On 7/4/2010 11:29 AM, Doug Weller wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 18:49:22 +0200, in rec.food.cooking, ChattyCathy
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:49:59 +0000, Steve Pope wrote:
>>
>>> This could be more B.S. but I thought it might serve as a Monday Funny:
>>>
>>> http://www.birdsontheblog.co.uk/more...from-brussels/
>>
>> Not knowing which "papers over the weekend" the blogger in the above link
>> was on about, makes it a tad difficult to know exactly which rags s(he)
>> was referring to (or what was said exactly)... But whatever they were, the
>> interpretation is pretty amusing.
>>
>> Imagine going to a supermarket and asking for "a kilo of (whole, fresh,
>> uncooked) eggs". So what do the supermarket staff do to supply *exactly* a
>> kilo of eggs to a customer? Break one (or more) of them in half, maybe?
>>
>> FWIW, here in South Africa (chicken) eggs have been "graded by weight" for
>> as long as I can remember. i.e. large eggs have to weigh a minimum of
>> X-grams *each* in order to be termed "large", extra-large eggs have to
>> weigh X-grams each, and so on. And the corresponding weight per "grade"
>> has to be printed on the labels/packaging. However, they are still sold in
>> traditional egg boxes by the half-dozen, dozen, or in egg trays of 18 or
>> 36 eggs.
>
> I have found a claim that
> "even where packages do give numbers of items, price would still be
> determined by weight."
>
> Which doesn't seem unreasonable, does it?

Except that now you have a big stack of egg cartons and every one a
different price.

> What I find a pain is that eggs labelled medium in one supermarket can be
> a very different size than eggs labelled medium in another, I think this
> has to do with free range eggs having less restrictions on labelling. Not
> very helpful when your recipe calls for medium or large eggs specifically.
>
> Doug