On Sunday 22 February 2009 07:42:17 John M. Steele wrote: > Nutrition labeling is defined under different laws and rules but also by > the FDA. > Note that the serving size MUST contain a metric reference and this is the > serving actually analyzed. It must ALSO contain a reference to "familiar > units" which may include a count. > This is a rare instance where the metric is binding and the familiar units > are rounded. Specific (and slightly wrong) rounding factors must be used, > such as 8 fl oz = 240 mL. This is wrong to the number of figures > apparently indicated, but correct to two figures. A more correct value of > 237 mL is NOT permitted, yet a more accurate conversion is REQUIRED for net > content labels.
This law needs to be changed. If the metric amount is binding, it should be outside the parentheses. And the milliliter ought to be declared a familiar unit, as it's on all the measuring cups I've seen. Food packagers should have a bit of leeway when declaring the serving size, or should be able to declare a non-integral number of servings per package. On a 1 liter bottle, I'd make the serving size 250 mL, not 240. I would say "about n servings per package" if the package contents vary. Pierre
