal to "shift to a new way of eating."
"You'll never know the difference!" their church says, "So you won't even miss it when the original is gone." Which is their more palatable (ha, pun!) way of saying, "You will eat the bugs, and you'll like it."
Yea, I have a lot of contempt for that. This Not Milk = Milk crap is the tip of the iceberg, and anyone with a brain (when they're not thinking about the Roman empire) can see it a mile away.
"No, they want to pretend they’re drinking milk."
How do you know what 'they' want to pretend? Are you a mind reader?
"Why include non-dairy in the dairy section at the store?"
Why do you care? Don't shop there if the arrangement of the products offends your sensitivities. \
" UNLESS they’re trying to subtly ingrain the idea that non-dairy and dairy "
There's nothing subtle about putting non dairy products near dairy products.
"No, it comes out of my contempt for them (and, more generally, the Church of Environmentalism) to try and ultimately force their aversions (which are less taste, and more “morality”) on the rest of us. "
Nobody is forcing you to shop where non dairy products are available. Grow up for Christ's sake and find another hobby horse.
"Yea, I have a lot of contempt for that. This Not Milk = Milk crap is the tip of the iceberg, and anyone with a brain (when they’re not thinking about the Roman empire) can see it a mile away"
Again with the fortune telling. All this silly hand wringing is not persuasive. At least I managed to convince you of the foolishness of your 'soy milk is not logical' idiocy. You have an open mind on that front.
The Law of Non-Contradiction says that a thing cannot be A and Non-A at the same time and in the same respect (emphasis added.).
The Law of Non-Contradiction does not preclude changes in the definitions of words. It simply means that when you accept one definition of A, it is not also simultaneously a Non-A with the same definition of A being used.
Is Not Milk, Milk?
Cow's Milk is Cow's Milk and Nut Milk is Nut Milk.
Cow's Milk is not Non-Cow's Milk and Nut Milk is not Non-Nut Milk.
🙂
😉
The reason they can’t be honest about this is because they know their product won’t sell without deception.
I don't think that's true at all. People buy these products because they want a substitute for real milk, for whatever reason. They exist because the demand existed for milk alternatives. Lots of people are lactose intolerant. Vegans are idiots, but they do exist. It's really not so hard to believe.
"Vegans are idiots"
Just round them all up, put them in a padded room, and feed them thorazine for the rest of their lives.
What a great idea -- so consistent with freedom. Lock people up for their diets.
No, lock them up for their actions. Perpetuating a fraud on the public should do nicely as a reason to lock those religious fanatics up where they can't peddle their snake oil cures for things that aren't diseases.
And don't let them breed, veganism is not healthy to the unborn (from personal knowledge).
All soy products contain phyto estrogen, which is why the soy boys appear so feminin. It obviously affects their brains as well.
I'd like to sell them rattlesnake milk. Think about it... milking a snake should mean what you get from it is milk...
Yes it's kind of a stupid bill but the only thing stupider is claiming "a desire to limit economic competition for dairy farmers."
Since Oat Milk isn't Cow Milk it just isn't and the only crooked economic competition is the Oat Milk. To claim the complete opposite of what it really is makes me want to side with the bill. If you wanna make BS claims flipped on their heads then maybe it should be required to set your BS straight.
Proof that Libertarians don't mind redefining the meaning of words. As long as it benefits their own preferred special interests. Anyone who opposes Fetterman on this particular issue has zero standing to complain about trans activists.
Trans activists are the very reason there is support for this stupid bill. They are the one's running around trying to label Non-A, A. As stated; It's a stupid bill but in today's garbage society probably needed.
John Fetterman is, unfortunately, very probably correct.
Now I need an article about how government is oppressing human females by preventing them from mass producing and selling their milk in grocery stores.
Can we ship that in from Ix?
I'd rather drink directly from the source.
According to your own numbers in this very article, 9%-25% of consumers are, in fact, so utterly moronic.
Surprised it's that low given the kind of blabbering idiocy it takes to buy into the ridiculous narratives of the GOP.
Still think it's a stupid regulation being proposed but with numbers like that I don't think you can really rely on the 'consumers aren't confused' message.
Not saying that the FDA or state governments should regulate labeling of food products in the first place, but if they're going to, all they have to do is require non-dairy products to say "Non-Dairy" on the label so the other twenty percent who were born confused and haven't improved with age can't possibly continue to be confused! In smaller print further down the label they could require "Contains no animal products."
I think that is a reasonable compromise. I'd like the word "DANGER" in with the "Not a Dairy Product" and perhaps a "Bizarre Chemical Processes Used in the Making of this Product."
Fetterman is weird as a soup sandwich but good on him for supporting dairy. The entire vegan/vegetarian/enviroweirdo movement is too bollixed up for description, so let's quit pretending there's anything normal about any of it. Almond liquid with flavoring, soybean liquid with flavoring are more accurate anyway. It's a blue ribbon day - I found something to agree with John Fetterman about.
He has excellent reasons for believing that voters are indeed that dumb: after all they elected him.
Well, it's difficult to argue against that logic.
The author also probably thinks that you are too dumb to understand that a trans woman isn't a man.
Lurchin, watchin the clock,
his brain has stopped,
like Biden, plopped.
Tell him, read the card, he practices his speech,
As he falls on the floor, slurs all over,
Portends to keep with D crooks all over.
He’s retarded, he’s a Dem sped,
Scant mind in Fetterman.
He dreams no color, he is brain dead,
Scant mind in Fetterman
Scant mind in Fetterman
Scant mind in Fetterman
Sang to the tune of anything?
I'm not a big fan of protectionism in any case, but this is particularly stupid. Dairy farmers are begging for protection from products that don't actually compete with theirs. Most people buying soy milk or whatever are specifically avoiding actual dairy products for whatever reason. Even if you could wave a magic wand and make all plant milks disappear, these people still wouldn't be buying cows' milk.
Some people used to be smart enough to recognize things like this. Back in the early 80s Congress slapped tariffs on imported motorcycles to "save" Harley-Davidson. The tariffs specifically exempted bikes under 700cc because Harley didn't make small bikes and people who wanted a small bike were never going to buy a Harley anyway. (To the credit of Harley's management and workers, they got their shit together, started making bikes people actually wanted to buy and requested that the tariffs be lifted early.)
Does this mean that Congress can no longer milk the taxpayers?
I've seen these "milk products" in the local grocery store along with the fake meat products.
I don't see anyone buying any of it.
Soon, very soon bugs will be marketed. The soon after that real meat will disappear. Then after that you will be living in a pod, in a fifteen minute city, where you vill own nutink und be happy. Ja?
You've likely been eating bugs since you started eating solid food. The red dye used to give an appetizing color to everything from ground beef to deserts is derived from cochineal, an insect native to Mexico.
If you're a lady or cross dressing gentleman, that rouge or lipstick you love owes its color to the same bugs.
If you ever go to a Korean movie theater it's not popcorn you'll be snacking on, it's roasted silkworm larvae.