Kuzco’s poison
If it was based on page count, I’d recommend double spacing. Just remember with word count: no contractions. Spell it out!
Nah, double spacing is super obvious.
Increase the font size of punctuation by 1.
Fill up olive the space you’re given.
🥁🐍
The shape goes into the shape press that presses the shape into pressed shape.
You can tell it’s AI because they left out the part about the majority of olive oil is aduterated with cheap vegetable oils.
@OriginEnergySux Yep, I use to do that in college.
For anyone interested, this means it’s shit olive oil. Good olive oil is obtained directly from olives using only mechanical methods. It then passes taste test to determine if it’s only “virgin” or “extra virgin” (better, pure taste). Bad olive oil is extracted using chemical processes. This is not edible and normally was used in lamps but you can refine it in other industrial processes, add some virgin oil for taste and sell it. This is the bad kind. Don’t buy that shit.
Also want to add something I saw in the US: light olive oil. It advertised itself as olive oil with a lighter flavor. It was olive oil diluted with vegetable oil, yet sold at a premium.
The amount of astoundingly shit product that are casually sold in the US is mind boggling. You just cannot trust anything over there.
Hey, finally a topic I can contribute something to (I dabble in making my own olive oil).
Depending on what you mean by chemical methods, you might not be 100% correct. The vast majority of food grade olive oil (including really high quality stuff) is extracted by crushing the olives into a mash, mixing it with warm water and spinning the resulting paste in a centrifuge. The quality varies according to the quality of the fruit, when it’s picked, how much oil you’re trying to squeeze out, and the variables you control are basically the quality and quantity of water in the mash. It’s classified as virgin or extra virgin according to the chemical composition, and the “cold pressed” is more of a marketing term than an actual process. It’s nowadays supposed to mean that the mash doesn’t get over a certain temperature in the extraction, but if it did it would be poor quality oil anyway, so it’s pretty meaningless for “decent or above” oil quality. Purely mechanically pressed oil is exceedingly rare and has a more muted flavor because it skips the process of mixing the mash with water, which activates the aromatic compounds.
Edit: all that being said, the bizarre wording in the meme undoubtedly means that the oil is garbage tier.
I believe the refined oils are extracted using solvents. This is how Aceite de Orujo (Pomace Oil?) is made for example.
Look out for stuff that is sold next to Olive oil called Pomace Oil. It’s packaged almost exactly the same and ‘Pomace Oil’ is usually hidden in fancy script somewhere. It’s much cheaper because it’s made from running the garbage that is left over through a couple questionable processes to squeeze out every last ml of oil out of it.
It’s possibly unhealthy to consume regularly and definitely the poorest quality. That’s why the 3 liter tin is only like $25
Also, the Italian/Greek/whatever Olive Oil was probably sourced from a bunch of different places and only packaged in the stated country.
Look for ‘First Press’ oils to have some chance at quality product, though the producer may be lying about that too, or mixing a legal minimum of the stated high quality product with the cheapest garbage they can boost their margins with.
That is really interesting. I always wondered what virgin and extra virgin mean (other than just “better quality”) but never got to looking it up.
Refined oils usually have the benefit of being able to be heated to a higher temperature before braking down though. This is why most cold pressed oils should not really be used for cooking.
Olive oil has a high breakdown temp as far as I know and is fine for cooking.
Good that you mention it, I should have done that. Yes, virgin olive oil itself has a high breakdown temperature and is fine for cooking. It’s just not recommended for deep frying.
As a comparison: unrefined sunflower or rapeseed oil for example are not suitable for heated foods (although both can be expected to be refined, if not stated otherwise). When they are refined, they are fine for even deep frying.
One interesting thing I found: According to the wikipedia smoke point chart, unrefined rapeseed oil is fine for cooking. My german source says it’s not.My sources: English: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Smoke_point_of_cooking_oils
German: https://www.alnatura.de/de-de/magazin/warenkunde/warenkunde-erhitzbare-oele/
Oh, right. The poison. The poison for Kuzco, the poison chosen especially to kill Kuzco, Kuzco’s poison. That poison?
I was going to reply to the post with “That olive oil?” but you got here first. Oh well.
Shhhh! Stop saying that word!!! You’ll draw attention from uncle Sam!
When there wasn’t a word count, but instead a page count, I increased the size of periods to make wider spaces between lines, just by a point or two. These types of stupid requirements are why in undergrad, multiple TAs and professors noted that I have a very verbose way of writing.
Fat, of which saturates?
Warning: this product was processed in facility which processes olives and olive products.
There is a brand of peanut butter here that has “WARNING: May contain nuts” on the label.
Peanuts aren’t nuts. They are Goober peas. Nut like peas not pea like nuts. A peanut allergy and a nut allergy are different things and your peanut butter is likely made in a factory that also processes actual nuts. So as poor as that communication is - it’s probably accurate.
Huh, TIL! Thanks for the explanation!
Peanuts are nuts. You can tell because:
- They have “nut” in the name
- If you buy a bag of “mixed nuts”, it often has peanuts in
- If someone asks whether something contains nuts, peanuts will be included in the reply
- In sane markets, a pack of salted peanuts will say “may contain traces of other nuts” in the allergy information
Peanuts don’t belong to the botanical classification of nuts, but that also doesn’t categorise strawberries as fucking berries so it’s a load of shite.
If someone did ask you whether something contains nuts, you wouldn’t risk saying “no” if it really contains peanuts, would you? At least, I hope not…
None of what you said is relevant for allergies which is the purpose of the labelling.
What about the third bullet point/my final paragraph? Did you read them?
If someone is allergic to nuts or peanuts, they know the difference between nut and peanuts.
As someone who constantly deals with other peoples allergies, I literally never have to clarify the statement of “nut allergy” because a peanut is factually not a nut. Therefore, they are not allergic to them.
If there is any risk of you giving someone who says they have a nut allergy peanuts, you need to immediately change how you handle that, because you are risking putting someone in hospital, or worse. I’m not saying this to prove a stupid internet point; I’m saying this because I genuinely fear you might endanger someone, and you don’t want that.
I have a nut allergy, and I only learnt of the botanical definition of a nut from know-it-alls on the internet, long after my initial doctor’s appointment. In that appointment, I was told to go easy on peanuts because, even though I had never had a reaction to them (only a different kind of nut), there was a risk of one developing. That would, presumably, have been the time for the doctor to have told me that peanuts aren’t nuts.
a peanut is factually not a nut
- https://www.dictionary.com/browse/nut?s=t - peanuts meet the first definition
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nut_(food) - “In general usage and in a culinary sense, many dry seeds are called nuts.”
- https://www.anaphylaxis.org.uk/fact-sheet/peanut-and-tree-nut-allergy/ - “Once you have been diagnosed with a peanut or tree nut allergy, you will need to avoid the nut or nuts you’re allergic to.” does not make sense if “peanuts are not nuts”. It also separates them into “nuts and peanuts” but since it does not always do this, the distinction is not the categorical one you are claiming.
- https://www.uhb.nhs.uk/media/z4xaw3rb/pi-immunology-peanut-and-tree-nut-allergy.pdf - “In this information leaflet we refer to peanut and tree nuts as ‘nuts’.”
- https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/conditionsandtreatments/nut-allergies - “The term ‘nut allergy’ can be confusing, because we tend to use it to describe an allergic reaction to the fruit of unrelated plants such as peanuts, seeds and nuts that grow on trees.”
I hope this over-the-top reply is enough to convince you.
Raisins are also nuts, because they are frequently packaged with peanuts.
If I bought a packet of “mixed nuts” I would not expect it to have raisins in, but packets of mixed nuts often contain peanuts.
Notice I didn’t say “peanuts are nuts because they are packaged with nuts”, but because they are included in a package whose label is just “mixed nuts”.
See also my other comment here for a number of places where you can see the word “nut” used in a way which includes peanuts (and why it’s important)
