I think you are confusing 2 issues. One is the package size which is regulated by the FPLA or at the state level (UPLR) and the nutritional information. Your link refers to the latter of the two while the OP was discussing the former.
As far as I know only 3 states at this time seem to not permit metric only labeling. I know that New Jersey is listed but I cannot find any statues or administrative codes that prohibit metric only labeling. The only reference to packaging I could find is to unit pricing. As for the FPLA, we already know the status. Phil > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Anon Anon > Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 8:07 AM > To: U.S. Metric Association > Subject: [USMA:35557] Re: Product of Germany > > --- G Stanley Doore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >That's the purpose of the metric only labeling > >legislation which the NIST has drafted for Congress > >to pass. It needs support to get rid of English > >units on labels. > > Note that the legislation only applies to container > sizes. Labels that contain metric serving sizes will > still be forbidden in most cases. See: > http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/fr05404c.html > > > >Incidentally, I liked the SI "Energy in Food and > >Drink" table which someone submitted. It was very > >meaningful. > > As I understand it, US law is based mostly on 'per > serving' but laws in the EU are based on 'per 100 g' > or 'per 100 ml'. Changes are being proposed by both > regions. Here is one example format that is being > taken seriously in Europe: > http://www.igd.com/CIR.asp?menuid=146&cirid=1756 > > > > > __________________________________________ > Yahoo! DSL - Something to write home about. > Just $16.99/mo. or less. > dsl.yahoo.com
