"Pete C." wrote:
>
> Mark Thorson wrote:
> >
> > If I recall correctly, canned pumpkin is not actually
> > pumpkin. It's some kind of squash, but not pumpkin.
> > They use this squash because it's tastes better or
> > it's easier to process or something.
>
> The only ingredient listed on the can is "pumpkin".

Yes, international regulatory authorities accept
the squash substitute as falling within that label
description. Just as the mushroom soup makers are
granted the liberty to call some other fungus a
"mushroom". Industry wanted these things, there
didn't seem to be any risk to letting them have
their way, the public wasn't being cheated, and
nobody opposed them. Nobody is hurt, except the
occasional crank who also opposes GMO food, etc.

And to you, crank, I say: Why do you not also
oppose large orange gourds masquerading as pumpkins
in giant pumpkin contests? Those are NOT pumpkins!
A very large pumpkin might weigh as much as 100
pounds or so. The winners in these so-called giant
pumpkin contests are far heavier than that. A pumpkin
that big would fall apart under its own weight.

I suggest the winner of such contests, in order
to claim the prize, should be required to eat
half a pound of the flesh his winning "pumpkin".