Why? I admit I cook by volume because most of my recipes are written that way. However, I have an electronic scale and when I have gotten weight-based recipes, I have cooked them that way. I'm a strong believer in "cook as written." If it doesn't turn out, I'll change it next time.
I'm still coming up the learning curve and I can't say I prefer it to cooking by volume, but it beats converting. ________________________________ From: Martin Vlietstra <vliets...@btinternet.com> To: U.S. Metric Association <usma@colostate.edu> Sent: Sun, June 12, 2011 5:40:22 PM Subject: [USMA:50592] Re: Fwd: ASDA pound campaign My wife certainly has a friend who was quite happy to weigh out 100 g of sodium chloride in a laboratory, but baulked at weighing out 100 g of sugar when cooking. ________________________________ From:owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of John Frewen-Lord Sent: 12 June 2011 16:33 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:50589] Re: Fwd: ASDA pound campaign Thanks for this kPa. And thanks for the compliments. Regarding sending my previous response only to you, that was in my haste as we were preparing to go out. This email has gone to the entire listserver, so everyone can now catch up with the entire thread. I like your idea of a book for the consumer put out by the supermarkets. It's something that is certainly needed, and while there will of course be the usual howls of protest/derision from the BWMA, I would imagine that the average consumer might just like it. My other half, even though she's a (now retired) scientist in neurology (and therefore quite used to using SI in the laboratory) still herself occasionally gets a bit confused in the shops (bear in mind that she, like me, was educated in a pre-metric school world), so I think there is a call for something on the lines you have suggested. I will certainly give it much thought - as you say, it has to be VERY consumer-friendly, but that is something that appeals to me very much, Cheers John F-L ----- Original Message ----- >From:Kilopascal >To:John Frewen-Lord ; U.S. Metric Association >Sent:Sunday, June 12, 2011 12:50 PM >Subject:Re: [USMA:50549] Re: Fwd: ASDA pound campaign > >Since you wrote a book, you may be able to work with your publisher to publish >a booklet on smart metric shopping and how to break free of the imperial >crutch. Your publisher may even know ways to get financial support to pay for >the booklet so it can be given away for free. Something that would benefit >those who insist that metric shopping is a burden and they have to spend >extra >time to figure it out. Of course there are those who are so biased against >metric that no amount of training would help, so then let them suffer. > >Instead of businesses like ASDA reverting to imperial sizes they would be >better >off in the long run in offering seminars and classes on smart metric >shopping. >Someone with your knowledge and expertise could play a vital role in >organizing >it. This whole fiasco, if played right could be the catalyst needed to >finally >finish the metrication in this industry and end dual pricing as well >as non-metric (not rounded) sizes of some remaining products. Why not work >with >ASDA, Tesco, Sainsbury and others to include a smart metric shopping guide to >their website as a help in adjusting to metric shopping? > > >I don't find a problem with 400 g because it is a rounded number, but I would >find a problem with 396 g as that is a hidden 14 ounces. I understand that a >business needs to downsize its products when it experiences huge price >increases >and can't just raise the price without causing discomfort for the consuming >public. But they should downsize to a rounded metric amount. 400 g or 450 g >would be preferable to 396 g or 454 g and 200 g instead of 227 g. This is >where >the problem with their actions lie, in going from a rounded amount to a >non-rounded amount instead of a rounded amount to a rounded amount. > >I'm surprised you didn't respond to this email via the USMA list server. You >spent a lot of time writing a lot of good stuff that would benefit other >readers >but instead only I saw it. > > > >From:John Frewen-Lord >Sent:Sunday, 2011-06-12 06:47 >To:Kilopascal >Subject:Re: [USMA:50549] Re: Fwd: ASDA pound campaign > >Hi kPa: > >I agree - the only fuss is being made by the likes of the BWMA and its >supporters, who as far as I can see make far more noise than their >ground-swell >support would merit. Many people are actually objecting to ASDA's approach - >many comments are saying that recipe books have been metric now for 30 years, >and use rounded metric quantities (e.g. 500 g of raw beef, etc). For ASDA to >then sell raw beef in 454 g packs just makes the whole process too hard. > >I agree that the strawberries are shown in metric only (which was the point of >my post in Metric Views), and I feel that ASDA are committed to the 227 g size >for a while, as they no doubt have bought about 5 billion of them and have to >use them all up. Then they will go back to the 250 g size, increasing the >price >as they do so - or even (in a bit of smart publicity) saying 250 g for the >price >of 227 g! > > >Almost all products are in rounded metric sizes on the shelves. Whether it's >cornflakes, butter, cheese (except for individually wrapped cheeses which are >in >individual sizes, still labelled in grams of course), coffee, canned stuff, >shampoo, soap, washing products, etc etc, all in rational (for the most part) >metric sizes. Some may be a bit odd - why canned tomatoes are in 400 g cans >is >anyone's guess. > >The point is that very, very little is not metric. The loose veggies etc MAY >(but by no means always) be shown dual marked (which annoys me, as I then have >to figure out which price to look at and make my assessment as to whether it's >good value or not). I have developed some rough pricing criteria, and it's >amazing how such a diversity of foods end up being similarly priced on a unit >price basis. My criteria are £2 to £4/kg - good value; £4 to £7/kg - typical >for a lot of stuff; £7 to £12/kg - more expensive meats and fish; anything >over >£12/kg - usually too expensive for us! So if I see some fish (or cheese) at >around £6/kg, I know that's very good value. And seeing prices for items >measured in pounds (or ounces) just throws that pricing assessment system off >base. > >Anyway, gotta go - we have a country-wide farm open day today, so we will be >visting a local farm. Most farmers work in metric, but I will look out for >any >non-metric bits! > >Cheers > >John F-L >----- Original Message ----- >>From:Kilopascal >>To:j...@frewston.plus.com ; U.S. Metric Association >>Sent:Sunday, June 12, 2011 4:33 AM >>Subject:[USMA:50549] Re: Fwd: ASDA pound campaign >> >>John, >> >>If you peruse the ASDA website, you would wonder what all the excitement was >>about concerning these strawberries. Every thing I saw there was only stated >>in >>metric sizes, except for their brand labeled milk: >> >>http://groceries.asda.com/asda-estore/catalog/sectionpagecontainer.jsp?departmentid=1214921923758 >> >> >>All of the unit pricing is metric, even the milk pints. >> >>Even the strawberries are shown in metric only: >> >>http://groceries.asda.com/asda-estore/catalog/sectionpagecontainer.jsp?departmentid=1214921923758 >> >> >>Anyone not aware that 227 g is half a pound would not be satisfied that the >>store reverted to imperial. If I hated the metric system I would not be >>satisfied until the metric was dropped from the website and only imperial was >>shown. That definitely is not going to happen. >> >>As far as I can see the vast majority of products shown are in rounded metric >>sizes. If British shoppers are truly confused by metric, then how is it that >>downsizing a 250 g pack of something to 227 g is going to cure them of their >>confusion when there are tens of thousands of rounded metric products that >>will >>never change? >> >>I can't speak for the UK , but here in the US we have been experiencing a >>steady >>and steep rise in food prices. I can see where a company like ASDA would try >>to >>control rising prices in fresh fruits and vegetables by down-sizing. But it >>is >>sinister to hide this behind the wishes of the ignorant to return to imperial >>by >>pretending they were granting their wish but in reality they were trying to >>prevent a loss of sales if the prices did go up instead. So they distracted >>the >>consumer with happy talk of returning to imperial. And to add insult to >>injury >>they got the BWMA and the anti-metric media to support it. >> >>Hopefully the UKMA can take advantage of this and discredit both ASDA and the >>BWMA for their deceptive actions. I wonder if any consumer protection groups >>in >>the UK would be interested bringing this issue to the public and expose >>ASDAs and the BWMAs motives. >> >> >>[USMA:50549] Re: Fwd: ASDA pound campaign >>John Frewen-Lord >>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 13:35:30 -0700 >>Thanks for this Pat. This is actually my neck of the woods (N E >>Lincolnshire) >>- I never realised we were so retarded! I have added my own comment, which >>should show up by now. >> >>Cheers >> >>John F-L >>Dear All, >> >> >> Another report of the same obfuscation, deceit, and plain straight out >>cheating from ASDA: >>http://www.thisislincolnshire.co.uk/Supermarket-sells-strawberries-pound/story-12656150-detail/story.html >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> Pat Naughtin >> Geelong , Australia >> ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1382 / Virus Database: 1513/3696 - Release Date: 06/11/11
