You’d think that — even on the cookie aisle — a mother would think twice before tossing a bag of Scooby Snacks into her grocery cart for the kids.
You’d think that the picture of the famous cartoon dog on the package, and the words “pet food only,” would have given her a clue.
You’d think that, as she loaded the bone-shaped treats into her children’s lunch boxes, she’d realize something was amiss.
But it wasn’t until the kids got home from school and told her they didn’t like the new “choc friendly carob” treats — “yuck, they are disgusting,” they said — that she gave the package a closer look.
That’s when she finally saw they were not only labeled as dog treats but that they promoted “skin and coat health.”
“On closer inspection they are DOG treats,” Tania Toomey, of Sydney, Australia, admitted on Facebook. “It does say that it is pet food only – human friendly but not recommended!”
But she added, “BE CAREFUL the store is very disorganised … Terrible and disgraceful, not to mention dangerous!” she wrote on the store’s Facebook page.
Before we pounce too hard on grocery store management — or the stoner stock boy we imagine was behind the error — consider this.
There are Scooby Snacks for dogs AND Scooby treats for humans, not too mention some other slang applications of the term to describe — Zoinks! — certain illicit drugs.
Betty Crocker, a General Mills company, offers Scooby-Doo Fruit Flavored Snacks — for humans. They come in a box with a big picture of Scooby on the front.
Del Monte makes a version of its dog treat Snausages that goes under the name Scooby Snacks.
Confused? As a rule, if something is called Scooby Snacks (without the “doo”) it is probably a dog snack. If the full name of the dog is used — both the the “Scooby” and the “Doo” — it is likely a human snack, even if it is shaped like a bone and has a large picture of a dog on the box.
Still confused? Well, we all are, but do be careful when asking for Scooby Snacks, because the phrase can also apply to Valium, Vicodin, Quaaludes, and hash or marijuana brownies, according to Urban Dictionary.
Scooby Snacks, in the cartoon show, were consumed by dog and human alike. Some of the show’s cult members/fans are convinced they were actually (well, as “actually” as things can get in a cartoon) weed or hash brownies.
They seemed to be a common solution to many of the problems Scooby and the gang came across. They made everything work out — or at least kept Shaggy and Scooby on an even keel.
We should point out here that dog treats of any type aren’t generally harmful to children or other humans, and that until the makers of rat poisons start appropriating Scooby’s name and image, we are probably safe.
Since the story of the Sydney mom hit social media, many others have admitted to accidentally consuming the dog treats — in Australia, New Zealand and elsewhere.
A father-of-two from the northern beaches in Sydney bought the dog treats for his young boys. He told news.com.au that the dog treats were incorrectly placed in the snack aisle of his local Woolworth’s and he grabbed them quickly without looking at the packet.
Woolworths initially stated that the pet food product was only stocked in the pet food aisle.
Then, store officials admitted that a mix-up had occurred and apologized for it.
Comments from social media users indicate that Scooby-labeled snacks have created confusion among many customers and at more than a few stores.
And in their comments, as always, they’re feeling free to pass judgment.
Some social media users have defended the mother as a victim of grocery store error.
Some have pointed out the product is clearly marked as a dog treat and say the mother should have been a little more alert.
Others have inquired as to whether her children have taken to digging in the back yard or scratching behind their ears.