[TeMPOraL]

> What would you predict are the amount of people total who bought almond milk instead of semi-skimmed?

Likely a large amount of people about to or becoming obsessed with fitness, or vegan recipes. The problem here is that all those "milk alternatives" have absolutely nothing to do with milk whatsoever, they have different handling and nutritional value (or lack of it; to the detriment of innocent kids suffering their parents' obsession). For most people, using the word "milk" will pull all kinds of wrong associations from their minds' latent spaces, which they won't be able to evaluate and ignore.

[bleep_bloop]

While I understand your point that nut milk chemically isn't at all related to animal milk, I don't think that's the association that comes to mind when using a product. The association is in it's use. By calling nut or oat milk, 'milk', you're making it clear to the consumer what it should be / can be used for, which is a substitute for animal milk.

By removing the word milk, all you have achieved is confusing the consumer as to what it can be used for. Can I put it on cereal, is it safe to cook with, can it go in coffee, etc, etc.

There isn't a consumer alive who thinks almond milk came from an animal. This is obviously nothing more than industry lobbying gone wild.

[TeMPOraL]

But that's my point. Those plant-based "milks" are not milk substitutes, except in few circumstances you mention. They won't work the same when used in cooking or baking. They don't have the same nutritional value, meaning that if you use them in place of real milks in a cereal for your kid, you may be starving them on nutrients without realizing it. Etc.

For use in coffee? It's already established you can put all kinds of whiteners in it, so no need to brand another one as "milk".