18 ms·
The Unlikely Success of Fish Sticks
- flakiness 5y agoAs a someone who came from a fish-eating nation (Japan), it's great to know that fish sticks are sustainable. The collective memory there was that Japan was condemned as fish abuser. People felt unfair but also were ashamed at the same time. (Over-fishing was/is at least partly true after all.) However, I don't have any memory around fish sticks associated from my childhood in Japan. Fried (frozen) fish fillets are popular, but they are more chunky. "Fish sausages" used to be popular and felt kind of similar, but it was even more artificial. I wonder where it went. It doesn't make sense not have it there.
- tashoecraft 5y agoIf Seaspiracy is to be believed, there's no such this as sustainable fishing at scale. In order to catch this much fish, you're going to kill tons of other animals, discard tons of nets and other fishing equipment, saying it's "sustainable" is probably a lie in most every sense.
- stouset 5y agoThe uncomfortable reality is that there is almost no “sustainable” anything at our current population scale. Certainly not at anything approximating a typical Western lifestyle.
- shkkmo 5y agoI think this is a cop out that needlessly encourages people to not try to find sustainable solutions. Yes, the road to sustainability is hard and long, but a path does exist that achieves sustainability without population reduction. Discouraging people from seeking that path does nobody any good.
- k__ 5y agoOr it's simply eco-facism. I think, we should move to sustainable solutions, but I don't believe in over population
- shkkmo 5y agoWhat do you mean by "I don't believe in overpopulation?" Overpopulation is definitely a real thing in ecological systems, so I assume you mean either: 1) We are not currently in an overpopulated state. 2) We are extremely unlikely to reach an overpopulated state in the nearish future. One important thing to note is that overpopulation is not a fixed threshold, but one that is dependant on a number of ecological, environmental and technological factors that makes it extremely hard to completely accept 2).
- k__ 5y agoI mean, I believe in the concept, but I think humanity is far from reaching that state. Which doesn't mean that I think we can't live above our means with the population we already have. I just think it's a question of optimizing production and not restricting population growth.
- at_a_remove 5y agoDoes that path exist? I am not entirely convinced that you can have our current population living with our current standards -- especially if the standards spread from say that USA to the poorest nations, sustainably.
- shkkmo 5y agoNot in our current economic structuring, but our current economic system places little to no value on sustainability. I wholey believe that we can replicate the aspects of our standard of living that have the biggest impacts on our quality of life. We can have nice clothes, we just need clothes that last a decade rather than a month or a year. We can travel, we just have to travel a bit slower using electric power. Education is a huge factor in our quality of life and can be done very sustainably. We can still have plenty of food, we just might not have year round cheap access to stuff that doesn't grow locally. So there is definitely a path to a very good aproximation of our standard of living that is sustainable for the entire planet. We just aren't currwntly on that path, or even really headed in that direction .
- an_opabinia 5y agoI don't know. If you removed all the worst parts of the supply chain of a cell phone - the slave labor, the conflict minerals - it would cost like what, four times more? Boohoo. But nearly everything else about it, like the IAP sold on it, or the music you listen to or the books you read, is already essentially sustainable. And people spend literally hours on their phone, globally, consuming and spending in totally sustainable entertainment, and not just in the West. For the consumer, sustainability in the West really is about food, and specifically, it really is about meat. There's no amount of equivocation that will change that. And affecting it - by simply not buying meat - really is as easy and as effective as it appears.
- cheese_goddess 5y agoMaybe if you only ever bought a single phone and never discarded it, creating more e-waste that would not have a big impact on the environment. But if everyone buys one or two new phones a year then you have a mountain of waste. Of course you don't see it because it's a mountain that forms in some far away land where people are so poor they have to scavenge in the detritus of your electronics and can't afford to eat any meat anyway.
- yissp 5y agoI think a big part of this is the lack of repairability and long-term software support, though. There's no good reason we need to be replacing our phones (and a lot of other electronics) as often as most of us currently do.
- triceratops 5y agoBut if phones cost 4x what they do now, as GP suggests, people would replace their phone far less frequently.
- an_opabinia 5y agoYes. The root cause of unsustainability is still something horrible - the abuse of labor - but not literally the same as environmental goals. This is a case where intersectionality really shines. You really can align goals because ending labor abuse is good for the environment. Likewise, with meat, the root cause of unsustainability is the animal abuse that enables cheap meat. I'm definitely not blaming the consumer here. Of course you could make sustainable meat, it would just cost 10-400x more (Eating Animals is a great, broad take on this you could read).
- Enginerrrd 5y ago>If Seaspiracy is to be believed, there's no such this as sustainable fishing at scale This statement is silly. There is A scale at which fishing is sustainable. The issue is that we are likely well over that.
- whoisburbansky 5y agoThis is like saying your amazing lock-free architecture is scalable, as long as you define scalable to mean "at most one thread."
- shkkmo 5y agoHuh? Just because something is scalable, doesn't mean it is scalable indefinitely. There very clearly exists a scale at which fishing is sustainable and a scale at which it is not. You can argue what the tipping point is, but you can't argue with that fundemental premise.
- whoisburbansky 5y agoI phrased this quite poorly; my quibble isn't with the concept of scaling or that it's possible to fish sustainably at some defined scale. I was getting at the idea that most people's definition of doing something _at scale_ is going to be well above the tipping point, in the same way that processing data _at scale_ usually invokes rows of server racks, and not a single thread on a dinky laptop.
- shkkmo 5y ago"Scalability" means that you can adjust the scale at which you are operating. The definition of "At scale" just means operating at whatever is a sufficient scale to solve the problem at hand. If you only need one dinky laptop to solve the problem, you can operate at scale with a dinky laptop. So "fishing at scale" is fishing at a scale that statisfies the demand for fish. Since demand for fish will drop as sustainabile fishing regulations increase costs, there is absolutely a way to fish at scale sustainably.
- shkkmo 5y agoI think that there is some confusion as to what you are trying to say. 1) There is no way to catch the amount of fish we catch in a sustainable manner. (No sustainability at our current scale.) 2) There is no way to catch any amount of fish sustainably. (No sustainability at any scale.) I think people are intrepreting you as saying #2 when you are really saying #1. The answer would appear to be that if that we need to reduce the scale at which fiahing operates. This means sustainability requirents that increase the costs to fishermen so that overall demand cam be curbed to a sustainable level.
- cheese_goddess 5y agoAs far as I understand it, Seaspiracy claims that 2) is the case and we should all stop eating fish entirely.
- shkkmo 5y agoI think Seaspiracies argument is that current "sustainable fishing" efforts are not actually sustainable and are designed to appear to solve the problem while avoiding regulations that would actually enforce sustainable fishing (and hence massively disrupt the industry.) If that is their argument, the push to stop eating fish would be justified only in the current environment where there is no ecologically sustainable source. Maybe I being too generous, but "fishing can never be sustainable" appears to be blatantly false so I feel we have to look for the "strongest plausible interpretation".
- tashoecraft 5y agoI interpreted it as unless the fishing are doing is entirely local (the example in the movie being the African fisherman) it can be sustainable, but really and type of fish most of us buy is definitely not sustainable no matter what organization says. That sustainable fishiers fudge the numbers to work and farming produces it’s own set of problems
- avereveard 5y agoWhich is silly since one can make a completely isolated self perpetuating fish farm given enough money, heck even building it disconnected from the sea is a possibility with today technology.
- isleyaardvark 5y agoIf marine biologists are to be believed, Seaspiracy is not a reliable source of information.
- jiofih 5y agoYou must have missed the part saying that most fish sticks use farmed fish.
- AnimalMuppet 5y agoFishing at scale? Pun not intended (I presume).
- diggan 5y ago> The collective memory there was that Japan was condemned as fish abuser I don't know about the over-fishing, but I do remember reading a lot about whaling in Japan and some incidents about fishermen hunting whales in sanctuaries. Guess that could also be folded into "condemned as fish abuser".
- nostromo 5y agoI think The Cove (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cove_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cove_(film)) had a lot to do with raising (negative) awareness of dolphin fishing in Japan.
- cheese_goddess 5y agoAlso see: epicanthic folds. You've heard of the killing of dolphins by Japanese fishermen, but not of the similar practice of killing of pilot whales in the Faroe islands where people are distinctly not of Asian descent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling_in_the_Faroe_Islands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling_in_the_Faroe_Islands
- tofof 5y agoMaybe that's got more to do with the fact that the Faroe Islands have a population of 52,000 while Japan's population is 125,410,000? Surely the fishing practices of the nation 2400x larger are going to be more impactful by at least an order of magnitude or two. Edit: We don't have to guess. Using 1986 numbers since this is when I remember the world being peak-Save-The-Whales (Star Trek IV's release year). Admittedly if you use current numbers they're closer, but that's because Japan's fishing output has decreased dramatically. That decrease is due to exhaustion of its fishing grounds; their fishing practices i.e. square milage of nets it's putting in the water each day remain mostly unchanged. Faroe - 355,000 metric tons fished in 1986 Japan - 12,750,000 metric tons fished in 1986 Source: https://tradingeconomics.com/faroe-islands/total-fisheries-production-metric-tons-wb-data.html https://tradingeconomics.com/faroe-islands/total-fisheries-p... and corresponding Japan page.
- Turing_Machine 5y agoI suspect the stuff that went into "fish sausages" is used to make surimi nowadays.
- _Microft 5y agoAbove all I find fish sticks convenient. I can take only as many as needed out of the box and put the rest back into the freezer for next time. They only take a few minutes to fry and go well with a variety of side dishes which gives flexibility. I do not even mind putting them on burgers instead of patties when I am not willing to make some (I usually cook freshly and do not like pre-made patties at all) (-> flexibility again).
- GavinMcG 5y agoSuch an improvement over fishbricks: > Birdseye developed a novel freezing technique...but when used on fish, the method created large blocks of intermingled fillets that, when pried apart, tore into “mangled, unappetizing chunks” .... The fishing industry tried selling the blocks whole, as fishbricks. These were packaged like blocks of ice cream, with the idea that a housewife could chop off however much fish she wanted that day. What a world.
- oblak 5y agoI used to like putting fish sticks in my mouth It's the only animal seafood that doesn't smell like sea silt to me.
- GuB-42 5y agoWhat are you, a gay fish?
- nostromo 5y ago> Each kilogram of fish sticks produces about 1.3 kilograms of carbon dioxide, which “rivals the climate impact of tofu,” she says. Beef, by comparison, produces over 100 times that amount of carbon dioxide per kilogram. That's fascinating. I wish they'd explain why.
- bryanlarsen 5y agoThat beef number is going to vary widely. The low end might be grass-fed beef on rotational grazing regenerative grassland fed a methane suppressing supplement versus beef raised on factory farmed corn grown on land created by burning down the rain forest.
- asdff 5y agoI thought the methane from decomposing grass was net generated whether it passed through the cow or not?
- eldenbishop 5y agoYou are correct. It's one of many sleight of hand tricks used to exaggerate the impact of beef. For some reason, certain parties don't want harm reduction policies on these issues, they want you to stop eating Beef altogether.
- barbazoo 5y agoSure you can argue about the specifics and how bad eating beef is for the environment and whether it's 10x worse or 100x worse than something else. But it's hard to argue that it's not causing an environmental problem that other foods simply wouldn't create. Monoculture, water poisoning, carbon footprint, animal cruelty, health and we haven't even considered the ethics of it yet. I get that it's part of our lifestyle but why is it so difficult to move on?
- sokoloff 5y ago
- ojhughes 5y agoAnother thing British and Americans have a different name for. We call them fish fingers. If you ask for fish sticks in the UK you will probably get the pinkish crab sticks that don’t have breadcrumbs
- Mordisquitos 5y agoIndeed. Although I'm mostly aware of the American equivalents of British terms, in this case it caught me off guard. Seeing the headline I had no idea what it was talking about, and I thought it might mean "fish sticks" as in fishing using spears! I wonder what my American counterpart might have thought if the headline used "fish fingers" instead... maybe that the article was about the unlikely evolutionary success of vertebrate fingers‽
- frosted-flakes 5y agoChicken prepared in a similar manner is called chicken fingers in the US, and at least in Canada, "fish fingers" sounds entirely natural and is not something I would even blink at. I don't even know what they're labelled as on packages; probably a mixture of both.
- ryanianian 5y agoFish fingers sounds funny to me as an American, but actually it's more consistent. Chicken fingers in the US are the same product but with chicken instead of fish.
- mr_cyborg 5y agoAs an aside, I grew up with “chicken fingers” everywhere, on restaurant menus, etc. but now I can’t think of the last time I didn’t see them called “chicken tenders” outside of one regional fast food chain where I am now. I live in a different region now so I wonder if that’s a regional thing or just an overall trend
- Steltek 5y ago
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 5y agoI think the secret sauce for fish sticks’ success is tartar sauce. By themselves fish sticks are meh, but when dipped in tarter sauce, the taste is sublime. The shape and consistency of fish sticks make it easier to dip in tartar sauce.
- twic 5y agoTomato ketchup is also pretty good - even if broadsheet journalists might dismiss it as "a bit childish": https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/dec/15/how-to-eat-fish-finger-sandwiches https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/dec/15/how-to-...
- mohaine 5y agoA 50/50 Mix of Tomato ketchup and Sriracha is IMO better than straight ketchup
- GloriousKoji 5y agoNew York semi-recently discovered korean ingredients so Gochujang and ketchup is the new hotness for the western world.
- leoc 5y agoThe extra bite from HP sauce makes it preferable to normal tomato ketchup here: the real sophisticate’s choice. ;)
- screye 5y ago> Each kilogram of fish sticks produces about 1.3 kilograms of carbon dioxide, which “rivals the climate impact of tofu,” she says. Beef, by comparison, produces over 100 times that amount of carbon dioxide per kilogram That's an u̶n̶f̶a̶i̶r̶ comparison. (apparently they did consider some of my complaints) Does it take into account the additional co2 that fishing boats emit? Esp. given that they usually use far more harmful fuels than the gas used on roads. Comparing a dish to the raw. material is unfair. Fish sticks should be compared to the environmental. impact of beef stir fry or sukiyaki or at the very least, an order of burger and fries (per kg) Then there is the fact that caloric densities vary. comparisons should be made per portion, not unit weight. co2 is also a complex topic. There is carbon that is recaptured in replanting crops. Beef also primarily produces methane, so I'm not sure if the co2 impact of beef is the proportional impact in methane or actual co2. Methane has a much shorter term. impact vs co2. Lastly, trawling has massive ecosystem destroying impacts that don't show up on co2 counters. We must also consider that in sustainability calculations. All in all, fish sticks might be sustainable, but these back of the napkin numbers are rarely representative of the complex systems that drive climate change. ____ to be fair, I love fish. They are healthier, easier to do sustainably than red meat, you need less of it to flavor food and it is easier to use 100% of it vs red meat animals. Lastly, salt water fish have straight up more flavor. (too much for some) If seafloor trawling is banned and ships are moved over to better refined petroleum products, then fishing can be quite sustainable.
- dfan 5y ago"Does it take into account the additional co2 that fishing boats emit?" Yes. "Unlike previous studies that have largely overlooked the downstream processing activities associated with Alaskan pollock, this study examined all the components of the supply chain, from fishing through the retail display case." [https://news.ucsc.edu/2020/01/mckuin-fish.html https://news.ucsc.edu/2020/01/mckuin-fish.html]
- screye 5y agoThanks for adding that, will edit it into my post.
- 5y ago
- runawaybottle 5y agoThere’s a class of adult baby food that fish sticks fall under. It’s food that’s conceptually shaped for kids but adults have no problem eating this stuff with a straight face. Wendy’s nuggets look like chicken feet. I think as we figure out how to make protein alternatives that taste like meat, we’ll see a small rise in adult baby food, things shaped like a slim jim, etc. Then we can finally fulfill our prophecy of being adults that wear children’s winter jackets and eat food that’s shaped like toys, and just really come full circle with the aging into infancy.
- GavinMcG 5y agoWhy on earth should adults care what shape their food is? The childish thing is judging adults by completely substanceless distinctions like this.
- idiotsecant 5y agoAsking why this should be the case is not particularly useful. The fact is that it is true. If you offer an average adult cereal in the shape of little ronald mcdonald faces vs. generic flakes even with identical nutritional content they will, on average, select the more 'adult appropriate' option. Marketing is a thing for a reason.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- GavinMcG 5y agoThe parent was alleging the opposite: that we are infantilizing ourselves by choosing child-oriented food shapes.
- barbazoo 5y agoI think this is only a problem in a subset of cultures, not one of "adults" in general.
- drewzero1 5y ago
- nickik 5y ago1> So you like fish sticks? 2> yes! 1> So you like to put fish sticks in your mouth? 2> yes! 1> So you are a gay fish. 2> I'm not a gay fish, I'm the voice of a generation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishsticks_(South_Park) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishsticks_(South_Park)
- davzie 5y agoSuch a great episode
- sampo 5y ago> Each kilogram of fish sticks produces about 1.3 kilograms of carbon dioxide, which “rivals the climate impact of tofu,” she says. Beef, by comparison, produces over 100 times that amount of carbon dioxide per kilogram. These estimates vary a lot from one source to another, but even then 130 kgCO2/kg is an unusually high estimate for beef. Common range, I think, is from 20 to 60. For example this estimate is 26 [1] and this is 21 for beef from dairy herd and 60 from beef herd [2]. [1] http://css.umich.edu/factsheets/carbon-footprint-factsheet http://css.umich.edu/factsheets/carbon-footprint-factsheet [2] https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local
- xyzzyz 5y agoThis also depends on what you count as carbon dioxide production. For example, cattle produce methane through gut fermentation, which is a strong greenhouse gas. However, it contributes to warming only to the extent the cattle stocks are growing. If cattle numbers are stable for some amount of time, than the methane produced by them does not contribute to new warming, as it forms closed cycle: methane decomposes to CO2 in atmosphere in a decade or two, which is then captured by grass, which is eaten by cattle. The result is a steady state of stable fraction of CO2 and CH4 in atmosphere, and no warming. What really does contribute to climate change though is emissions that come from fossils, like fuel for machines, electricity for processing and storage, and gas for artificial fertilizer. The variation in reported numbers is caused by agenda, ie whether one wants to accurately assess impact of beef production, or whether they want to paint beef as worst thing ever.
- lostlogin 5y agoCan’t you apply this logic to other things too though? We have two ICE cars for the household, and as long as that remains stable the CO2 produced will be used by the plants in our garden.
- jsight 5y agoI think that would only be the case if the plants in your garden eventually turn into biofuel.
- SeanFerree 5y agoGreat article! Love Fish Sticks!
- tsatx 5y agoHow the sausage is made: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/47/5b/d9/21b5da48190f5b/EP0307232B1.pdf https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/47/5b/d9/21b5da4... Bon appetit!
- capableweb 5y agoI'm unsure of why you shared this? Normal people are unlikely to have a plate freezer at home, which this seems to require in order to make these at home. And I'm not sure how many people keep minced fish meat around at home anyways.
- realct 5y agoTo explain that fish sticks are made from ground fish which is beaten into filet shape again? Which seems to elude many posters in this submission.
- dweekly 5y agoThis made me curious about how it was that Clarence Birdseye came to discover the fast-freeze approach that preserves flavor. The answer is surprisingly straightforward - he was a fur trader in Labrador (northern Canada) and noticed when he pulled fish out they froze immediately and were still delicious months later. So if only you could make fish as cold as northern Canada, you could make frozen fish tasty! It was from there that he designed a -45F calcium chloride based belt technique and then a -25F ammonia evaporation driven technique. https://www.loc.gov/everyday-mysteries/technology/item/who-invented-frozen-food/ https://www.loc.gov/everyday-mysteries/technology/item/who-i...
- s0rce 5y agoI like that you can still buy Birdseye brand frozen foods in the Grocery store.
- switch007 5y agoIt’s a pretty big, well known brand in the UK :)
- jfengel 5y agoNitpick: the brand is Birds Eye. After a series of mergers it's owned by Conagra, which also owns a dizzying array of brands, including Chef Boyardee and PF Chang's.
- s0rce 5y agoGood point, thanks, I figured it must be owned by some large corporation by now. At least the historical branding remains.
- nimvlaj30 5y agoSounds like he was inspired to try that by the food company of the same name
- schwartzworld 5y ago
- cheese_goddess 5y ago> In 1953, 13 companies produced 3.4 million kilograms of fish sticks. A year later, four million kilograms were produced by another 55 companies. This surge in popularity was partly due to a marketing push that stressed the convenience of the new food: “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss,” as one Birds Eye advertisement proclaimed. A dirty lie, at least when it comes to "no waste", when you consider that the skin, head and tail of the fish, or about 1/3 of its edible tissue, is thrown away as garbage, and lucky if it's made into pet food. This is the convenience and advantage of rearing entire generations on food that doesn't look like food: that they never wonder what happened to the rest of the animal. No respect for an other living thing.
- narag 5y agoIs that what it means? I take that as "you won't need to dispose of waste"...
- cheese_goddess 5y agoSure, someone else will do the dirty job for "you". Food waste as a service.
- narag 5y agoIn 1953 I seriously doubt there was so much concern about it, much less in an advertisment directed to consumers.
- cheese_goddess 5y agoNote the oxymoron in that advert: "Fresh Frozen!".
- jdminhbg 5y agoThat's not an oxymoron. It means they were frozen right away after being caught. A similar term today used especially for things like shrimp is "Individual Quick Frozen" or IQF. Shrimp are frozen on the boat that catches them.
- jonas21 5y agoAnd here I am amazed that British schoolchildren in the 70s apparently ate on proper plates with cutlery.
- bonoboTP 5y agoHow do kids eat in other places or at other times? I think kids eat from plates with cutlery in most of Europe both now and in the past. Do kids in the US use plastic cutlery and paper plates or something (and drink from red solo cups)?
- jonas21 5y agoWhen I was growing up (in the US), school lunch would typically be served on a disposable tray with a plastic spork. Similar to this: https://arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-tronc.s3.amazonaws.com/public/2AU4GMOFBBDURCMOLVT2MA6HIA.jpg https://arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-tronc.s3.amazonaws.com/publ...
- bonoboTP 5y agoInteresting, but so wasteful and hamburgers? In Hungary kids eat something like these for lunch: https://m.blog.hu/eo/eokoskodas/image/menza2.jpg https://m.blog.hu/eo/eokoskodas/image/menza2.jpg https://kep.cdn.indexvas.hu/1/0/1758/17587/175878/17587888_03d62eb411618ddad4a3c98aa70bc08d_t.jpg https://kep.cdn.indexvas.hu/1/0/1758/17587/175878/17587888_0... Far from fancy, but at least real plates and cutlery. I guess American schools are afraid kids will hurt themselves with a real fork or break a plate on each other's head and the school gets sued out of existence by the parents or something?
- wnevets 5y agoI'm convinced having to eat fish sticks as a child has caused me to hate the taste of fish as an adult.
- whitepaint 5y agoHow healthy are the fish sticks?
- supernova87a 5y agoFunny that we have certain collective nouns that don't cross meat types. -- Fish sticks -- Chicken nuggets or fingers -- Shrimp poppers And beef / pork don't seem to ever fall into those. (pork sticks?? Beef nuggets??) Maybe because beef, pork seem worthy of preserving identity as a piece of a distinguishable reputable whole parent, while fish, chicken, are sometimes almost.... um, extruded and need a noun of their own after such process?
- justinv 5y agoFwiw - in Ireland & UK, they're fish fingers, not fish sticks.
- fl0wenol 5y agoInteresting -- for the US "fingers" is reserved for breaded frozen meat that appears to be hand-formed (that is, not rectangular, but still likely machine-made at scale). Chicken fingers and fish fingers are commonly available.
- chumich1 5y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finger_steaks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finger_steaks
- BucketsMcG 5y agoWhat's a sausage if it's not an extruded pork stick?
- m463 5y ago"The fishing industry tried selling the blocks whole, as fishbricks." Now that sounds unappealing. But fishsticks were always great as a kid. I don't know why it isn't mentioned that they were good for dipping. You could dip them in tartar sauce, inferior to british fish and chips, but kids didn't mind, they were even amenable to ketchup or mayonnaise.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- lai-yin 5y agoThat fish sticks episode of South Park is so good. Can't wait to watch it with my grandkids and admire the puzzlement in their faces.
- lucioperca 5y agoFun fact, Birds eye belong to the Nomad Foods which resides in Tortola - British Virgin Island. I guess there neither there for the fish nor the weather. https://www.icij.org/investigations/paradise-papers/british-virgin-islands-corruption-scandal-threatens-its-dependable-tax-haven-reputation/ https://www.icij.org/investigations/paradise-papers/british-...