Ground Beef Weight Discrepancy (apparently not fraud!)

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/yes-the-walmart-settlement-over-groceries-sold-by-weight-is-real/ar-BB1j06Uo

Yep…“16” ozs of ground beef recently purchased from Walmart. Greedy jerks…

1 Like

It’s lean. 90% of 16oz is 14.4oz. So they are giving a bit extra. :laughing: lol

3 Likes

They can fix that by adding one character…

NET WT. ~16 OZ

Or they can say…

NET WT. 16 OZ +/- 10%

1 Like

Already built in to the net weight calculations stipulated by the gubmint


Src

3 Likes

So they can be off an ounce on the average package of ground beef.

10% for that size.

It is not practical to demand the actual contents be exact, so some variation is allowed.

It is a valid debate whether the tolerance should be tighter today.

This explains a lot. I have weighed the contents of nearly 14,000 cans of cat food. Each can is supposed to contain 5.5 ounces of food. The mean is 5.03, with a very small standard deviation. The t-test proves that there is no way they can be targeting 5.5 ounces.

You know that companies with greater precision would target the lower end of the allowed range…

I hate the “already solved” nag.

1 Like

But that “10% of labeled quantity” note is on the same line as “Less than…3 oz”, so does it apply to a 16 oz package of mystery meat.

Although I see a following line indicates 1 oz of slop allowed for weights in range of 7-48 ozs. So I guess it’s OK…sigh.

Agreed…I highly doubt it is a coincidence that my example is off/underweight by precisely the amount allowed by Gubmint.

I love the “already solved” helpful note.

Uh uh. 10% is for packages 3 ounce and less.

1 Like

We should all be concerned they are allowed to put slop in our food…

1 Like

You…probably don’t EVEN want to know how much glass is allowed in baby food jars or how much insect parts is allowed in flour or how much rat urine is allowed in processed beverages or…

2 Likes

And now, microplastics everywhere. Same with GMOed ingredients.

2 Likes

The package would be on the second row with a tolerance of 0.25 oz (for 3 oz to 16 oz packages). I’m sure some organization oversees this and would care but I’m not sure who that is.

When I was weighing portions for a diabetic dog, my yield on 13oz cans of dog food was always less than 13oz; a 5.5oz and 7.5oz portion should have been a very predictable 7 cans/week but it was more like >7.5 cans per week. While I don’t doubt that the manufacturers were delivering as little as they think they could get away with, there are always too-small bits of food, residue, and moisture that’s beyond impractical to extract from the can - to say nothing of that which sticks to the utensil.

The wet cat food I’m buying has similar challenges.

Marshall’s issue however implies - at best - water that somehow went missing between weighing and being put on the scale. Perhaps it’s simple cheating, perhaps moisture is lost between weighing and sale.

1 Like

Or maybe you should to gain some understanding of the effects of dilution which don’t reduce something to zero but do reduce it to the point that you cannot tell that it’s there.

For example. The city of Portland OR used to have open-air reservoirs for drinking water - something the EPA no longer allows but were grandfathered in because they’ve not been a source of any problems. I saw them during a visit some ~20 years ago - fenced off, but leaves, airborne detritus, waterfowl lands in them. Yet at some point there was a kerfuffle because CCTV footage showed what may have been a teenager urinating into one and the administrator considered dumping the water into the river due to public outrage … because of the possibility that urine at perhaps 0.1 part per billion was present in the water.

I thought the same thing … but upon closer inspection I think that tolerance applies only to homogenous fluids. I suspect that the relevant amount is the 4th row, “All Other Products” 7 oz to 48 oz.: 1.0 oz. tolerance.

That reminds me of the story of Elisa Lam

An eerie case.

However the Mt Tabor reservoir in question is enormous - nominally ~38M gallons or ~144M liters.

1 Like

Yet another completely toothless class action settlement !!! These should be illegal.
Who in Gods name still has a proof of purchase from 2018 ???
And, can receive 2% of the cost of the material ??? Seriously!!! LESS than the amount overcharged ???
“Customers without proof of purchase may still be able to claim between $10 and $25, depending on how many eligible goods they attest to purchasing from Walmart during the time period.” Yeah… I am SURE those claims will be “approved” !!!

I once received a ‘settlement’ check from ATT for $0.20 !!! Postage was $0.32 !!!

Utterly offensive result!!!

1 Like