Martin,  The bit in brackets is why a very small, relatively recently formed 
party called 'UKIP' came second in the most recent European elections.

 

Incidentally - I have three observations:

1) The packet of sweets (US: candy) I have here right now on my desk shows no 
information regarding calories, kJ, etc (and probablt a clever move considering 
that these sweets are encrusted in sugar!).

 

2) My bottle of Pepsi Max (Pepsi's much nicer tasting version of Coke Zero 
which proved difficult to buy otside the UK) quotes 'kJ', 'kcal' and 'Calories'.

 

3) I have bought many products which have the US 'nutrition info' labelling 
system on them with no UK sticker on over top of or beside it.  It appears that 
the rules are not strictly enforced.  For some reason the biggest carriers of 
the US label system are in health food shops (pick up a carton of protein 
drink, or the array of tablets they have etc and check the label).
 


From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [USMA:46759] Re: NY Times and kilojoules
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 22:13:17 +0000









US Congress might play silly games by calling kilocalories and calories, 
thereby adding yet more confusion to an already confused system of measure, but 
within the United Kingdom, British (and EU) law trumps US law.
 




From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
John M. Steele
Sent: 24 February 2010 20:56
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:46758] Re: NY Times and kilojoules
 


When in doubt find the law:

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr;sid=5ff8aaaa91ba97987538fc138063b16a;rgn=div5;view=text;node=21%3A2.0.1.1.2;idno=21;cc=ecfr#21:2.0.1.1.2.1.1.6

 

To the FDA, nutritional calories are obviously always kilocalories, but the 
kilo is never used, and they are fairly indifferent to big C and little c 
unless the word is in a position requiring capitalization.

 

Scrolling down to section (c) (apologies for how messy the cut & paste looks):
[quote] 
(c) The declaration of nutrition information on the label and in labeling of a 
food shall contain information about the level of the following nutrients, 
except for those nutrients whose inclusion, and the declaration of amounts, is 
voluntary as set forth in this paragraph. No nutrients or food components other 
than those listed in this paragraph as either mandatory or voluntary may be 
included within the nutrition label. Except as provided for in paragraphs (f) 
or (j) of this section, nutrient information shall be presented using the 
nutrient names specified and in the following order in the formats specified in 
paragraphs (d) or (e) of this section.

(1) “Calories, total,” “Total calories,” or “Calories”: A statement of the 
caloric content per serving, expressed to the nearest 5-calorie increment up to 
and including 50 calories, and 10-calorie increment above 50 calories, except 
that amounts less than 5 calories may be expressed as zero. Energy content per 
serving may also be expressed in kilojoule units, added in parentheses 
immediately following the statement of the caloric content.

(i) Caloric content may be calculated by the following methods. Where either 
specific or general food factors are used, the factors shall be applied to the 
actual amount (i.e., before rounding) of food components (e.g., fat, 
carbohydrate, protein, or ingredients with specific food factors) present per 
serving.

(A) Using specific Atwater factors (i. e., the Atwater method) given in Table 
13, “Energy Value of Foods—Basis and Derivation,” by A. L. Merrill and B. K. 
Watt, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Handbook No. 74 (slightly 
revised, 1973), which is incorporated by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 and is available from the Office of Nutritional 
Products, Labeling and Dietary Supplements (HFS–800), Center for Food Safety 
and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., 
College Park, MD 20740, or may be inspected at the National Archives and 
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this 
material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go to: 
http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
 ;

(B) Using the general factors of 4, 4, and 9 calories per gram for protein, 
total carbohydrate, and total fat, respectively, as described in USDA Handbook 
No. 74 (slightly revised 1973) pp. 9–11, which is incorporated by reference in 
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 (the availability of this 
incorporation by reference is given in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A) of this section);

(C) Using the general factors of 4, 4, and 9 calories per gram for protein, 
total carbohydrate less the amount of insoluble dietary fiber, and total fat, 
respectively, as described in USDA Handbook No. 74 (slightly revised 1973) pp. 
9–11, which is incorporated by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 
1 CFR part 51 (the availability of this incorporation by reference is given in 
paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A) of this section;

(D) Using data for specific food factors for particular foods or ingredients 
approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and provided in parts 172 or 
184 of this chapter, or by other means, as appropriate; or

(E) Using bomb calorimetry data subtracting 1.25 calories per gram protein to 
correct for incomplete digestibility, as described in USDA Handbook No. 74 
(slightly revised 1973) p. 10, which is incorporated by reference in accordance 
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 (the availability of this incorporation 
by reference is given in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A) of this section).[endquote]

 

So they can be called Calories; Calories, total; or Total calories with 
complete indifference.  Based on the methods allowed and the values of 4, 4, 
and 9 "calories" per gram for protein, carbohydrate and fat, these are 
obviously kilocalories, but the kilo prefix or kcal is NOT permitted.  A 
parenthetical value in kilojoules is permitted but the Calories are required.

 

Scrolling through the law, there are many references to calories (lower case) 
when Calories are meant and the word is not in a position requiring 
capitalization.

 

Perhaps if we pick at them enough about calories, Calories, kilocalories and 
their utter confusion about same, kilojoules would start to look better to 
them.  They are wrong, but they are the government.  If they instruct everyone 
that this wrong manner must be used, everyone must do it (or sue).


 




From: Martin Vlietstra <[email protected]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
Sent: Wed, February 24, 2010 2:21:43 PM
Subject: [USMA:46756] Re: NY Times and kilojoules

You might well run into problems if you tried to export that food to the United 
Kingdom - I don’t think that the argument that it says “Calories” rather than 
“calories”  would convince many people here.
 




From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
[email protected]
Sent: 24 February 2010 15:20
To: U.S. Metric Association
Cc: U.S. Metric Association
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.
                                          
_________________________________________________________________
Do you have a story that started on Hotmail? Tell us now
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/

Reply via email to