Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Nutritional declarations on average weight SKU's


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 StevieP

StevieP

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 79 posts
  • 1 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 29 August 2018 - 11:01 AM

Hello everyone, I was asked the question by one of my customers. When we pack product by average weight, the weight fluctuates, therefore, how is the nutritional declaration valid?

 

I understand legislation around average weight, and we also print on the pack nutrition's for 100g and per portion. 

 

I guess the question is, if the average weight of the pack is greater (by a few grams) than the target weight, how do the nutritional on the pack work?

 

I apologise if someone has already asked this.

 

Thanks,

 

Steve



#2 pHruit

pHruit

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,709 posts
  • 693 thanks
397
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Composing/listening to classical music, electronics, mountain biking, science, sarcasm

Posted 29 August 2018 - 12:01 PM

Hi Steve,

Are you putting two or three sets of nutritionals on, i.e. is this per 100g, per pack and per portion, or is one pack the same as one portion?

If your pack size is x grams and you're defining your portion size as x grams then surely this isn't a problem?

 

In any case, the nutritional values themselves will also almost certainly be subject to natural variation (unless you're packing something that is genuinely fully standardised), and this is acknowledged by the current regs - you may already be familiar with the guidance on it but if not then this link is worth a read: https://ec.europa.eu...ces_1212_en.pdf

As long as your pack quantities comply with Weights & Measures regs then I genuinely don't think it would be at all concerning for regulators even if you were saying "per pack" rather than (or as well as) "per portion", as the actual variation this is likely to cause is still potentially smaller than the inherent natural variation in many products. We've had various labels with "per bottle" in addition to per 100ml data checked over by Leatherhead and Trading Standards over the years, the latter directly following a discussion about the type of average fill controls in operation, and the question on per pack nutrition has never come up.

If you wanted to be extremely thorough you could do some quick calculations to reassure yourself - i.e. assuming your current nutrient values per 100g are "right", what is the effect on the values per pack for each nutrient based on pack size at both the top and bottom ends of the average fill weights, and how does this compare with the tolerances per 100g permitted in the guidance when translated into a tolerance per pack based on your pack size?



Thanked by 1 Member:

#3 StevieP

StevieP

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 79 posts
  • 1 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 30 August 2018 - 09:14 AM

Thanks for the feedback, yes, we put two sets of nutritionals on pack, 100g and per portion.

 

I agree that nutritional values are subject to natural variation.

 

For this SKU, we declare average weight, and so, working this back, for this issue we are working in the constraints of average weight, so comfortable here.

 

Thanks for the guidance in the latter part of the email.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users