Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

…As opposed to Imaginary ?

I have just been presented with a can of fancy-schmancy tomato soup.

It says, right there on the label, in LARGE red letters:



  1. Rob F says:

    Does it also say “BUT NO REAL CALORIES!”?

    I’d grudgingly take off my hat to any advertising exec who managed to successfully pull that one off…

  2. Lynne says:

    Over here it would also have the precautionary “may contain nuts” on the label too…

  3. Kevin B says:

    Are you sure it wasn’t from the Duchy of Cornwall – Prince Charlie’s little hobby farm – and thus using Real in the old sense of Royal?

  4. RAB says:

    I bought a bag of peanuts that had “may contain nuts” on it Lynne. I just can’t make it up anymore, life itself it just too surreal. And Chuckles Dutchy Originals had to be bailed out by Waitrose when it almost went bankrupt Kev. I wonder how the Prince’s Truss is doing?

  5. Lynne says:

    Yeah, I’ve seen stupid beyond belief labeling like that,RAB. You have to question the intelligence behind such idiocy.

    And talking of that same idiocy, when it comes to the Westminster Brand of tinpot tyranny politicians that pollute the HoC there isn’t any precautionary advice on the label, only accusatory – contains nuts.

  6. Lynne says:

    The Prince’s Truss has been made redundant. There are no balls that require support, only a prick with loose marbles.

  7. Mark says:

    It’s hard to argue with though. No misrepresentation of goods here folks, move along.

  8. Mark says:

    On the nuts thing, I have seen justifications of this lunacy on the basis that some people don’t read English and can recognise the phrase without knowing the literal meaning, so it’s put on everything with nuts in just to be safe.

    But honestly if I had a dangerous nut allergy and was old enough to read, `The World Compendium Of Nuts` would be my constant companion, and I would, as a precaution not eat anything that remotely looked like a nut, this obviating the need for a warning on things that were obviously nuts.

    But that’s just me.

  9. Julie near Chicago says:

    Lynne, yes, but as regards your first comment, I ask, Would those be REAL nuts. To be or not to be, that iss ze qvestion.

    In the light of your last comment (above RAB’s, with which I must concur :)), the apparent answer to ze qvestion is that the nuts can hardly be Royal.

  10. Julie near Chicago says:

    Although in all seriousness, peanuts are not nuts but legumes, and for those of us who tend to take things literally (qui, moi??) it does make a difference. Of course “Mixed Nuts” should specify peanuts as an ingredient, if they are an included, even aside from the allergy question–and the bigger packers at least, like Planters, tend to say things like “Not more than 50% peanuts” or, for the really fancy mixes, “Does not contain peanuts” on their packages of mixed nuts.

  11. RAB says:

    Although not technically nuts, peanuts are taken to be so by the general population. Just as the general public regards a Tomato as being a vegetable, not a fruit, which it is.

    The bottom line though is that allergy to Peanuts is by far the biggest category of nut based allergies.

  12. John Galt says:

    ‘Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit; wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad’ according to Ireland captain Brian O’Driscoll.

  13. Julie near Chicago says:


  14. Jobrag says:

    Recently I saw Original XYZ facecream “All new formula”

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: