Gransnet forums

Chat

Weights on packets, jars, bottles etc

(3 Posts)
lizzypopbottle Sat 04-Feb-17 15:40:53

We buy baby spinach from Sainsburys or Morrisons and there's always a little more than the net weight stated on the package. Also, don't forget that any weighing scales (yours or theirs) can be inaccurate and all give very slightly different results. Our digital scales go haywire when the battery starts to wear out. My bathroom scales tell me something quite different compared with those at the GP surgery. When I was studying inorganic chemistry we were assigned a particular analytical balance and had to use no other because different scales have different inaccuracies. So, we might be ripped off sometimes but sometimes it works the opposite way.

shysal Sat 04-Feb-17 14:44:28

I have only been vaguely aware of the e symbol, and have to say I didn't know what it meant. I have always wondered how packs of fresh meat, for instance, can all be exactly the same weight. You are not being cynical or paranoid HurdyGurdy, just a realist like I consider myself to be.

HurdyGurdy Sat 04-Feb-17 13:56:36

I have oft been suspicious of the weights stated on the labels of food stuffs, whether that is chilled (soft cheese or meat, for example), or packets (rice), or tins (chopped tomatoes) and I have started actually weighing the contents

Not once have I received the amount stated on the packaging. It is always less.

Having looked into this, I have found that the "get out clause" is the "e" symbol on packaging, which essentially means "estimated". So manufacturers can blatantly get away with putting less in the packaging than is stated, all because of that EU approved symbol.

I had no idea about this - am I the last to know?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_sign

Am I just being paranaoid or cynical to think that the manufacturers are exploiting this "tolerance", which can be between 1.5% and 9%, depending on the product as just another way to boost their profits and short-change the consumer