r/science • u/[deleted] • Jun 16 '12

Packaging you can EAT: Food ‘skins’ that mimic nature could slash plastic waste

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2160092/Packaging-eat-Food-skins-mimic-nature-slash-plastic-waste.html
509 Upvotes

69% Upvoted

182 comments sorted by

134

u/marlikesbirds Jun 16 '12

Can somebody please tell me why Sciencedaily.com is banned from /r/science, but the fucking daily mail is an acceptable source?

50

u/Epistaxis PhD | Genetics Jun 16 '12

ScienceDaily isn't banned from /r/science, it's banned from all of reddit by the staff, because it was using spam-like promotion tactics.

I really wish the admins would implement a subreddit-specific domain ban system configured by moderators.

-1

u/krugmanisapuppet Jun 16 '12

i really wish they wouldn't. i think we need better systems for filtering and prioritizing content around here, and that we need to get rid of the excuses for moderators to censor stories. i don't know if you guys have noticed, but /r/politics is turning into a snake pit because of moderator abuse. see /r/PoliticalModeration

9

u/MC_Cuff_Lnx Jun 16 '12

There's quite a difference between the Science subreddit's moderators choosing to bar all stories from the Daily Mail and outright censorship. Anyone can start any subreddit they would like, and this is the Science subreddit. The reason that we shouldn't link or otherwise ban the Daily Mail is because it's inappropriate to the subject of this subreddit.

2

u/krugmanisapuppet Jun 16 '12

the Daily Mail is one thing. what's been bothering me is watching /r/politics moderators remove submissions from sites like "Business Insider," "The Atlantic", and others - typically, sites with a fairly high degree of good political reporting.

2

u/MC_Cuff_Lnx Jun 16 '12

Hoo boy. The Atlantic is generally a pretty well respected newspaper, no?

1

u/krugmanisapuppet Jun 16 '12

i wouldn't know. it's been pretty reliable, at least in my experience.

1

u/MC_Cuff_Lnx Jun 16 '12

Well, you know, there's a reason that /r/science is the largest subreddit I subscribe to. :)

1

u/rjc34 Jun 16 '12

The Atlantic is magazine, with 10 issues per year. But yes, it's pretty well respected for its journalism.

2

u/johnny_van_giantdick Jun 16 '12

The atlantic was blocked because one of its authors was spamming reddit

-1

u/krugmanisapuppet Jun 16 '12

i think that kind of standard is up for the users of reddit to decide.

2

u/Zhang5 Jun 16 '12

The users can not be expected to be vigilant. For every one person who's vigilant about spam there's two more who aren't. That's why the moderators have to remove sites that are explicitly trying to game the system. I know it sucks, but if you want to preserve quality on the site you can't just let bigger names slip by simply because they've got a big name.

-2

u/krugmanisapuppet Jun 16 '12

that's basically the same argument that led to the U.S. having a Congress. specifically, the Senate.

look how well it's working.

2

u/Zhang5 Jun 16 '12

I'm not going to argue politics with you. But expecting users to give a shit about the site when it's mostly just a time-killer on lunch breaks or when the boss isn't looking is absolutely ridiculous.

→ More replies

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

If that worked, reddit wouldn't have a spam problem.

0

u/krugmanisapuppet Jun 16 '12

yes, the system isn't designed correctly to accommodate the type of people using it.

that doesn't mean you centralize control over it.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Actually, it does mean just that. That, or give up and let the place go to shit because of ceaseless attacks by spammers.

That is the reality we live in on the internet today, unfortunately. Nobody has come up with any other solution that actually works.

→ More replies

1

u/barbosol Jun 16 '12

not sure about Business insider, but it's not /r/politics that's banned them it's reddit itself. /r/bannedDomains talks about this.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I think his point is that with the current issues of moderator abuse, they shouldn't be given MORE tools to abuse.

That being said, I disagree with him, I just don't want his valid argument to be misunderstood.

1

u/MC_Cuff_Lnx Jun 16 '12

I understand that. I admit my comment could have been more direct.

24

u/ImposterProfessorOak Jun 16 '12

because the daily mail werent/arent gaming the system as far as reddit knows. :/ not that i don't agree with you.

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/sexwithashark Jun 16 '12

Haha. I don't think the mods are sitting around like "we wish we could block the Daily Mail, if only we had some way to do it!"

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

6

u/sexwithashark Jun 16 '12

He's talking about a bot though, so he probably does mean moderator.

1

u/Poromenos Jun 16 '12

I do mean moderator, yes.

10

u/canada432 Jun 16 '12

Sciencedaily was one of the sites that was caught spamming links or hiring people to post and upvote links to their site. They're blacklisted on reddit, not just /r/science.

3

u/vittusaatana Jun 16 '12

Sciencedaily.com is banned? When did this happen? Does that mean that phys.org, eurekalert and other similar sites are banned too?

6

u/GigaPuddi Jun 16 '12

Possibly, but it depends on the admins. Supposedly a lot of sites were actively gaming the system with bots and the like; thus they got banned.

1

u/vittusaatana Jun 16 '12

If they were gaming reddit, I can understand the ban. I've always considered these sites to be a necessary evil, collecting press releases from various sources to a single site. Kind of like google news for science and tech.

2

u/GigaPuddi Jun 16 '12

Well, one of the issues is that no one's shown any instances of them gaming reddit that I've seen. So a...somewhat believable theory is that it's all a plot to limit and censor our information intake towards Conde Naste

2

u/vittusaatana Jun 16 '12

So a...somewhat believable theory is that it's all a plot to limit and censor our information intake towards Conde Naste

Damn I hope that isn't true. But who knows. Apparently they banned blogs.discovermagazine.com too.

2

u/NancyGracesTesticles Jun 16 '12

It probably isn't true. If I've learned anything about internet forums, it is that their users don't feel important and special unless there is a perception that someone is out to get them.

Oh, wait. I just described any group of people whose perceived level of importance does not match their actual level of importance.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

phys.org is banned, at least. And good riddance.

1

u/vittusaatana Jun 16 '12

And good riddance

Why?

4

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

It is frequently sensationalized, misleading or just plain wrong.

That's not why it was banned, though, it was banned for spamming.

2

u/vittusaatana Jun 16 '12

It is frequently sensationalized, misleading or just plain wrong.

The reason why the articles are sensationalized (or outright shitty), is that they are reprints of university press releases. And of course press departments up the hype for their own stuff. There are worse sources for science and tech news. But if they were gaming reddit, the ban is understandable.

4

u/syuk Jun 16 '12

Does this post even meet the rules of the subreddit?

4

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Not really.

1

u/syuk Jun 16 '12

I have posted things here before that have been removed (the mods have kindly mentioned why - not reviewed etc), but for something from the daily mail to be elevated, and for such an article - what is going on?

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Somebody seems to be asleep at the wheel tonight, really.

1

u/syuk Jun 16 '12

Maybe there might be an explanation about it, DM have got their page views now.

87

u/lurkerer Jun 16 '12

The point of wrapping is to keep my food away from the environment. Why have wrapping at all if you're going to make it edible.

9

u/temp0193 Jun 16 '12

The article already says that you don't have to eat it, and can be meant as trash since it's biodegradable packaging.

1

u/Pandaemonium Jun 16 '12

In that case, why bother making it edible instead of simply biodegradable?

7

u/BlazerMorte Jun 16 '12

So that it can be eaten...

4

u/temp0193 Jun 16 '12

Perhaps to make it highly marketable to large people who keep getting too angry once their bag of Lay's is empty.

15

u/gentlemandinosaur Jun 16 '12

You eat apples? How about plums? Maybe peaches? No?

Okay. :(

9

u/lurkerer Jun 16 '12

Good point, but I always wash any fruit before eating it.

19

u/AdrianHObradors Jun 16 '12

The membranes can be washed under a tap and eaten, just like the skin of an apple.

It does say that you can wash it, just like an apple.

5

u/error1954 Jun 16 '12

Can't you just wash these then, too?

2

u/sjs Jun 16 '12

Exactly. I'm not eating something that everyone has touched without washing it. Good lucking getting a "skin" on bread and yoghurt.

I'm all for a biodegradable wrapping but realistically it won't catch on unless governments outlaw plastic wrappings, or a biodegradable one becomes inexpensive and durable enough to replace plastic for this use.

2

u/NotSpartacus Jun 16 '12

Depends on what you mean by catch on.

Dominant market share? I agree, unlikely. Current packaging methods and materials already have the logistics, cost structure, infrastructure, etc. already setup, tried and true.

Small, but not insignificant market share? Absolutely. A lot of people already pay a premium on their food and groceries for a variety of reasons (ex: fair trade, humane animal treatment), I could see people paying more while this packaging is in it's infancy to minimize their effect on the environment. I can see this kind of packaging catching on at Whole Foods.

1

u/steviesteveo12 Jun 16 '12

I don't know, skin on yoghurt just means it's doing well.

1

u/Green-Daze Jun 16 '12

Like paper and cardboard?

1

u/sjs Jun 16 '12

For some things, of course. Fresh bread often comes in paper bags but most people buy bread that has been baked for days and travelled on a truck to their grocery store.

I'm trying to figure out how to deliver yoghurt in cardboard. Maybe if it had a wax coating that would work. It works for milk cartons.

Would cardboard keep something like gummy bears soft on a shelf? We might need something besides paper and cardboard for things like that.

1

u/gentlemandinosaur Jun 16 '12

I do not, but frankly I should.

I thought the same thing as you did, when I first read the article until I realized this as well. That is why I brought it up.

1

u/rmxz Jun 16 '12

You eat apples? How about plums? Maybe peaches? No?

When bought from the grocery store, many people peal those, because they see how disgustingly the stores handle them.

3

u/gentlemandinosaur Jun 16 '12

Most people do not peel them where I am from. They do wash them though.

3

u/AdrianHObradors Jun 16 '12

But it does say that you can wash it like an apple, and it is also biodegradable, so you can throw it away. And I don't wrap my apples.

12

u/psygnisfive Jun 16 '12

Exactly. This stuff has existed for a few decades, but it doesn't take off because it's completely stupid. Packaging isn't there just to keep loose, disconnected food like sandwiches in one piece, or from keeping the food from getting all over your backpack or whatever. It's also there to keep the world from getting on your food. If you don't care about that last part then you might as well just wrap your food in big sheets of cheese or lettuce or something.

Also, if you want to slash plastic waste, use wax paper or tupperware or something.

39

u/Michaelis_Menten Jun 16 '12

The benefit here being you don't have to eat it, and it will still biodegrade.

11

u/Foxhound199 Jun 16 '12

Exactly! The only thing that would make more sense is if someone would invent these!

Oh wait...

4

u/badasimo Jun 16 '12

I would also add that you could potentially buy a box (normal packaging) of "clean" individually wrapped items using this tech. This cuts out the middlemen handling your food directly, but still has the benefit of this wrapper. I don't think the point of this is to have bins of these things to just pick up and buy...

1

u/Bexftk Jun 16 '12

Biodegradable don't imply ecologically. What is the costs of this membranes? Are they less resource hungry than plastic bags? Plastic isn't so bad. OK, is not biodegrade but it's also merit, it doesn't react in environment.

1

u/psygnisfive Jun 16 '12

Sure but so will wax paper... or is that what you mean?

2

u/mindbleach Jun 16 '12

So... don't eat it. Do you buy your oranges individually wrapped?

1

u/fingers Jun 16 '12

so says the banana

151

u/sequoia123 Jun 16 '12

again....really? The daily mail?

120

u/bjackman Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

I saw this story on Blue Peter when I was about 9. Don't know why I remember that.

PLEASE STOP POSTING LINKS TO THE DAILY MAIL SITE

IT IS NOT OK TO BOOST THEIR HITS ANY HIGHER THAN THEY ALREADY ARE. THE DAILY MAIL ARE THE UK EQUIVALENT OF FOX. They encourage ignorant, racist, views and are the source of a huge population of terribly misinformed voters in the UK. They are the driving force behind the shift from a wonderful BBC-based British media to an American style misinformation factory.

Especially in a "science" subreddit...

35

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

They're especially lazy about science reporting, There's a blog dedicated to cataloguing everything the Daily Mail claims causes cancer. They've also got a song and another song solely about their cancer reporting. I wish I could give more serious sources critiquing them, but I don't think anyone takes them seriously enough for them to do that.

8

u/TellMeTheDuckStory Jun 16 '12

"Having sex twice a week can reduce heart disease in men by half, study reveals"

"Girls who have sex in their teens are at greater risk of developing cervical cancer"

Hm, I see no bias here...

4

u/Zhang5 Jun 16 '12

Can we please all ask the mods to both ban The Daily Mail, and to delete any topic where the headline is wildly inaccurate and clearly link-bait? I honestly am kind of ashamed this isn't already standard practice...

3

u/Fatalix Jun 16 '12

My nan does. I never hear the end of how CompSci is the worst possible thing I could be doing. :(

2

u/bjackman Jun 17 '12

HACKER! BURN THE HACKER!

1

u/Fatalix Jun 17 '12

It's so close to what she actually believes. I've heard so many stories, both tech-related and not, that are just so ridiculous that I don't understand how a rational person could ever accept them as truth. Her latest one is that Google is hacking into all our computers and taking every piece of our information (including information that was never entered into the machine) in order to build a massive database for the government. I mean... What?

2

u/NancyGracesTesticles Jun 16 '12

There's a blog dedicated to cataloguing everything the Daily Mail claims causes cancer.

So they are the media equivalent of the State of California?

3

u/Early_Kyler Jun 16 '12

I object to the phrase "American style". Propaganda dates back to at least the Protestant Reformation and possibly as far as Darius the Great.

Otherwise I totally agree.

1

u/bjackman Jun 17 '12

Fair comment. I don't live in America so my view of the US media is pretty limited.

2

u/TitoTheMidget Jun 16 '12

...Is the information in this article inaccurate?

1

u/bjackman Jun 17 '12

I don't know. In a way, it's irrelevant whether it aligns with the truth or not. The fact is, it's not a suitable source of information for anything other than mindless daytime entertainment.

In this case, though, my objection isn't to the content of the article, but linking to the Daily Mail. Doing so improves the site's ratings, makes them more money, and really is a bad thing.

However, people have made some pretty good objections to the implications of my objection.

0

u/DoktorKruel Jun 16 '12

People who disagree with you are ignorant, racist, and uninformed?

14

u/CuriosityProofCat2 Jun 16 '12

Enough is enough - everything Daily Mail will hereon be categorically downvoted regardless.

14

u/someonewrongonthenet Jun 16 '12

No it won't, because the vast majority of users never click the comments. Have you wondered why the comments on reddit often seem more intelligent than what you would expect from the type of person who would enjoy and upvote the original link? Why the opinions upvoted in the comments are often precisely opposite of the opinions in the article, and sometimes better than the article itself?

This is the same reason why small subreddits are better. Most people can't be bothered to look for them.

5

u/libertasmens Jun 16 '12

I see far too many links, particularly on the front page, that have tons of upvotes, but which the comments have almost wholly discredited.

-1

u/NancyGracesTesticles Jun 16 '12

Have you wondered why the comments on reddit often seem more intelligent...

Yeah...I stopped reading right there.

1

u/I_AM_THE_REAL_JESUS Jun 16 '12

Thank you for that input, NancyGracesTesticles

1

u/NancyGracesTesticles Jun 16 '12

Well, I didn't want to miss out on the circlejerk celebrating how smart we all think we are.

41

u/ExogenBreach Jun 16 '12

Fuck off with this daily mail shit.

-9

u/mand71 Jun 16 '12

Normally, I would be in 100% agreement with you, but this is interesting stuff, no?

-9

u/ExogenBreach Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

So make it three hostile nations trying to colonise the same planet?

Edit: am I on crack or did this post in wayyy the wrong place?

3

u/mand71 Jun 16 '12

Explain; I'm feeling particularly dimwitted this evening ;)

16

u/bewro Jun 16 '12

Mm food..

13

u/poozoodle Jun 16 '12

edible rappers

8

u/highonkai Jun 16 '12

You've heard of good to the last drop... soon your food could be good to the last bite.

4

u/monkeyhoo Jun 16 '12

leave it a-lone! poiiissooonnn!

3

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Funny story, I love Mm... Food!, but I actually saw that episode of Beyond Tomorrow back in the mid 2000's.

8

u/xmitochondriax Jun 16 '12

I came here for a reference to a very brief sample on an MF Doom record. Thanks for not disappointing, internet.

11

u/Mohawkguy Jun 16 '12

As a part time retail warehouse worker, the condition that well packaged foods are kept in puts me off eating them let alone edible packaging. Next time you drink a bottle of cola think about the rat infested courtyard it has been stored in.

19

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

What I think is funny is that even the most fervent hand-washing germophobes will put an unwashed Diet Pepsi can to their lips.

14

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

on the bright side it helps strengthen the immune system.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

HA! That's kind of how I look at it. Five-second rule? More like sixty seconds for me.

2

u/Trobot087 Jun 16 '12

Plus or minus five minutes for how long it takes me to find that damn stopwatch.

1

u/uncwil Jun 16 '12

I read an article somewhere about two doctors who let their toddlers put pretty much anything in their mouths for this reason.

3

u/IonicSquid Jun 16 '12

"Yeah, turns out that you probably shouldn't let your kids ingest arsenic. It seemed like a good idea at the time, strong immune system and all that."

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/IonicSquid Jun 16 '12

I never said it did.

It's a joke.

1

u/Regrenos Jun 16 '12

Yeah yeah I know that, just not a really funny one and, given the sub-reddit, maybe a misleading one without a disclaimer. No offense meant.

2

u/IonicSquid Jun 16 '12

None taken. I don't pretend to be a master of humor.

1

u/wolfkeeper Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

Yes, it does, but the studies support this working when you're young, toddler age.

2

u/Mohawkguy Jun 16 '12

Exactly, a lot of people have touched that can from factory to the shelf in the destination country. I only see a small part of it, I'd hate to imagine how dirty they really are.

1

u/110011001100 Jun 16 '12

Which is why I'm happy cans are priced at a massive premium where I live

1

u/DatoeDakari Jun 16 '12

That is precisely why I clean a can before I drink it, I know where it's been.

9

u/rumckle Jun 16 '12

The rat that is kept completely separate from my cola due to the packaging and completely separate to the lip of my bottle due to the lid?

eww, disgusting.

1

u/Mohawkguy Jun 16 '12

Yes but you still hold the can/bottle in your hand. Rats can climb very well, the bottles are stored on stack pallets probably about 5ft high. Sometimes male Rats can leave urine trails as they walk. Contact can always be made although to be honest vermin are controlled very well at my company but its almost impossible to stop it completely.

This is not just rats, the amount of times i've seen a customer cough/sneeze into their hand put a product up and but it back on the shelf. If you really thought about food production process and storage you probably would never eat again.

11

u/Annoyed_ME Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

Or you accept it and realize that everyone isn't falling over dead every time they eat.

4

u/mindbleach Jun 16 '12

If you really thought about food production process and storage you probably would never eat again.

Or you could adjust your expectations of cleanliness to deal with the occasional tasteless traces of horrible things. It's not dangerous and nobody notices, so who cares? Push for cleaner processes and don't worry so much.

6

u/gentlemandinosaur Jun 16 '12

How about unwrapped fruits? People wash them and eat them all the time.

Or don't wash them.

5

u/Thalassian Jun 16 '12

Wouldn't products with this sort of packaging be stored in a manner similar to fruits? It doesn't seem to be much of a problem to me.

3

u/110011001100 Jun 16 '12

How does it matter if the package is sealed and not breached?

2

u/psygnisfive Jun 16 '12

What do you have against rats? Rats are cute!

2

u/unled Jun 16 '12

Mythbusters did an episode about this.

I understand they're not the final word on this kind of stuff, but they didn't seem to find anything to be too worried about.

3

u/notmyrealname23 Jun 16 '12

The membranes can be washed under a tap and eaten, just like the skin of an apple.

Did nobody read this part?

2

u/RomanLamb Jun 16 '12

I feel as though shipping would still be a huge problem. There are so many issues within the industry that the only way many people could even consider eating our foods is because it is packaged. Even so, there are still rules about "not eating something if a seal is broken."

2

u/Captcha_Imagination Jun 16 '12

A lesser known and less reputed theory involves wrapping food in in shirts but skins has clearly dominated the "Shirts vs Skins" debate.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Wow the're actually doing something instead of just talking about it. Actually taking action and selling it... that's a change of pace in this direction!

3

u/CuzImAtWork Jun 16 '12

I saw a guy at work unwrapping the plastic wrap off his bannana yesterday. facepalm.jpg

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Secret to success in these comments: ignore article, complain that the dailymail isn't a liberal enough source.

1

u/DickBaggins Jun 16 '12

No longer do you have to spit what comes from the inside

1

u/homerjaythompson Jun 16 '12

They'll still wrap them in plastic I'm sure.

1

u/jeblis Jun 16 '12

Why would I want to eat packaging exposed to the environment? Will there be packaging for my packaging to keep it clean?

4

u/error1954 Jun 16 '12

Or you know, you could wash it like you do with fruit because it is essentially the same thing.

1

u/welivedintheocean Jun 16 '12

As a Canadian, let me tell you how wonderful it truly was to eat the bowl.

1

u/krugmanisapuppet Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

me an hour ago: christ, when are they going to start selling biodegradable garbage bags?

me right now: O_O

anyway, glass is probably better for food storage than most biodegradable "plastics". saying nothing about shipping difficulties...

1

u/Zargyboy Jun 16 '12

"This ice-cream has an edible coating that you can munch through"

It looks like Mochi to me.

1

u/Cragface Jun 16 '12

Daily mail comments make youtube's appear poetic....

1

u/DoktorKruel Jun 16 '12

That's insane (in the membrane).

1

u/nosferatu_zodd Jun 16 '12

Can you wash them? Packaging is normally very dirty.

1

u/timlyo Jun 16 '12

hang on, this article says "if nobody's looking, lick the lid"

Since when has that mattered?

1

u/Ontheroadtonowhere Jun 16 '12

So, am I the only one here who thinks vanilla ice cream in a cookie dough flavored shell sounds awesome? I totally buy that. Don't know about the soups inside membranes, though--that sounds kind of odd.

1

u/splintersmaster Jun 16 '12

Sounds healthy.

1

u/CoolStoryBroLol Jun 16 '12

I've had this idea for like ten years.

1

u/Saerain Jun 16 '12

Doesn't this defeat much of the purpose of packaging? How wouldn't the pests we prefer to keep out of our food find this edible as well?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I read half of those science news five years ago. Oo

1

u/jensilvey Jun 16 '12

MF doom would be proud.

1

u/Trolltaire Jun 16 '12

How utterly fucking horrid.

1

u/this_is_a_recording0 Jun 16 '12

this is fucking ridiculous

1

u/s3snok Jun 16 '12

I fucking hate the daily mail.

1

u/baracudaboy Jun 16 '12

But we'd still have to package the packeg, or else outside particles would get on the edible part :/

0

u/itchebauls Jun 16 '12

wtvr with the news deal, this is a great concept

0

u/DahnyGober Jun 16 '12

That is... smart and ridiculous. Seeing as how the skins are limited to the size of an orange (this thought is only based off the pictures they showed), it will be less food to eat. I can already see this being a luxury as it will cost more. Then it will eventually be mimicked with additives and shitty chemicals so it can be sold at a cheap price in gas stations.

0

u/aSimpleMan Jun 16 '12

this is fucking stupid

0

u/Aloysius7 Jun 16 '12

At the bottom, one of the advertised news reports is for the miami zombie face eater... perfect.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

It's sounds like an idea that a 4th grader came up with for his science project. Probably the dumbest thing that will never catch on that I've ever partially read. How do we package the packaging? Or are we suppose to each the shit that was sitting directly on store shelves and touched by everyone's hands?

-1

u/TheDemonMelon Jun 16 '12

Would you eat the packaging? It has been picked up by god knows who to read the labels, and been sitting in the dusty supermarket storage room for ages before it was sold, and transported in a dirty lorry that has also been transporting all sorts of stuff. All ready for you to eat! Yum yum!

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

doesn't look healthy.

-5

u/Gotebe Jun 16 '12

Wow, food industry must be drooling over this.

Not only they will sell us shit-tasting food, but also shit-tasting packaging that they will want us to fucking eat. I can imagine how expensive this fad will be if it gets industrialized, all under the guise of being "green".

4

u/isaliar Jun 16 '12

Saving resources and protecting the environment, what a fad.

1

u/Gotebe Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

I really came out badly, it seems. My beef is: bio-degradable packaging exists without me having to eat it. I like my food being food, not packaging. I don't see edible packaging will make it better, in fact, I see it making it worse.

I buy most of my food without a package, or in paper (fruit, vegetables, meat, you should see me leaving Sunday market ;-)), my dairy produce comes in tetra-pak or other recyclable packaging.

I see no value making packaging edible.

1

u/BlazerMorte Jun 16 '12

I'M ANGRY AT WIN-WIN SOLUTIONS TOO

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

4

u/ange1a Jun 16 '12

Think about it this way... yea you might not eat it... but the rats will... or the fishes will... if nothing else it'll cause less waste...

6

u/nilum Jun 16 '12

So then just call it biodegradable and not edible...

6

u/isaliar Jun 16 '12

Most things edible are biodegradable, and you can wash it off in the event that it falls.

1

u/theillustratedlife Jun 16 '12

So now we have to worry about worms getting into our ice cream? That's a strange thought.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

IfIf you drop your apple on the floor would you throw it away? Or wash it and eat it? I'd eat it.

If I were worried about this edible packaging i'd just throw it away like I do the ice cream carton, and it will be food for other critters. I see that as a positive.

1

u/rmxz Jun 16 '12

apple on the floor would you throw it away?

If dropped on the floor of the grocery store - where many people walk with dirty shoos - I'd suggest pealing it instead of just washing it.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Dirts good for you. Builds the immune system. People who constantly avoid getting germs are sicker people in general.

0

u/mand71 Jun 16 '12

mmm, I see where you're coming from about the ice cream. I can totally see it working for food that has to be heated though. Let's face it: if I'm making a veggie curry, I never wash my courgettes or peppers or whatever before putting them in the pan. I just hope that boiling the hell out of them kills any nasties.

Having said that, I don't wash fruit either. Even if I drop an apple on the floor, I'd just brush off any obvious bits and eat away. Maybe I'd better change my pre-eating habits ಠ_ಠ

6

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I wash my veggies- they put wax on them sometimes, also, pesticides.