Lovells milky lunch bar?

Oh dear. Having returned after 3 hours, I was rather hoping this one would be wrapped up by now. It is rather reminiscent of the PantsMC game - y'know the sort of thing - no replies for aeons; conflicting clues, etc etc. Some people [no names] used to get a bit tetchy. Great fun.

[snorgle]No.
[Bob]2(No)
[Chalkos]No
[Riff]no
[Angus]No
[Zoo Keep]No
[Bob]No
[rab]Usually liquid, extreme examples can be solid (clue!)
[Chucky]No.
[Inkspot]No.
[Inkspot]It isn't normally consumed.
[Boolbar]No
[Raak]No
[Lib]No
[Inkspot]No, vegetable: grass.
[Dixy]No.
[Boolbar]No
[Chalky] Not if you're lucky. Sorry about this, I've tried to give more clues.

[Boolbar]No.
[rab]No.

Ok, you're veering off in the wrong direction here guys. Stick with types of milk.

[Raak]Any milk is possible, but cow milk is how you've most likely come across it.

Definitly a daft question when it is not consumed but is a drink.

Chalky] ...and while I'm at it...!! who's getting tetchy?

[Inkspot]No.
[Inkspot]Yes. Sorry, I see the confusion. It is a drink, a form of milk, I'm just saying you wouldn't want to drink it.
[Chalky]No.
[Raak]No.

To clarify the clarification: it is a drink in the measure that it is drinkable.

I mean, it's a laxative, so you wouldn't want to drink it...

[Ibid]No, form of cow milk that you wouldn't want to drink.

Raak]The sting of bees? No.

Ah, just looked it up. No.

[Chalky]No.
[Boolbar] YES! YES! YES!

Well done Boolbar, that was quite painful. I was actually thinking of Sour Milk. Have a line:

---

You see, I would have answered no to this question.

Sorry about that, I guess you have to set a definition of 'drink'.

[Kayl] Beestings is the watery milk that is first produced after a cow has had a calf, a fact which I only know because it was the first or last entry in one of the pages of Chambers Dictionary (Mid-Century Edition, 1953) in our house when I was growing up, and therefore was repeated in the header of the page.

Not that I was desperate to win that particular round because I have been in the chair quite recently - but my guess of 'Sour Cream' received an unequivocal thumbs down with nary a hint that I might be on the right lines. But I'm not bitter :-) We had 'milk' in a Pants game [sorry to keep banging on about Pantics] and it was definitely an ANIMAL. The bacteria that cause it to go 'off' are arguably animal aswell.

I was wondering whether the product of an animal should be defined as animal, and I decided no on the grounds that anything man-made would therefore by extension also be animal.

Butter? Lamb Chop? Surely anything 'man-made' should be classified by its material composition?

Absolutely - hence why it would be inconsistent to describe milk as animal because it's made of minerals but produced by a cow, but a CD mineral cos it's made of plastic and produced by a human.

Now your tending towards syllogism :-) We're arguing on two fronts here - firstly 'What is milk'? which we disagree on; secondly 'anything man-made should be classified by its material composition' which we agree on. I don't see the logical step from one to the other. Perhaps I'm a bit tired.