Hacker News Reader

Which, I would expect, ought to be well known by anyone shopping with lactose issues. It’s like shipping peanut brittle without a label saying that it contains peanuts. How many people would really be harmed without the recall?

I’m in favor of safety over profit. I’m just bummed at the unnecessary waste.

View on HN

It actually lists milk as an ingredient. So even if you are have doubts if its milkless butter, the ingredient list can clarify it.

If you see that on a product, you'd expect that the thing was made with milk, but does not contain any as far as you need to worry about allergens, and that it's tested to be safe.

It's a valid case in the truth table where somebody with a milk allergy should be safe to eat it

Does any such food product actually exist? Not even just for milk, but for any of the FDA's nine major allergens?

You will find that even butter often does not have milk in the ingredients list. E.g. Kerrygold: "pasteurized cream, salt"

In this case, the Kirkland's listed "sweet cream" and not milk.

a lot of the alternative product packaging looks very similar to traditional dairy butter packaging

That sounds like an issue for the alternative people to solve.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com