Another wacky lawsuit: woman sues Kraft over amount of avocado in guacamole (1 Viewer)

[Rob Gardiner]

Mark,

I think most consumers know the difference between "orange juice" and "orange flavored juice drink".



Eric,

The FDA does mandate that "peanut butter" must be at least 90% peanuts. Perhaps a better solution would have been for this woman to petition the FDA to adopt similar regulations for guacamole. However, once this story gets around, it will be a moot point -- avocado will become a selling point and manufacturers will tout the high avocado content of their guacamole, relative to the competition.

 

[MarkHastings]

But she went out of her way to file suit because she doesn't think it tastes like guacamole. If the point of the law suit is that the product was labeled improperly, then wouldn't the new label also be improperly labeled?

Or are the laws less strict when it comes to the term "Flavored"? And if so, how loose? If it's wrong to say "Cherry Flavored" and it tastes like Banana, then is it also wrong to say something is "Guacamole Flavored" when the flavoring doesn't contain much (or any) avocado?

Shouldn't the label say "Avocado Flavored Guacamole-like Dip"? instead of "Guacamole Flavored Dip"?

 

[Rob Gardiner]

Mark, she's not suing because it doesn't taste like avocado, she's suing because it isn't made out of avocado to any significant degree. Instead it is "a whipped paste made from partially hydrogenated soybean and coconut oils, corn syrup, whey, and food starch" which sounds pretty much like the filling in a Three Musketeers bar, tinted green.

***

According to Wikipedia, Mexicans call diluted guacamole by the name "aguamole".

 

[MarkHastings]

 

[Eric_L]

You mean there are no musketeers in those either?? Gawd we are all such pawns...

 

[MarkHastings]

Maybe it's stricter for peanut butter because the word "Peanut" is in the name?

Like with chili, I can replace the meat with chicken and it's still considered chili, whereas if I replace the peanuts (in peanut butter) with almonds, it's no longer peanut butter.

 

[KurtEP]

Sure, they're telling us to buy their low avocado quacamole and pretend it's the real stuff. I'm not sure how an individual asserting their rights under the law constitutes big government, though.

If you look in any dictionary, you'll notice that guacamole is defined as an an avacado paste or dip. So, if they are making an expressed statement that the product they are selling is guacamole, you have a right to expect it to actually conform to that definition.

As I understand the EU, they have a vast code structure defining various types of goods and how they are defined. That's big government. In the US, things are a bit more relaxed, but the law still lays down some basic rules as to how things can be represented in a commercial context. Here, though, it's often up to the individual to assert those rights, rather than the government. This is simply an example of that process in action.

Will this lawsuit save the world or cure cancer? Of course not, but it will protect me from getting something other than guacamole when the jar clearly says guacamole. Consumers shouldn't have to perform due dilligence or spend time reading a lable to find out if something is not what it is expressly being marketed to be.

 

[Rob Gardiner]

Not at all. HOWEVER one requires accurate information in order to make an informed decision.

The FDA has the authority to prohibit the sale of mislabeled foods.

http://www.fda.gov/opacom/laws/fdcact/fdcact3.htm

 

[Eric_L]

Mislabled is an ambigous term so far. Maybe you'd like to clarify what the FDA considers mis-labled. See the buffalo wings, three-mile island and Musketeers bars examples above. Going back to the peanut butter example - just because they can does not make it a good thing (ex: yellow margarine law). I can think of more efficient uses for the federal government than monitoring the peanut content of my sandwich spread. I don't need the government mandating the ingredients of my guacamole. So long as the ingredients lable is accurate I can take care of myself and make my own decision on wether to buy or make my own. Saying we're not as bad as Europe does not make it good. The US government is involved in far too many things a government has no business being in. Increasing that does little to enhance my freedom - even if it is just guacamole. Why? Because it is just guacamole - that's why.

edit - another thought - AFIK avocados do not stay fresh for very long. Most people who eat them know that. To expect a packaged product to contain a large amount of avocados would either be lame or one would have to expect enough preservatives in there to perform taxidermy on an elephant.

 

[Chu Gai]

From a little searching it seems Kraft isn't the only company making guacamole with not a lot of actual avocado. Deans, Marie's, and Herr's among others also do the same. There are dips that list avocados first like Trader Joe's.

However, if we look at what an avocado is made up of, we find that on a weight basis about 17% is fat, 10% is fiber, 3% is protein, with the rest of the fruit being essentially water. Within that less than 1% we find the various minerals, vitamins, flavor chemicals, and so forth. 82% of the calories in avocados are derived from fat making it a very tasty fruit, but not something you ought to chow down on regularly.

It seems to me that what Kraft and others have done is more or less 'deconstruct' the avocado so that the individual components can be added easily in a factory that's largely automated to create their version of an avocado dip. The various health groups and watchers of our wasteline, the guardians of our health, rail against the fat that's in Kraft Guacamole Dip, but the fat in Kraft only represents about 68% of the caloric content. It seems to me that if you were to make a fresh Guacamole, after you cut it with tomatoes and what not, you'd probably be in and around the same amount that Kraft is using.

In this particular case, I don't see the lawsuit as anything more than benefitting lawyers. The little consortium will rake in millions and you and I will see what? A coupon? If the various health groups, consumer advocates, and lawyers who see themselves as 'Rainmakers' want to do something to that's pro consumer how's about shutting down every place that deals with alternative medicine, aka quacks, and for good measure, let's toss in the naturopaths and chiropracters.

I've tried the Kraft Guacomole Dip but it didn't do it for me. OTOH, Friendship's Onion Dip Sour Cream is mighty damned good.

 

[Dennis Nicholls]

It appears to be labled "Kraft DIPS....guacamole".



Hey, read more about how lawyers are your friends....
www.primezone.com/newsroom/news.html?d=109601

 

[KurtEP]

I'm not sure how this mislabeling is ambiguous. Guacamole is avocado dip. If it just "contains avocado" it might be good and wholesome, but it isn't guacamole. You might want to spend several hours a day in the supermarket reading labels, I'd rather be watching an HD DVD.

Also, it's not like there's a government agency involved here suing Kraft, it's a consumer going to court. You seem to be suggesting that the government should get rid of consumer protections and things like the Uniform Commercial Code. Neither is especially burdensome (the relative section of the UCC is probably only a few pages). Granted, there are some abuses, but there are also plenty of offsetting abuses from businesses selling obviously unsafe products (care for a cigarette?). If you want to live under an absolutely free market, that's wonderful, but I doubt few people would really want to join you, if they knew all of the consequences.

 

[Scott_Sch]

Wait so let me get this straight...its called a guacamole dip right? And in the ingredients it does list some avocado? Just towards the end meaning there isn't much in it? And this woman is filing a lawsuit because it wasn't avocadoey (love that word by the way) enough? And some people are defending this as protecting joe public from false labelling and advertising? Wow...I guess I don't see the problem. Its a dip...she didn't like it....so move on. Until I see something that says in order for something to be called guacamole it must have X % of avocado...this is a joke. And whether or not this is class action or all for her obviously bored self...doesn't matter to me unless all the lawyers are working pro-bono and involved goverment staff are coming in on their own time to laugh at this. Otherwise I see it as a complete waste of time.

 

[KurtEP]

It's the slippery slope argument. If they can get away with this today, what are they going to do tomorrow, sneak corn or rice into our beer. Oh, wait...

 

[Chu Gai]

Why it seems that Kraft sells a variety of Dips. I'll bet the French Onion or Green Onion don't have those as their primary ingredients either.



They even make a variety of dips under the Philadelphia brand.

Seems to me like Ray Gallo got a bit of cash from the Rubio Lobster thing and is looking to parlay the money into a longer protracted legal fight. Of interest to me is who is this crusader, Brenda Lifsey, and does she receive any sort of compensation? A Google search of her name will find that it's also listed in a suit brought forth against Sears. In the interests of full disclosure, I'd like to see a bit more full disclosure of this individual and how she particularly benefits.

 

[Scott_Sch]

...very good point. Hmmm...aftertaste.

 

[MarkHastings]

But what about the the claim that the FDA does not regulate how much avocado is allowed in Guacamole???

I'm sorry to be so vocal about this, but you guys are arguing that Kraft should be using more, but if the regulations don't account for percentages, then your arguments are a moot point.

It sounds to me that Kraft is abiding by the FDA standards and that's why I have so much of an issue with this law suit. It's totally uncalled for. If the woman wants justice, she should be going after the FDA standards and making them change the rules instead of suing Kraft who (IMHO) has not broken any rules thus far.

If you guys want to argue that the FDA should create a rule that a certain percentage of avocado must be included in Guacamole, then I will agree to that, but again, that's an FDA issue and NOT a Kraft issue.

 

[KurtEP]

I, at least, am not arguing this. I'm arguing that calling something "Guacamole" is an expressed warranty that it is, in fact, guacamole. Wikipedia points out that the term guacamole comes from the Mexican Spanish term Ahuacatl (avocado) and the molli (sauce). Hence, guacamole is avocado sauce. When I buy avocado sauce, I figure avocado should figure very prominently in the ingredient list.

I in no way believe that the FDA should set up a set of EU like regulations describing every possible permutation of foodstuff in exacting detail. However, this is a pretty simple case; they were selling something as guacamole that wasn't anything like it, ingredient wise.

Now, as far as Chu Gai's point goes, I'd be willing to bet that this is an entrepreneurial lawsuit of some sort. There are plenty of arguments for and against such things, but that's for some other thread.

 

[MarkHastings]

But wikipedia is not the FDA.

Seriously, the FDA is who mandates what a product is made of, not what traditional recipes are. If this were the case, then I would be able to sue EVERY maker of jar tomato sauce because it is NOTHING like what real Italian tomato sauce should be. And what about Cookies? Remember the tropical oil thread? Who makes fresh chocolate chip cookie with the same ingredients that the cookie manufacturers use? Those are not what real cookies are supposed to be.

 

[Chu Gai]

You see, I look at the Kraft products as 'DIPS'. Whether the DIPS are onion, bacon & cheddar, or guacamole, I consider them to be more flavors with some texture thrown in than anything else. As processed foods, I expect the various chemicals in them. In a way, it's a pity that Kraft doesn't have a place where consumers can chime in to voice they're support that parallels what Gallo is doing.