Technically, you are correct, but I think only because it appears before the number, and each such item is capitalized in the nutrition label. In their explanation of the nutrition label, the FDA uses Calorie and calorie haphazardly. "In the example," they are clearly misusing it and speaking of calories, when they mean Calories. Since it follows a number, it is a (wrong) measurement and not a euphemism for the concept of heat energy.
http://www.fda.gov/Food/LabelingNutrition/ConsumerInformation/UCM078889.htm#see1 Qutoing from them (a graphic does not copy): "Calories (and Calories from Fat) Calories provide a measure of how much energy you get from a serving of this food. Many Americans consume more calories than they need without meeting recommended intakes for a number of nutrients. The calorie section of the label can help you manage your weight (i.e., gain, lose, or maintain.) Remember: the number of servings you consume determines the number of calories you actually eat (your portion amount). (#2 on sample label): In the example, there are 250 calories in one serving of this macaroni and cheese. How many calories from fat are there in ONE serving? Answer: 110 calories, which means almost half the calories in a single serving come from fat. What if you ate the whole package content? Then, you would consume two servings, or 500 calories, and 220 would come from fat. General Guide to Calories * 40 Calories is low * 100 Calories is moderate * 400 Calories or more is high The General Guide to Calories provides a general reference for calories when you look at a Nutrition Facts label. This guide is based on a 2,000 calorie diet. Eating too many calories per day is linked to overweight and obesity." ________________________________ From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> Cc: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, February 24, 2010 10:19:31 AM Subject: [USMA:46751] Re: NY Times and kilojoules Actually...the law says kilocalorie shall be used and it shall be called Calorie. Big C. Silly I think, but technically accurate. Canada uses kcal. -------- Original Message -------- >Subject: [USMA:46749] Re: NY Times and kilojoules >From: "John M. Steele" <[email protected]> >Date: Wed, February 24, 2010 3:17 am >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> > > >It seems to me that what she really had to explain was "calorie" whereas >kilojoule was almost an aside for international readers. Our food labeling >laws require that the kilocalorie shall be used and it shall be called >calorie. That is confusing. If you don't understand the unit you are >starting with, it is harder than normal to convert to kilojoules (which may >NOT be legally used here on nutrition labels). (It may be allowed as >supplemental, but not to replace mislabelled kilocalories.) > > > > ________________________________ From: Pat Naughtin <[email protected]> >To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> >Sent: Wed, February 24, 2010 3:00:24 AM >Subject: [USMA:46748] NY Times and kilojoules > >Dear All, > > >It is only a small mention in the first paragraph of the Notes but the editor >at the NY Times actually felt that they had to explain the meaning when they >used kilojoules. Here is the paragraph: > > >The term “calorie” sometimes causes confusion. Most people, when referring to >the energy content of food, use “calorie” instead of “kilocalorie” — which is >the actual unit that food energy is measured in. When I refer to 30 calories, >I am following this convention and therefore technically mean 30 kilocalories. >For metric system users, that’s about 125 kilojoules. >To see this in context go >to http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/23/stand-up-while-you-read-this > where you might be concerned about the ideas in the article. > > >Cheers, > > >Pat Naughtin >Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, that you can obtain >from http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html subscribe. >
