Nutrition facts are always shown per 100 g or per serving – which most of us never follow. Then the pack is 57 g and we have to do mental math. Just add another column: nutrition per pack. That's what we actually eat, that's what matters. I know it might not always suit marketing, but it can work both ways. Sometimes people skip a product because the per‑100 g numbers look bad, even though the actual pack is small and fine. Clearer info doesn't hurt; it helps folks make smarter, more accurate choices.
(https://i.ibb.co/vCq1xnS9/98c9w63y7cvg1.jpg)
That's how they show love. If you're gaining weight, at least be good at maths!
I totally agree, and by the way these chips are sooo tasty, yaar – I love the blue pack, the masala flavour.
I'm not against having both per 100 g and per pack, but I think the per 100 g info should come first. Why? Because when every pack lists nutrition per 100 g, it's easy to compare and make an informed choice across different items. Per pack is handy when you already have the product in hand, but it's not very useful in the supermarket when you're picking which brand to buy. For example, if I'm in the chips aisle and watching my daily calories, a 20 g packet versus a 35 g packet – looking at calories per packet means more mental gymnastics than just checking the 100 g values. Since 100 g is a standard, I keep a mental number for calories, protein, fat etc., which helps me choose a healthier alternative. Per pack doesn't help me during purchase comparison, which I'd say is more important. So both should be present, but 100 g should be primary. Also, I really dislike the per serve metric – it makes no sense. I've hardly ever eaten exactly a 'serve', and most people don't either. It feels like a marketing gimmick, useful only when the packaging clearly shows how many servings you're actually having without extra measuring.
It'd be a good addition, and the math is still simple. Just round it to the nearest ten and multiply. Everyone should do at least that much daily maths practice. I've stopped doing mental calculations lately, but keeping the brain active helps.
It claims no palm oil, but it actually contains even worse cottonseed oil.
Cottonseed oil – worse than palm oil.
Illiteracy is rising. Please, let's not dumb ourselves down further. Let people use their brain for this small thing at least.
I think every brand should put a serving‑size pack on each product, so people know how much to consume in one go.
I'm building a tool that scans product barcodes and analyses the ingredients. It's designed to read food labels and instantly tell you if they contain hidden additives, nutrients or animal products, making it easier to stick to a healthy lifestyle without the hassle of reading every ingredient yourself! For more info click here https://satvikscan.github.io/Page/index.html SatvikScan app https://satvikscan.com
Math isn't that hard, bro.