Fries Are Now Fresh Vegetables - USDA Says So

[Guest guest]

Rense.com

 

 

USDA Reclassifies French

Fries As Fresh Vegetables

By Dan Glaister

The Guardian - UK

6-16-4

 

 

LOS ANGELES -- Think of fresh vegetables and you think of fields of crops,

or perhaps rows of supermarket shelves brimming with luscious, colourful

variety.

 

But thanks to the US department of agriculture, American consumers will no

longer have to bother with such healthy fare. A little-noticed ruling by

the department reclassifies french fries as fresh vegetables.

 

Arguing that the process of coating or battering a vegetable does not

change the end product, the department has ruled that a chip is as fresh

as, and indeed not that different from, a waxed lemon.

 

The change, introduced last year after pressure from the US chip industry,

will come as a relief to parents who weary of the daily battle to

persuade their offspring to eat fresh vegetables.

 

The ruling came to light this week after a Texas judge ruled against a

lawyer who challenged the reclassification on behalf of a bankrupt

vegetable distributor. The judge, Richard Schell, agreed with the

agriculture department that the term " fresh vegetables " was ambiguous.

 

Lawyers for the department had argued in court that chips, far from being

a processed food, were in fact still fresh.

 

" While plaintiff argued that batter-coated french fries are processed

products, they have not been 'processed' to the point that they are no

longer fresh, " the agriculture department's lawyers argued. " It is still

considered 'fresh' because it is not preserved. It retains its perishable

quality. "

 

The change was first proposed in 2002 after lobbying of the agriculture

department by the Frozen Potato Products Institute. The amendment to the

perishable agricultural commodities act, which was drawn up in 1930 to

protect fruit and vegetable growers, goes beyond potatoes to include most

battered vegetables as well as products such as caramel-coated apples.

 

The reclassification will be welcome news to the french fries industry,

with consumption having dropped in the US. In 2001, consumers ate an

average of 13.3kg (29.4lb) of frozen potato products, down 2.4% from 1996.

 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 http://www.guardian.

co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1239835,00.html

 

 

 

Disclaimer

 

Email This Article

 

 

 

 

MainPage

http://www.rense.com

 

 

This Site Served by TheHostPros

 

 

" If you're just talented you're not responsible for it. I'd rather be

considered skilled. "

--Diogenes Trannel, keyboards

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

that's insane! i barely classify a fresh potato as a

vegetable!

 

--- The Stewarts <stews9 wrote:

 

> USDA Reclassifies French

> Fries As Fresh Vegetables

> By Dan Glaister

> The Guardian - UK

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

a biggie frie instead of string beans?

" Honey, eat your greasy salty beef flavored fries or you don't get any dessert. "

What is this world coming to?

 

The Stewarts <stews9 wrote:

Rense.com

 

 

USDA Reclassifies French

Fries As Fresh Vegetables

By Dan Glaister

The Guardian - UK

6-16-4

 

 

LOS ANGELES -- Think of fresh vegetables and you think of fields of crops,

or perhaps rows of supermarket shelves brimming with luscious, colourful

variety.

 

But thanks to the US department of agriculture, American consumers will no

longer have to bother with such healthy fare. A little-noticed ruling by

the department reclassifies french fries as fresh vegetables.

 

Arguing that the process of coating or battering a vegetable does not

change the end product, the department has ruled that a chip is as fresh

as, and indeed not that different from, a waxed lemon.

 

The change, introduced last year after pressure from the US chip industry,

will come as a relief to parents who weary of the daily battle to

persuade their offspring to eat fresh vegetables.

 

The ruling came to light this week after a Texas judge ruled against a

lawyer who challenged the reclassification on behalf of a bankrupt

vegetable distributor. The judge, Richard Schell, agreed with the

agriculture department that the term " fresh vegetables " was ambiguous.

 

Lawyers for the department had argued in court that chips, far from being

a processed food, were in fact still fresh.

 

" While plaintiff argued that batter-coated french fries are processed

products, they have not been 'processed' to the point that they are no

longer fresh, " the agriculture department's lawyers argued. " It is still

considered 'fresh' because it is not preserved. It retains its perishable

quality. "

 

The change was first proposed in 2002 after lobbying of the agriculture

department by the Frozen Potato Products Institute. The amendment to the

perishable agricultural commodities act, which was drawn up in 1930 to

protect fruit and vegetable growers, goes beyond potatoes to include most

battered vegetables as well as products such as caramel-coated apples.

 

The reclassification will be welcome news to the french fries industry,

with consumption having dropped in the US. In 2001, consumers ate an

average of 13.3kg (29.4lb) of frozen potato products, down 2.4% from 1996.

 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 http://www.guardian.

co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1239835,00.html

 

 

 

Disclaimer

 

Email This Article

 

 

 

 

MainPage

http://www.rense.com

 

 

This Site Served by TheHostPros

 

 

" If you're just talented you're not responsible for it. I'd rather be

considered skilled. "

--Diogenes Trannel, keyboards

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hmmm, I think I smell some fresh greens in this story too.

 

Who in their right mind could consider fries fresh? There had to be

some money involved. It's true that some vegetables contain toxins,

but did they ever take into consideration that potatoes after cooked

produce (I can't remember the word exactly) acrylomide - well one of

those " A " words, that is a known carcinogen.

 

Forget AIDS, Today's Supersized Fries generation won't live long

enough for anything.

 

Remember several years back when that woman won the $2 mill lawsuit

agaist McD's because of her own clumsiness for spiling hot coffee on

herself.

 

Why can't anyone sue the fastfood industry in general for changing the

world's health? Bigger for a few cents more is worth children wearing

size XL when they're less than 10 years old. Not to mention all the

clogged arteries in there as well. Everybody seems to think it's OK now.

 

When I went to school, which ended 10 years ago, it was shameful to be

fat. Now, more than 50% of the American population is considered

obese! I can't understand that at all.

 

Lezlie

 

 

, The Stewarts <stews9@c...>

wrote:

> Rense.com

>

>

> USDA Reclassifies French

> Fries As Fresh Vegetables

> By Dan Glaister

> The Guardian - UK

> 6-16-4

>

>

> LOS ANGELES -- Think of fresh vegetables and you think of fields of

crops,

> or perhaps rows of supermarket shelves brimming with luscious,

colourful

> variety.

>

> But thanks to the US department of agriculture, American consumers

will no

> longer have to bother with such healthy fare. A little-noticed

ruling by

> the department reclassifies french fries as fresh vegetables.

>

> Arguing that the process of coating or battering a vegetable does not

> change the end product, the department has ruled that a chip is as

fresh

> as, and indeed not that different from, a waxed lemon.

>

> The change, introduced last year after pressure from the US chip

industry,

> will come as a relief to parents who weary of the daily battle to

> persuade their offspring to eat fresh vegetables.

>

> The ruling came to light this week after a Texas judge ruled against a

> lawyer who challenged the reclassification on behalf of a bankrupt

> vegetable distributor. The judge, Richard Schell, agreed with the

> agriculture department that the term " fresh vegetables " was ambiguous.

>

> Lawyers for the department had argued in court that chips, far from

being

> a processed food, were in fact still fresh.

>

> " While plaintiff argued that batter-coated french fries are processed

> products, they have not been 'processed' to the point that they are no

> longer fresh, " the agriculture department's lawyers argued. " It is

still

> considered 'fresh' because it is not preserved. It retains its

perishable

> quality. "

>

> The change was first proposed in 2002 after lobbying of the agriculture

> department by the Frozen Potato Products Institute. The amendment to

the

> perishable agricultural commodities act, which was drawn up in 1930 to

> protect fruit and vegetable growers, goes beyond potatoes to include

most

> battered vegetables as well as products such as caramel-coated apples.

>

> The reclassification will be welcome news to the french fries industry,

> with consumption having dropped in the US. In 2001, consumers ate an

> average of 13.3kg (29.4lb) of frozen potato products, down 2.4% from

1996.

>

> Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004

http://www.guardian.

> co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1239835,00.html

>

>

>

> Disclaimer

>

> Email This Article

>

>

>

>

> MainPage

> http://www.rense.com

>

>

> This Site Served by TheHostPros

>

>

> " If you're just talented you're not responsible for it. I'd rather be

> considered skilled. "

> --Diogenes Trannel, keyboards

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

[Lezlie]

>Who in their right mind could consider fries fresh? There had

>to be some money involved.

 

Of that there is little doubt.

 

 

[Lezlie]

>Remember several years back when that woman won the $2 mill

>lawsuit agaist McD's because of her own clumsiness for spiling

>hot coffee on herself.

 

Who can forget that one?

 

 

[Lezlie]

>Why can't anyone sue the fastfood industry

>in general for changing the world's health?

 

Oh, I'm sure you will find some loser that will attempt this.

Hell

forbid someone in this day and age should be responsible for their

own actions. When in doubt, blame someone else, or take a pill.

 

 

[Lezlie]

>Bigger for a few cents more is worth children wearing size XL

>when they're less than 10 years old. Not to mention all the clogged

>arteries in there as well. Everybody seems to think it's OK now.

>When I went to school, which ended 10 years ago, it was shameful

>to be fat. Now, more than 50% of the American population is

>considered obese! I can't understand that at all.

 

What's not to understand? Generally speaking, people are

inherently lazy, ignorant, stupid, uncaring, irresponsible, and they

obviously do not believe that they are accountable for their own

actions. The overall obesity of America is just one of thousands of

such examples that illustrate this point!

 

Saedric

[Guest guest]

, " Lezlie Anne " <laf_bkk>

wrote:

 

> Remember several years back when that woman won the $2 mill lawsuit

 

> agaist McD's because of her own clumsiness for spiling hot coffee on

 

> herself.

 

 

 

My understanding of that case is that McD’s (part of the Evil Empire,

right up there alongside Walmart) had been told that their coffee was

significantly hotter than standards recommend, and had been advised to

lower the temperature substantially. The woman in question had no

reason to expect that the coffee she bought from them would be 40 – 50F

hotter than coffee bought anywhere else. She suffered significant

burns, well beyond anything you’d get from spilling a “normal” cup of

coffee. How many people do you know who require repeated skin grafts

just from spilling a cup of coffee? I spilled my tea today, and while

it was uncomfortable, it certainly didn’t cause any damage. Why

shouldn’t McD’s be held liable when they had been repeatedly warned

about the danger of their coffee? If you read the actual facts of the

case you may change your opinion about the validity of her suit.

 

--

Sherri

 

Arrogance: The best leaders inspire by example. When that's not an

option, brute intimidation works pretty well too.

www.despair.com

 

 

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.708 / Virus Database: 464 - Release 6/18/2004

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Agreed, Sherri. You can find info on this on Snopes, I believe. I am all in

favor of personal responsibility, but this was not the first time McDonald's had

had such an incident, and their internal records show that they were AWARE that

their coffee was dangerously hot.

 

Sherri <sherria wrote:My understanding of that case is that McD’s

(part of the Evil Empire,

right up there alongside Walmart) had been told that their coffee was

significantly hotter than standards recommend, and had been advised to

lower the temperature substantially. The woman in question had no

reason to expect that the coffee she bought from them would be 40 – 50F

hotter than coffee bought anywhere else. She suffered significant

burns, well beyond anything you’d get from spilling a “normal” cup of

coffee. How many people do you know who require repeated skin grafts

just from spilling a cup of coffee? I spilled my tea today, and while

it was uncomfortable, it certainly didn’t cause any damage. Why

shouldn’t McD’s be held liable when they had been repeatedly warned

about the danger of their coffee? If you read the actual facts of the

case you may change your opinion about the validity of her suit.

 

--

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

, Sherri <sherria@o...>

wrote:

> , " Lezlie Anne "

<laf_bkk>

> wrote:

>

> My understanding of that case is that McD's (part of the Evil

Empire, right up there alongside Walmart)

 

It's so funny to hear someone else say this. I have been calling

Walmart " The Evil Empire " for years now, yet I have never heard

anyone else say it until now.

[Guest guest]

hmm. i had always heard this term reserved exclusively for micro$oft.

 

 

, " saedric " <sdemon@o...> wrote:

> , Sherri <sherria@o...>

> wrote:

> > , " Lezlie Anne "

> <laf_bkk>

> > wrote:

> >

> > My understanding of that case is that McD's (part of the Evil

> Empire, right up there alongside Walmart)

>

> It's so funny to hear someone else say this. I have been calling

> Walmart " The Evil Empire " for years now, yet I have never heard

> anyone else say it until now.

[Guest guest]

Why stop there with McDonalds (by the way, good point on the coffee

being knowlingly hotter), Walmart and MicroSoft?

 

That's being too specific. Why not just say most, if not all of

corporate America is or is part of an " Evil Empire "

 

Besides, who can forget companies like Exxon, Enron, and maybe even

AOL, too! just to name a few.

 

But what happened to the french fries?

 

Lezlie

 

 

, " radcsusa " <radcsusa@n...>

wrote:

> hmm. i had always heard this term reserved exclusively for micro$oft.

>

>

> , " saedric " <sdemon@o...>

wrote:

> > , Sherri <sherria@o...>

> > wrote:

> > > , " Lezlie Anne "

> > <laf_bkk>

> > > wrote:

> > >

> > > My understanding of that case is that McD's (part of the Evil

> > Empire, right up there alongside Walmart)

> >

> > It's so funny to hear someone else say this. I have been calling

> > Walmart " The Evil Empire " for years now, yet I have never heard

> > anyone else say it until now.

[Guest guest]

>Why stop there with McDonalds (by the way, good

>point on the coffee being knowlingly hotter),

>Walmart and MicroSoft? That's being too specific.

>Why not just say most, if not all of corporate

>America is or is part of an " Evil Empire " Besides,

>who can forget companies like Exxon, Enron, and maybe

>even AOL, too! just to name a few.

 

I think it is unfair to lump in ALL of corporate

America into the Empire, since there is nothing wrong

with making a profit. Companies become " evil " when

making a profit becomes the prime objective AT THE

EXPENSE of everything else - including but not limited

to the employees, the environment, the local economy,

etc. Of course, that is just my opinion.

 

>But what happened to the french fries?

 

I just got word that they planted them and they are

eagerly awaiting a huge FRESH crop, but since they are

soooooooo pure, it may take a while.

[Guest guest]

> I think it is unfair to lump in ALL of corporate

> America into the Empire,

 

Well, I did try to have some limitations. It is a good percentage though.

 

 

> I just got word that they planted them and they are

> eagerly awaiting a huge FRESH crop, but since they are

> soooooooo pure, it may take a while.

 

And aren't they going to have these crops sectioned off...

McDonald's, Burger King would have to be imported, Wendy's, Hardee's,

Jack in the Box, White Castle, Ore Ida, and not to forget the generic

brands introduced by the other Evil Empires. I guess that the fries

for local " Mom and Pop " Hamburger stands wilk have to be grown locally.

 

Ok, OK, Maybe I'm just starting to get silly.

 

Lezlie

 

 

 

 

, " saedric " <sdemon@o...> wrote:

> >Why stop there with McDonalds (by the way, good

> >point on the coffee being knowlingly hotter),

> >Walmart and MicroSoft? That's being too specific.

> >Why not just say most, if not all of corporate

> >America is or is part of an " Evil Empire " Besides,

> >who can forget companies like Exxon, Enron, and maybe

> >even AOL, too! just to name a few.

>

> I think it is unfair to lump in ALL of corporate

> America into the Empire, since there is nothing wrong

> with making a profit. Companies become " evil " when

> making a profit becomes the prime objective AT THE

> EXPENSE of everything else - including but not limited

> to the employees, the environment, the local economy,

> etc. Of course, that is just my opinion.

>

> >But what happened to the french fries?

>

> I just got word that they planted them and they are

> eagerly awaiting a huge FRESH crop, but since they are

> soooooooo pure, it may take a while.