Carl There is no dual labelling in Australia/NZ except for products from the US or UK.
The US ones stand out like a sore thumb because they have weird ml equivalents, i.e. not standard 500mL or 1L bottles for instance. Also US products will put their flozzies first then the ml size in brackets. Mike Perth ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carl Sorenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 12:32 PM Subject: [USMA:21804] FPLA and RE: Global warmth for U.S. after 9/11 turns to frost | | >Here is the article some have requested: | >http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-08-14-1a-cover_x.htm | > | >John | | How ironic that Bush, who probably doesn't care for the metric system, may | actually do it a big favor. The anti-American sentiment could help kill an | effort to further postpone the Europeans' 2010 deadline for importing metric | only. (By the way, I just read today that American tourism in Europe is way | down--I bet there is a correlation.) | | I had an idea for amending the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act that might be | more politically safe. The government could make a new rule that | metric-only labeling will be allowed for certain types of products if two or | three producers request it. For example, suppose that whoever makes Scope | decides that there is no point in listing fluid ounces if the bottles are 1 | L. If several companies request the exemption, then mouthwash no longer | requires dual labeling. If *U.S. companies* are requesting the changes, how | many politicians would be against it? After a few years, so many products | would be labeled in metric only that the dual labeling would seem | unnecessary, at least for volume measures. Comments? | | Is there much dual labeling in Australia? England? | | Carl | |
