Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ProudFossil
I think they should stick to the actual quantity in a “serving” rather than some bureaucrat deciding what is the normal consumption amount.

On the current label, a "serving" is defined by "some bureaucrat deciding what is the normal consumption amount."

12 posted on 02/27/2014 3:22:42 PM PST by Conscience of a Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Conscience of a Conservative

I have to clarify my statement about some bureaucrat deciding what is normal. Now I imagine some booboo looks at the container for the product and decides what the normal consumption amount is based on that container. For example most cans of soup are listed with two servings in the can. What is being proposed is some bureaucrat who has never seen a can of soup will decide that maybe 3 ounces is what a person would normally eat of that soup, which is not dependent upon the container. That will be a disaster. We all may eat 2 pounds of peanuts at a sitting but the booboo who is allergic to peanuts will say a normal eating size is one peanut. Also if a booboo in the east has to decide how much green chile should be in a serving they might say a smidgen while here in the southwest we normally eat a whole one with our breakfast eggs. The difference is now it is based on the container, the new one is based upon assumptions made by the booboo.


18 posted on 02/27/2014 6:08:32 PM PST by ProudFossil (" I never did give anyone hell. I just told the truth and they thought it was hell." Harry Truman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson