Many of them are now 1.5 quarts. Same price, of course.
Carleton From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of John Woelflein Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 16:57 To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:43093] Re: consumer education on the metric system Reminds me: when did the dairy industry broadcast the change in ice cream products' size, from a half-gallon container to 1.75 quarts? Grrrrrrrrr. On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 4:21 PM, STANLEY DOORE <stan.do...@verizon.net> wrote: McDonald's restaurant is moving in the right direction. On its new table top flip device telling about its history and food quality, except for calories, metric was used throughout (g & mg etc). Only totals were listed in both oz and grams. It's a major step toward the SI. Stan Doore ----- Original Message ----- From: Victor Jockin <mailto:vjoc...@hotmail.com> To: U.S. <mailto:usma@colostate.edu> Metric Association Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 1:32 PM Subject: [USMA:43086] Re: consumer education on the metric system Very well put and absolutely correct. The only area in which I slightly disagree is your assumption that FMI actually believes those things. It is a fully disingenuous attempt to avoid the possibility of some trivial one-time costs. From: Phil <mailto:pcchern...@gmail.com> Chernack Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 10:17 AM To: U.S. Metric Association <mailto:usma@colostate.edu> Cc: U.S. Metric Association <mailto:usma@colostate.edu> Subject: [USMA:43085] Re: consumer education on the metric system Well, I pose this one: Does the avarage consumer know and understand the differences and relationships between ounces, pints, quarts and gallons? Many times I see unit pricing in quarts but the items being sold have no mention of quarts on them. They are either fl oz, mL or L. It seems to me to be very disingenuous on the part of the food marketing industry to "claim" most consumers don't understand metric or rather, understand customary units better all the while they are changing package sizes to non-standard sizes and putting only fl oz rather than expressing rounded up units such as quarts or gallons. Meantime, the unit pricing does not reflect these. You know as well as I that most consumers don't even pay attention to the units on the package to begin with. They buy by size--that is small, medium, large. How many people have been hoodwinked into thinking they are buying a half-gallon carton of something when it really contains less. The package size is a little smaller but it "looks" like a half-gallon. As for the space argument that rationally sized metric products won't fit into the current racks, refridgerators or shelves is a specious one at best. I have seen plenty of rationally-sized metric products in the supermarkets from soda and juice to cleaners and they fit fine. One other note, the FMI refers to the "metric experiment" I have news for them: it's no experiment. As many here can point out, many industries have converted to metric or work in metric with no issues and have made the deliberate decision to do so. What we have is a long, slow, painful inevability that could be made quicker and less painful. Phil On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Paul Trusten <trus...@grandecom.net> wrote: FMI claims that the American public does not understand the metric system and is not demanding metric products. I think there is some truth to this claim. Although the U.S. public has taken to metric soft drinks (and hard drinks, too) , it remains to be seen if the average U.S. shopper understands, upon inspection, how, for example, a 1 L bottle relates to a 500 mL bottle or a 750 mL bottle. Now, you and I on this list laugh at such a statement, because we have made this understanding of metric units as instinctive as cents relate to dollars. But FMI is talking about the average consumer who, under the FPLA amendment, suddenly will be faced with labeling, shelf tags, and advertising in metric units only, and will have to make a purchase based upon metric-only labeling. Its point that numerous questions will be handed to store personnel is a valid one (I speak here from personal experience as a retail pharmacist over the years, when any consumer-product issue comes up from behind and taps the public on the shoulder) . We must face the fact that Americans are generally not taught or oriented to using, and comparing, metric units. Buying a 2 L bottle of Coke is one thing, but really processing that measurement information is another. Does the average shopper know that 2 L = 2000 mL, and can (s)he yet quickly and easily relate a 2 L bottle to a 250 mL bottle? I don't think so. I say we need to work to change that. We who extol the advantages of metric need to educate our fellow Americans on features, and the virtues the metric system. This just isn't common knowledge yet in America. Developing a plan for consumer metric education is going to be a top priority for me at USMA in the coming months. We can accomplish two things with mass consumer education: to reduce any possible public confusion over metric units, and also to sell the decimal advantage of metric. Paul Trusten, R.Ph. Public Relations Director U.S. Metric Association, Inc. www.metric.org <http://www.metric.org/> 3609 Caldera Blvd. Apt. 122 Midland TX 79707-2872 US +1(432)528-7724 trus...@grandecom.net
