nutritional label mistake

Discussions about US MREs and other US rations
Post Reply
Richard w.
Posts: 338
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:55 pm
Location: VA

nutritional label mistake

Post by Richard w. » Fri Jun 06, 2008 11:43 am

I had this 2006 MEAL for lunch the other day, and I'm pretty sure that there was more than 40 calories in it.

The main meal was not bad. Pieces of chicken swimming in loads of mild salsa. Ate it like a soup.


Image
Top
User avatar
Lifesaver
Posts: 250
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 8:11 pm
Location: Colorado
Contact:
Contact Lifesaver

Post by Lifesaver » Fri Jun 06, 2008 11:45 am

I'm guessing a "0" got dropped somewhere along the line.
"That others might live."
Top
Richard w.
Posts: 338
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:55 pm
Location: VA

Post by Richard w. » Fri Jun 06, 2008 11:49 am

Yeah, maybe.

Looking at the picture, I just noticed that the "Calories from Fat" field must be wrong, too.
Top
User avatar
jfko6
Posts: 2083
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 5:49 pm
eBay name: jfk9
Location: North East Region - U.S.A
Contact:
Contact jfko6

Consumer Reports

Post by jfko6 » Fri Jun 06, 2008 1:06 pm

Yeah you should send this one to consumer reports. They would love to hear from you. They love printing stuff like that.
Image
The Long Gray Line
U.S. Army Veteran
Duty * Honor * Country
American Legion Legionnaire
Top
User avatar
kman
Site Admin
Posts: 4372
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 8:07 pm
Location: Naples, FL
Contact:
Contact kman

Post by kman » Fri Jun 06, 2008 1:20 pm

Woohoo...the diet MRE items are here! Only 40 calories. Now I can eat two or three of those for lunch! :-)
Top
User avatar
mreheater72
Posts: 1008
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 1:14 pm
Location: Germany, Frankonia

Post by mreheater72 » Fri Jun 06, 2008 2:06 pm

Here is a 2007 version of “Chicken Salsa” with 150 calories, but that is not really much, too. But if you compare, all data is different, thats really crazy :shock: :?

Image

So long mreheater72
Top
bishopmarine
Posts: 423
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 6:50 pm
Location: virginia

Post by bishopmarine » Fri Jun 06, 2008 2:11 pm

theres no way 8 ounces of chicken and salsa would be 400 calories unless it is pure chicken fat. and salsa made from bacon grease. that is a very odd mislable. but if you notice calories from fat is consistent also it says 10 calories but still yet 2 percent of 40 is definitely not 10.
"Do not attack the First Marine Division. Leave the yellowlegs alone. Strike the American Army."
Orders given to Communist troops in the Korean War;
shortly afterward, the Marines were ordered
to not wear their khaki leggings.
Top
Richard w.
Posts: 338
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:55 pm
Location: VA

Post by Richard w. » Fri Jun 06, 2008 2:18 pm

150 calories doesn't seem right, either.

I've oftened wondered if they just pull these percentages out of their asses. Proof? :D
Top
User avatar
MCIera
Moderator
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by MCIera » Fri Jun 06, 2008 2:47 pm

I'd be more inclined to believe that the nuitritional information breakdown was intended for another product and was misprinted on that box.
Richard w. wrote:150 calories doesn't seem right, either.

I've oftened wondered if they just pull these percentages out of their asses. Proof? :D
Top
User avatar
jfko6
Posts: 2083
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 5:49 pm
eBay name: jfk9
Location: North East Region - U.S.A
Contact:
Contact jfko6

Inspection

Post by jfko6 » Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:21 pm

150 calories and the warfighter is supposed to be able to sustain his load.

Ha!

Who is that guy in all those You Tube videos at Natick.

Maybe someone should give him a call.

Hello. Who's this? Yeah. I'm callin' from MRE... Who? You sun-of-BIT!
YA! How many calories does the FSR have in it? YEAH! (?)

:o
Image
The Long Gray Line
U.S. Army Veteran
Duty * Honor * Country
American Legion Legionnaire
Top
Post Reply

Return to “MREs”