Sure, the form of anaphylaxis known as nut allergy is a serious - potentially deadly - business, and sufferers need to know what is safe for them to eat. However, given almost every product in the known universe contains a nut warning it has already been alleged years ago that the effect of such warnings is weak and confusing.

The Poorhouse was therefore uber-jubilant to discover that manufacturers still haven't got round to redesigning their packaging, and there existed an ultra-ridiculous, even by conventional standards, nut warning on a pack of Tesco Healthy Living Natural Bio yoghurt. The product itself sounds pretty foul, but the nut warning was crazy enough to make it an object of pure hilarity.

In case the illustration isn't clear, the phrasing is as follows:

• Recipe: No nuts.
• Ingredients: Cannot guarantee nut free
• Factory: Product made in nut free area, but nuts used elsewhere.

Really? Nuts are used "elsewhere"? Someone in the whole known universe has been known to use a nut? The Poorhouse feels safer in the knowledge that the appropriate warning has been given.

Besides, there is less than no point in splitting up the nut knowledge into three. Anaphylactic shock doesn't especially care where the nut came from, just that it was there.

If you were given a pill that listed as its ingredients:

• Recipe: No anthrax.
• Ingredients: Cannot guarantee anthrax free
• Factory: Product made in anthrax free area, but anthrax used elsewhere.

would you take it? No-one is bothered that the recipe doesn't contain nuts if the ingredients may.

The Poorhouse respectfully suggests the following wording for a more sensible, comprehendible and ink-saving alternative:

"We have no idea if this product contains nuts"