Pringle's: Truth or UL?

[Green_Bean]

All of this hints as to why P&G decided to call Pringles potato crisps… The story that I’ve been told is that originally these were manufactured by a Scotsman named Pringle who called them crisps, per his cultural standard. When P&G bought the rights to the process they adopted the name as a product differentiator.

This may be the reason that they decided to use “crisps” specifically instead of some other word, but the fact remains that they could not use the phrase “potato chip” even if they wanted to.

I am sure that their official story is that they adopted the name as a “product differentiator,” but I do not think that this is the real story. They have differentiated their product quite nicely by the unique packaging and shape of the chip. They, not surprisingly, usually try to underplay the fact that their product is not a real potato chip, but a mess of dried potato bits smushed back together.

-Bean, who actually likes deep-fried reconstituted bits of granulated potato.

[DSYoungEsq]

So far, not one single piece of evidence about the usage of the term ‘crisp’.

How about a citation to the relevant FDA regulations? God knows the CFR is a pain to look things up in, but there must be a search engine for it somewhere.

[DSYoungEsq]

So far, not one single piece of evidence about the usage of the term ‘crisp’.

How about a citation to the relevant FDA regulations? God knows the CFR is a pain to look things up in, but there must be a search engine for it somewhere.

[Alphagene]

Yeehaw! Pay dirt! Well, sorta.

Apparently, some people made a stink about the liberal usage of the term “potato chips”:

In the past, firms have marketed articles they wish to identify as “potato chips” although these are not made by the traditional process of frying thin slices of potatoes in deep fat. These are made from dehydrated potatoes, with or without added carbohydrates from other sources, plus other ingredients commonly used in preparation of potato chips. Complaints were received both from individual manufacturers of potato chips and their trade association concerning the labeling of these new articles as “potato chips”…

POLICY:

The name “potato chips” may be used without qualification to describe the article made by frying thin slices of potato in deep fat.

The words “potato chips” will not be considered misleading in labeling an article whose composition differs from that of traditional potato chips only in having been processed from dried potatoes provided that the food conforms to 21 CFR 102.41.

See here.

So what’s 21 CFR 102.41?

(a) The common or usual name of the food product that resembles and is of the same composition as potato chips, except that it is composed of dehydrated potatoes (buds, flakes, granules, or other form), shall be ``potato chips made from dried potatoes.’’

See here.

So sounds like Pringles technically are potato chips. The FDA says you can’t call something a “potato chip” unless it meet certain set of guidlines. But it has no demand that something be called a “potato crisp” under any circumstances that I can find.

Who’s hungry?

---

Gypsy: Tom, I don’t get you.
Tom Servo: Nobody does. I’m the wind, baby.

[Gilligan]

Here is the Bathroom Reader article Guy Incognito referred to (bottom of the page):
http://www.bathroomreader.com/bestth.htm

The Potato Chip Institute is now known as the Snack Food Association. I haven’t found a mention on their site of the Pringles controversy, but here is their history page:
http://www.sfa.org/history1.html

[Milossarian]

This turned into a pretty cool mundane little mystery.

Thanks to all for the investigative work.

But Gilligan, I have to say that the bathroom reader story reeks of “urban legend” to me.

---

“Nothing is so firmly believed as what is least known” - Michel Gyquem de Montaigne