By scheisse - 14/07/2013 21:25 - Germany - Herne
Same thing different taste
By Anonymous - 06/06/2013 16:32 - Senegal
Lonely
By Anonymous - 25/10/2022 01:00 - Nigeria
By Anonymous - 30/04/2017 12:00
By good friend - 27/12/2013 06:35 - United States - Missoula
Gratitude
By fuckmylife - 28/04/2009 08:45 - United States
By Anonymous - 21/03/2011 06:20 - United Kingdom
Nice try
By Anonymous - 23/01/2022 21:00 - Philippines
Partaaaaay!
By Anonymous - 18/07/2013 18:16 - Canada - Kelowna
By Neednewfriends - 11/11/2015 14:38 - Australia
By Anonymous - 19/07/2012 04:55 - United States - San Diego
Top comments
Comments
Sorry OP. You're an idiot
Trying to get pity from us because you had to act drunk to get attention? That's all I see...
Glad someone said it
Again, alcohol free beer is NOT 100% alcohol free!!! It has a small percentage still. Drink enough and you can still get drunk. Same thing goes for fat free stuff. Eat the serving size it's fat free. Eat a second and it's no longer fat free.
So if you eat a serving size one day, it is fat free. But if you eat the same serving size the next day it isn't? Timing doesn't matter. Whatever is listed in the nutritional guide is in the serving size. Fat free is fat free. You're not too bright, are you?
@Phoenix: No, actually, Rodville is right. I don't know if this applies to all fats, but this does apply to food labeling of trans fats in the United States, and possibly other countries as well. Foods can be labeled as having "zero trans fats" if each serving has equal to or less than 0.5g of trans fat per serving. Therefore, if you eat four servings, you are STILL consuming small amounts of trans fats -- up to 2 grams. Food companies can get away with it because you're consuming a negligible amount... in one serving. If you eat several, it's not necessarily negligible anymore.
So then, toomanyidiots, each serving size would have .5 grams of trans fat and not be 'fat free'. Based on Rodville's last sentence, the first one serving size has no fat and the second one would have fat in it. A serving size either has fat in it or it doesn't.
No, Phoenix. You're obviously the one who isn't too bright. He's saying that companies are allowed to label their foods as fat free if they contain .5 grams or less. So the first "fat free" serving size is not truly fat free, it just contains a negligible amount. So if you've got a bag of "fat free" chips that truly contain an ignorable .4 grams of fat, and you eat one serving, you can feel like you didn't eat any fat at all. But if you eat the whole bag in one sitting you actually ate 2 grams of fat. OP might still be a moron but so are you.
Exactly. I don't care if there is an ignorable .4 grams of fat in a serving size. You're consuming .4 grams in each one, not 0 grams in one serving size and .8 grams in another.
That is a completely irrelevant thing to say. You are making nothing but moot points. Arguing for the sake of arguing. You are an idiot.
FML is now a dating site and a food website.
Its not arguing for the sake of arguing. Rodville makes a stupid statement and I'm the dumb ass for pointing it out. And maybe I'm the only one here use to the NYC nutritional standards of them needing to be completely accurate. Oh, and I can't take someone who has "'merica" listed as their country in their profile seriously.
That is the stupidest thing I've ever herd? How the hell do you manage to even do that?
Usually a shepherd's crook is part of the standard equipment. That would be your first step.
This FML made me laugh... You still deserve it though
YDI, Smh why act like you're drunk
Keywords


1. You had a non-alcoholic house party in Germany. 2. You fell for your own set up. How do you NOT deserve it?!
The mind is a powerful thing.