I would guess the 240 mL amount is chosen because that is the amount the laboratory used as a sample to come up with the amount of fats and sugars and what-not that is in the sample. The one cup or 8 fl oz is just the approximation. But for some reason the impression to the consumer has to be that the English units are the real units.
Jerry ________________________________ From: John M. Steele <[email protected]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 7:42:17 AM Subject: [USMA:43181] Re: true metrication is systemic 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. --- On Sun, 2/22/09, Jeremiah MacGregor <[email protected]> wrote: From: Jeremiah MacGregor <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:43180] Re: true metrication is systemic To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Date: Sunday, February 22, 2009, 2:06 AM Scott, Your answer really didn't answer the question. If I'm not mistaken, the set-up of the nutritional label is covered under a different law. The FPLA amendment would only affect contents declarations. All it would do would allow a producer to freely drop the English units of the contents declaration and leave the metric only. I have a couple of items in front of me that all have serving sizes stated in both English and metric. None are English only. On two of the items, the serving size is 1 oz/28 g. The other is 8 oz (240 mL). The funny thing is, the one with the 8 oz (240 mL) on it is a 1 liter water bottle that is labeled as 1 LITER (1 QT 1.8 FL OZ) 33.8 FL OZ. Here is a perfect example of what amending the FPLA would mean. It would mean that the double English units would be removed and the label would only read 1 LITRE or simply 1 L. Much of the extra clutter can be removed. If you have a problem with the set-up of the nutritional label, then you need to bring this up with the appropriate department. Jerry From: Scott Hudnall <[email protected]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 1:37:35 PM Subject: [USMA:43163] Re: true metrication is systemic Well, for starters, the nutritional information panel is in metric only, the serving size information is in imperial, and energy content is labeled in calories (when the value shown is actually kCal). So if you are trying to keep your fat intake to <10% of your diet ... you need to bring a calculator along to make comparisons in the grocery aisle. Product A 12 g saturated fat Serving Size: 1 cup Is this a good choice? You do the math Product B 8 g saturated fat Serving Size: 100 g Is this a good choice? Oh you betcha!
