App
FML for mobile
Free
Open in app

By scheisse - 14/07/2013 21:25 - Germany - Herne

Today, I held a house party. For fun, I made sure all the beer was alcohol-free, so I could see which of my friends would be weak-minded enough to end up acting drunk. Three did. I was one of them. FML
I agree, your life sucks 26 323
You deserved it 67 540

Same thing different taste

Top comments

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

Comments

Pwn17 25

The placebo effect is one thing, but you KNEW it was non alcoholic. How stupid are you?

AtomicDiamond87 15

From non alcoholic beer? wow

Trying to get pity from us because you had to act drunk to get attention? That's all I see...

jw90 18

How does that even? I'm so confused..

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?

toomanyidiots 14

@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.

Wittledinosaure 7

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.

perdix 29

Actually, if you knew it was non-alcoholic and you could will yourself into a drunken state, your mind is very powerful.

This FML made me laugh... You still deserve it though