Hacker News Reader

> I eventually realized that for perishable goods, they put the new stuff in the back of the shelves, so now I just head for the back of the shelf when I need to buy perishables there. This sucks for me, since buying at TJs used to be a stress-free experience, and now I check the 'use-by' dates on everything.

I just wanted to mention that this is a standard practice called rotation. After all, putting new product in front would result in wastage of the older product. Products are supposed to be culled on their sell-by (not expiration) date, and it's unfortunate that you got some bad groceries, but they didn't do anything unusual or shady.

Similarly, Safeway's practices are fairly standard amongst grocery stores, though it's a little annoying. Best to follow the sale circulars and keep your wits about you.

Yep, just look at milk. The newer milk is always in the back. If the expiration dates are too short and you won't be able to drink it in time, just look for ones towards the back and get those instead. I generally don't care though as long as the expiration isn't within a week.

Hackers new tip: Buy lactose-free milk and it will stay good for much longer than regular milk.

I don't consume a lot of milk, and I was getting tired of buying a half-gallon and having go bad two weeks later after I had only consumed 1/4 of it.

Lactose-free milk stay good for a long-time. Most of the time when I check, the best-before date is at least 6 weeks into the future. I've never had the milk go bad even if I've had it for 8 weeks. I'm not lactose intolerant BTW.

The only drawback is that the milk definitely tastes sweeter than regular milk. I'm used to it by now, but I'm sure some people would find it disagreeable.

I'm not sure why it lasts so long, even though there is no lactose in it, there is plenty of other sugars in it. Lactose-free milk is made by using enzymes to split the lactose into galactose and glucose. It tastes sweeter because both of the sugars have a higher perceived sweetness than lactose on a weight basis.

It's because lactose-free milk (or at least the Lactaid brand that I see my roommate drink) is treated at higher temperatures. You can find regular milk that has gone through the same treatment labeled as UHT or ultra-pasteurized, like the Horizon Organic brand and another I've seen at Costco as shelf stable juicebox form factor milk drinks (UHT coincidentally removes the refrigeration requirement too if stored in an appropriate container).

No need to pay extra for the lactose-free variant if you don't really need it and the plain UHT-treated milk is cheaper :)

Wouldn't the benefits of ultra-pasteurization go out the window once you open the package, thereby contaminating the milk?

There was this Mythbusters episode (pyramids preserving foods) where they sliced an apple in half. The one half rotted fairly quickly at room temperature the other was fine.

Brief investigation showed that there was difference in the initial contamination of the two halves and the results observed.

Modern kitchen and fridge are fairly clean places unless you are a movie bachelor. So opening a milk bottle and pouring a glass won't contaminate too much. And at 4 degrees there is not much breeding activity in bacteria anyway.

Actually, they didn't appear to investigate the cause at all - they just assumed one cut surface must have been contaminated more than the other and changed the experiment to remove the cut surface altogether. Since the mold on the non-pyramid apple only survived on the cut surface, not cutting the apples made sure no mold grew on any of them, and all bar one of the apples (the one from the cube) was perfectly preserved at the end of the experiment.

Was kind of annoying actually; the Mythbusters got so pissed off that their experiment appeared to show pyramids working that they set up their next test in such a way it'd give the same result regardless of whether pyramids or contamination had caused one apple to rot faster before, then held it up as proof pyramids were bunk. While it's really unlikely pyramids can magically preserve food, they should still have been honest and fair in their testing.

Regular milk spoils much faster after you open it though. Everything that I can find on the web suggests that UHT milk expires just as fast as regular milk after opening.

Well, the milk fridges are also loaded from behind - unlike regular shelves. So with milk at least it makes sense that the newer stuff would start at the back of the row.

That would be totally fine if this was Safeway or somewhere else that isn't selling fresh goods that go bad quickly. This isn't the case for things like bread and cheese at Trader Joe's - those things go bad just after their sell by dates. I'd agree that it wasn't unusual or shady if it wasn't a significant departure from their standard practices - I've shopped at TJs for years, and this change is fairly recent.

The Safeway experience is agonizing, though I'm sure it must be profitable for them at least in the short term. I just avoid them now, even though they have things I just can't find at TJs.

I generally agree with you - shopping at TJs is a fairly low-BS experience. But I feel that putting less fresh stuff in front is just common sense - its just a a FIFO buffer.

I'd agree with you, if the buffer had a sensible cutoff. The cutoff is currently "tomorrow" - so you'll buy stuff who's useby date is before you've even opened it. Sucks.

You are confusing sell by and use by. Despite what it says, the date on the shelf is almost always sell by.

FIFO is common at many stores.

I mostly shop at a handful of local stores, one in business for around 100 years, the other around 40 now. The younger of the two is more "hippy" (for lack of a better term) and has had many expired products on the shelf I've had to point out/return (when I wasn't paying attention). The older, not so much. I don't shop at the local Safeway -- a wholly different issue.

A lot of stores go with the FIFO approach, but some staff don't necessarily pay attention. In other cases, the vendor rents space and is responsible for stocking their own shelves...this happened to me recently...juice 2 weeks past due (didn't check when purchased, returned an hour later) -- store honored the return, but mentioned it was the vendor's responsibility.

What an absurd way for the store to put it. "Yeah, we don't look after the sell by dates, but shop here anyway."

(It's perfectly fine for the store to rely on the vendor to stock their products, it's silly for the store to try to communicate to a customer that they aren't still responsible...)

> I HATE this. I previously shopped at Trader Joe's with confidence

Um, this has NOTHING to do with Trader Joe's! Is it too much to even read the title? Never mind the actual article?

I read the article. You need to read my comment.

It's about the fact that food often DOES go bad by the sell-by date, and that Trader Joe - where this guy got his experience - has changed their policies to aggressively push older, effectively near-expired goods on customers. That's what I hate, and it's pretty relevant.

It still has nothing to do with this. If they changed policies it has nothing to do with him.

And his idea of using old food has nothing to do with their policies.

You are combining two unrelated things.

>I eventually realized that for perishable goods, they put the new stuff in the back of the shelves, so now I just head for the back of the shelf when I need to buy perishables there. <

This is standard practice at grocery stores to put freshest food at the back and soonest to expire in the front. No reason to hate on TJ's on that point.

It's called "rotation" and yes it's something grocery store managers struggle to get their lazy employees to keep doing.

Interesting... a few months ago I noticed exactly the same thing. I've begun walking a half mile further a few times a week to a Safeway rather than go to the Trader Joes two blocks from my home because of this. (I refuse to use store club cards, so I don't encounter the trouble you have with them).

I actually prefer some trader joe's branded food to the alternatives, but it isn't worth it to go there. Food from other stores simply lasts longer, which is essential when you are buying for just yourself.

Exactly. Most people aren't realizing that my frustration is with the extremes of the rotation - food shouldn't be going bad/ have a use-by date that is the day after you buy it.

Trader Joe's obviously has had a significant change of policy recently to reduce losses to perishables, and it's foisting those losses on customers. I hate it.

> I eventually realized that for perishable goods, they put the new stuff in the back of the shelves

I can't imagine this is a new practice at Trader Joe's, it's an industry standard, and common sense quite frankly.

I'm very interested in what you consider proper practice should be with perishable foods (or what you think they used to do)? It almost sounds like you think they used to throw all perishables away that didn't sell on the first day and restock everything fresh nightly.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I always thought that Trader Joes just bought their food from low cost countries and cheap manufacturers and then sold it for much higher prices, but with cool labels and within a fun atmosphere. I would never trust Trader Joes food, personally.

Trader Joe's is the American version of Aldi. Almost all the products are store brand so that they can offer lower prices. Plus the stores don't have nearly the same number of SKUs as other competitors.

Why wouldn't you trust it? Do you not trust grocery stores in general?

There are Aldi in America too, and I don't trust them either. Their produce, at least at the locations I have been to, is really sketchy.

Not sure how a LIFO queue would possibly work whatsoever for perishable goods.