So you get 500 ml bottle with nutritional info shown for every 100 ml and 250ml because that's the 'serving size'. No-one has ever drunk 250ml (8 ounces) and then left the rest for later.
That's why there need to be strict rules on that. In the EU, serving sizes make sense (1 cookie or 2 slices of bread) (probably because they have to), and there always has to be the normalised by 100ml / 100g too, so you can compare even if serving sizes are lying.
Not always unfortunately. 2 examples I have in mind:
- biscuits are sometimes « individually » packaged by 4 or 6 (ie you buy a box containing 2 or 3 smaller packages inside) and the serving size is 2 biscuits. Real serving should be 1 package for it to make sense
- there’s a brand of fresh ravioli which I buy, the package makes 2 servings, but if you do that you have a ridiculously small serving. 1 package makes a normal plate
There’s no way to get a « serving » unit that makes sense. I always rely on the /100g instead
Like 1 child hand full of muesli, totally typical serving size for a breakfast. Totally legit to label the sugar with A or B then.
I just get EU labels on Import products but so far I don't get it. They all have A or B and are full of sugars, sweeteners and aroma products.
Like: The box says score A but when you check the 100g list you realize that you are eating a complete meal calorie wise as snack using a realistic serving size. With little to zero nutrition value. Why A?
Similar when checking prices, I compare the price per 100g, not the price per randomly sized package...
And it makes us even fatter
The only good thing about EU labels is that they always have precise values per 100g or 100ml, which allows accurate calorie tracking vs. US labels with ridiculous serving sizes (eg. serving size is half a cookie. Who the fuck eats half a cookie)
Yes, there's 20 servings in this package if by a serving you mean 1/5th of what you average adult eats in one sitting.
The one exception here is when a portion actually equates to a portion, eg. '80 calories per cookie'. Those are wonderful, and probably what the original motivation for that type of labeling was; tangible.
And %: say, peanuts 51g fats/100g -> ah, product is roughly 1/2 fat.
Personally I ignore "Serving size" as meaningless bs.
As for whole packaging: say 22g sugar / 100gr, and there's 350g in the package. 3.5x22 is too difficult to calculate in one's head? (roughly!)
"Per serving/portion" seems like an American quick, like "tablespoons" or "cups" as units in recipes. The EU the labeling standard is per 100g or 100ml.
> So you get 500 ml bottle with nutritional info shown for every 100 ml and 250ml because that's the 'serving size'. No-one has ever drunk 250ml (8 ounces) and then left the rest for later.
What do you mean? I do that all the time.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32...
While actually it's basically 100% sugar.
Actually I had a coworker who would in fact drink 250 ml of a 500 ml bottle and leave the rest for later, although usually he would never get around to finishing it because he drank carbonated beverages and by the time he was next thirsty they had gone flat.
The odd thing was he did this for all size bottles and cups. E.g., if I went to get lunch and he was too busy for a break then and I offered to bring something back for him no matter what sized drink I got for him he drank half.
"Servings" are just a convenient way to capture the fact that there are some cases where you're not expected to ingest the entire container: that's why a packet of mayonnaise and a jar of mayonnaise have near identical serving sizes, and same for packets of sugar vs boxes of sugar.
The serving size can be relevant (whos going to drink an entire large bottle of V8 all at one time?) but there's no reason they can't do a side-by-side comparitive thing, similar to how cereal boxes compare the stats for the cereal by itself (dry) and with milk.
Maybe nobody drinks half of a modern 500ml bottle, but people certainly used to think of less than half of that as a single serving.
It's crazy that Coca-Cola is paying restaurants to only offer their poison (no still or sparkling water). These companies are literally making us sick.
Holy sh... that would be in the US, right? Is that even legal?