"Sweeping changes" was not my term. It was used by the initiator of this
thread, identified as "Metric Rules Info." The initial reports did,
however, imply the increased use of non-metric units because the current
units (which are, as you say, almost exclusively metric) were "confusing."
Government recently has been very untrustworthy. I would not be surprised
if more non-metric units were sneaked in. Anti-metric forces are still
out there. USMA needs to be on the lookout for a last-minute switcheroo.
It has happened before. --Martin Morrison
============
On Thu, 27 Feb 2014, John M. Steele wrote:
In my opinion, most of the earlier press articles presented a great deal of
misinformation
(disinformation?). The FDA has their own press release on exactly what they
are proposing. There
are a pile of links at the bottom with more information. Note that the two
Federal Register notices
of proposed rule making are only draft place holders now; they will be
officially published on March
3. That starts the 90 day period for public comment.
The only "conventional measures" are the serving size which has always been and
still is dual. None
of the teaspoons of sugar the press created hoopla about are in the FDA
proposal.
Link to FDA press release:
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm387418.htm
I don't find the changes all that "sweeping;"
*The more realistic serving sizes make sense and reflect the way people eat the
product.
*The larger font for calories, line for "added sugar," and a couple of new
required essential
nutrients are changes, but are they "sweeping changes?"
