Hello All!

I bought a can of soup labelled "Organics Organic Classical Tomato
Soup", assuming that it would be enough for two since it said "Don't add
water". However, when I came to eat it, I had to wonder what perverse
marketing logic went into the packaging since it was marked "Serving
size 1 cup" and "Servings per container about 1 1/2". Perhaps, it was so
that I would not be frightened by the sodium content.

Incidentally, it was rather good tasting tomato soup if somewhat
overpriced.


--


James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On Nov 19, 12:40*pm, "James Silverton" >
wrote:
> Hello All!
>
> I bought a can of soup labelled "Organics Organic Classical Tomato
> Soup", assuming that it would be enough for two since it said "Don't add
> water". However, when I came to eat it, I had to wonder what perverse
> marketing logic went into the packaging since it was marked "Serving
> size 1 cup" and "Servings per container about 1 1/2". Perhaps, it was so
> that I would not be frightened by the sodium content.
>
> Incidentally, it was rather good tasting tomato soup if somewhat
> overpriced.
>
> --
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> Email, with obvious alterations:
> not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

You've got THAT right - they still play the serving size game.
Just like, I think, a half gram of fat can legally be listed as zero.
Add 'em up - a lot of those 'zeros' can equal something substantial in
the fat game, if enough of that food is consumed. Consumers are
easily duped.

A half a million dollars, to me, would NOT equal broke. : ))

"James Silverton" > wrote in message
...
> Hello All!
>
> I bought a can of soup labelled "Organics Organic Classical Tomato Soup",
> assuming that it would be enough for two since it said "Don't add water".
> However, when I came to eat it, I had to wonder what perverse marketing
> logic went into the packaging since it was marked "Serving size 1 cup" and
> "Servings per container about 1 1/2". Perhaps, it was so that I would not
> be frightened by the sodium content.
>
> Incidentally, it was rather good tasting tomato soup if somewhat
> overpriced.
>
>
> --
>
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> Email, with obvious alterations:
> not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not





> According to the label, a pint of ice cream is 4 servings.

Jim

James Silverton wrote:

> Hello All!
>
> I bought a can of soup labelled "Organics Organic Classical Tomato
> Soup", assuming that it would be enough for two since it said "Don't
> add water". However, when I came to eat it, I had to wonder what
> perverse marketing logic went into the packaging since it was marked
> "Serving size 1 cup" and "Servings per container about 1 1/2".

Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many products.
That's to make it easy to compare one product with another.




Brian

--
Day 290 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project

Default wrote on 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT:

>> Hello All!
>>
>> I bought a can of soup labelled "Organics Organic Classical
>> Tomato Soup", assuming that it would be enough for two since
>> it said "Don't add water". However, when I came to eat it, I
>> had to wonder what perverse marketing logic went into the
>> packaging since it was marked "Serving size 1 cup" and
>> "Servings per container about 1 1/2".

> Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many
> products. That's to make it easy to compare one product with
> another.

That may be true but why should a can contain 1 1/2 servings?


--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

James Silverton wrote:

> Default wrote on 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT:

> > Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many
> > products. That's to make it easy to compare one product with
> > another.
>
> That may be true but why should a can contain 1 1/2 servings?

As I said, to make it standard. Then when you compare the nutritional
label of one brand of soup against another, you are comparing the same
serving size. That way you don't have a serving from one brand as one
cup, and another 1-1/4 cups.

BTW, did you know your character set is "Arabic"?




Brian

--
Day 290 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project

On Nov 19, 2:40*pm, "James Silverton" >
wrote:
> *Default *wrote *on 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT:
>
> >> Hello All!
>
> >> I bought a can of soup labelled "Organics Organic Classical
> >> Tomato Soup", assuming that it would be enough for two since
> >> it said "Don't add water". However, when I came to eat it, I
> >> had to wonder what perverse marketing logic went into the
> >> packaging since it was marked "Serving size 1 cup" and
> >> "Servings per container about 1 1/2".
> > Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many
> > products. That's to make it easy to compare one product with
> > another.
>
> That may be true but why should a can contain 1 1/2 servings?
>
> --
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

Because nobody eats HALF a can . . . or saves it for later!
Lynn in fargo

On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:40:14 -0500, "James Silverton"
> wrote:

> Default wrote on 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT:
>
>>> Hello All!
>>>
>>> I bought a can of soup labelled "Organics Organic Classical
>>> Tomato Soup", assuming that it would be enough for two since
>>> it said "Don't add water". However, when I came to eat it, I
>>> had to wonder what perverse marketing logic went into the
>>> packaging since it was marked "Serving size 1 cup" and
>>> "Servings per container about 1 1/2".
>
>> Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many
>> products. That's to make it easy to compare one product with
>> another.
>
>That may be true but why should a can contain 1 1/2 servings?

I've seen many can labels state serving size in fractions. in fact
most do... first item I pulled from my pantry, a 16.5 ounce can of
Bush's baked beans; serving size 1/2 cup or about 3.5 servings.
Actually pretty inane... how many get 3.5 servings from a can of
beans, the most I get is 2 servings, and in fact for a quick dinner I
typically eat the entire can with a couple three dawgs. Just two days
ago dinner was a 1/2 pound hunk of Hillshire kilbasa simmered in a
whole can of beans... only saving grace was that as my usual habit I
simmered the kielbasa for about a half hour and dumped that water
before adding the beans and simmering for like another hour. Amazing
how much curing salts and fat is removed thataway... tastes just fine
with the beans.

Actually it's the manufacturer who decides on serving size, based on
the FDA guidelines for calories and sodium content per serving... the
manufacture only need manipulate the fat/sodium content to adjust
serving size. And the sodium/fat intake per serving is only a
recommendation (guideline) by the FDA, but naturally the manufacturers
like to comply (good press), but they know full well that the more fat
and salt the better the product will sell, to most folks taste trumps
health, and they also know that most folks couldn't care less about
recommended serving size, most folks consume whatever is in the
can/package and/or whatever is placed in front of them. We all do
that, just depends on the product... I would never think to consume an
entire pound jar of orange marmalade in a sitting but wouldn't bat an
eye about finishing an entire one pound bar of chocolate in one fell
swoop. Few folks would consume an entire stick of butter like it was
a chocolate bar but they'd think nothing of consuming twice that
fat/cholesterol in one sitting scoffing down a rack of ribs/bucket of
KFC, etc. From how I've seen folks dig in I don't think the
recommended serving on a jar of peanut butter means squat.

In article >,
"James Silverton" > wrote:

> Default wrote on 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT:
> > Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many
> > products. That's to make it easy to compare one product with
> > another.
>
> That may be true but why should a can contain 1 1/2 servings?

Why not, Jim? One-and-one-half servings does not mean "serves
one-and-one-half persons." I think I'd look at the information and
probably open another one to serve with it. :-0)
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.me.com/barbschaller - Who Said Chickens Have Fingers?
10-30-2009

In article >,
brooklyn1 > wrote:
> simmered the kielbasa for about a half hour and dumped that water
> before adding the beans and simmering for like another hour. Amazing
> how much curing salts and fat is removed thataway... tastes just fine
> with the beans.

Why do I not believe that you're "removing" any of the salt by cooking
it for an hour with some beans? Makes no sense at all to me.

> KFC, etc. From how I've seen folks dig in I don't think the
> recommended serving on a jar of peanut butter means squat.

The recommended serving size information doesn't mean squat--right. My
guess is most people are interesting in putting on the amount of peanut
butter that they deem to be "just right." And that varies from one
individual to another. I measured out one serving of peanut butter to
see how much it is (2 tablespoons according to the jar label) and it is
twice as much as what HWSRN puts on his toast.

You're making generalizations again. LOL!
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.me.com/barbschaller - Who Said Chickens Have Fingers?
10-30-2009

Lynn from Fargo wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2:40 pm, "James Silverton" >
> wrote:
>> Default wrote on 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT:
>>
>>>> Hello All!
>>>> I bought a can of soup labelled "Organics Organic Classical
>>>> Tomato Soup", assuming that it would be enough for two since
>>>> it said "Don't add water". However, when I came to eat it, I
>>>> had to wonder what perverse marketing logic went into the
>>>> packaging since it was marked "Serving size 1 cup" and
>>>> "Servings per container about 1 1/2".
>>> Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many
>>> products. That's to make it easy to compare one product with
>>> another.
>> That may be true but why should a can contain 1 1/2 servings?
>>
>> --
>>
>> James Silverton
>> Potomac, Maryland
>>
>> Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
>
> Because nobody eats HALF a can . . . or saves it for later!
> Lynn in fargo

Ahem! I ate half of a can of soup today and saved the other half in a
Rubbermaid container for tomorrow.

Sincerely yours,
Nobody

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

Sqwertz wrote:

> On 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT, Default User wrote:
>
> > Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many
> > products. That's to make it easy to compare one product with
> > another.
>
> And they're really outdated.
>
> According to the FDA: "Serving sizes on Nutrition Facts Labels are
> loosely based on the amount of a product normally eaten in one
> sitting or reference amounts, determined from nationwide food
> consumption surveys."
>
> I'd like to know when the last time they did one of these
> "nationwide food consumption surveys".

The gubmint is trying not to encourage our fatass ways




Brian


--
Day 290 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project

On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:32:00 -0600, Melba's Jammin'
> wrote:

>In article >,
> brooklyn1 > wrote:
>> simmered the kielbasa for about a half hour and dumped that water
>> before adding the beans and simmering for like another hour. Amazing
>> how much curing salts and fat is removed thataway... tastes just fine
>> with the beans.
>
>Why do I not believe that you're "removing" any of the salt by cooking
>it for an hour with some beans? Makes no sense at all to me.

Read more carefully... there are *two* stages of simmering... the
first stage of simmering the sausage and dumping the water disposed of
the schmutz leached from the sawseege. Simmering the then purged
kilbasa with the beans removed nothing more, just melded the flavors.
>
>> KFC, etc. From how I've seen folks dig in I don't think the
>> recommended serving on a jar of peanut butter means squat.
>
>The recommended serving size information doesn't mean squat--right. My
>guess is most people are interesting in putting on the amount of peanut
>butter that they deem to be "just right." And that varies from one
>individual to another. I measured out one serving of peanut butter to
>see how much it is (2 tablespoons according to the jar label) and it is
>twice as much as what HWSRN puts on his toast.

Just one tablespoon, a very wussy eater... one Tbls of PB is a stingy
amount for two Ritz cracker sammiches.

>You're making generalizations again. LOL!

Well, how much peanut butter *one* person puts on their toast has no
bearing on how much peanut butter *most* folks consume at a sitting.
One Tbls of peanut butter is a pretty small quantity, barely a lech
and a schmeck, I don't think too many would bother dirtying a knife. I
just went to look at my measuring spoons to refresh my memory, I very
rarely use them, like once in five years to dole out the Metamucil
(and that's a rounded Tbls), 1 Tbs of PB/a grown man, yer kidding....
that's like two Reese's Pieces minis.

In article >,
brooklyn1 > wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:32:00 -0600, Melba's Jammin'
> > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > brooklyn1 > wrote:
> >> simmered the kielbasa for about a half hour and dumped that water
> >> before adding the beans and simmering for like another hour. Amazing
> >> how much curing salts and fat is removed thataway... tastes just fine
> >> with the beans.
> >
> >Why do I not believe that you're "removing" any of the salt by cooking
> >it for an hour with some beans? Makes no sense at all to me.
>
> Read more carefully...

Yes, I got that part. I don't understand why you'd cook already-cooked
meat and already-cooked beans together for another hour. All I can is
mushy beans.

> >
> >> KFC, etc. From how I've seen folks dig in I don't think the
> >> recommended serving on a jar of peanut butter means squat.
> >
> >The recommended serving size information doesn't mean squat--right. My
> >guess is most people are interesting in putting on the amount of peanut
> >butter that they deem to be "just right." And that varies from one
> >individual to another. I measured out one serving of peanut butter to
> >see how much it is (2 tablespoons according to the jar label) and it is
> >twice as much as what HWSRN puts on his toast.
>
> Just one tablespoon, a very wussy eater... one Tbls of PB is a stingy
> amount for two Ritz cracker sammiches.

Not for everyone, Sheldon.

>
> >You're making generalizations again. LOL!
>
> Well, how much peanut butter *one* person puts on their toast has no
> bearing on how much peanut butter *most* folks consume at a sitting.

How about saying "most of the people I've seen eating peanut butter"?

> One Tbls of peanut butter is a pretty small quantity, barely a lech
> and a schmeck, I don't think too many would bother dirtying a knife.

Waal, haal, you could always use your finger. :-0)

> (and that's a rounded Tbls), 1 Tbs of PB/a grown man, yer kidding....
> that's like two Reese's Pieces minis.

It actually looked like a reasonable amount to me. Enough to
generously cover a slice of toast .
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.me.com/barbschaller - Who Said Chickens Have Fingers?
10-30-2009

On Nov 19, 1:12*pm, "Default User" > wrote:
> James Silverton wrote:
> > Default *wrote *on 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT:
> > > Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many
> > > products. That's to make it easy to compare one product with
> > > another.
>
> > That may be true but why should a can contain 1 1/2 servings?
>
> As I said, to make it standard. Then when you compare the nutritional
> label of one brand of soup against another, you are comparing the same
> serving size. That way you don't have a serving from one brand as one
> cup, and another 1-1/4 cups.
>

I have to wonder about this. I often look at those labels to compare
something, and the serving sizes are NOT the same amount.

For example, soda pop - the 2 liter bottle and the 20 oz bottle both
list a serving size of 8 oz. But the can lists a serving size of one
can (12 oz). I was pleased to see that it is now accurate that one can
is a serving as most people plam to drink the whole can and don't plan
on sharing it. Duh, that's one serving, not 2.

I just checked 3 cereal boxes, and they all have different serving
sizes - 27, 33, and 59 grams. Part of that is bases on how they fill
a bowl. If you compare different cereals of teh same volume, they will
have different weights. But, the volumes were also listed with
different amounts. 3/4 cup, 1 1/4 cup, and 24 biscuits.

But I see a lot of things that list much smaller servings that what
normal people eat. So, it does make the fat, calories,and sodium look
a lot lower than what people are really consuming.

On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:18:59 -0600, Melba's Jammin'
> wrote:

>In article >,
> brooklyn1 > wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:32:00 -0600, Melba's Jammin'
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >In article >,
>> > brooklyn1 > wrote:
>> >> simmered the kielbasa for about a half hour and dumped that water
>> >> before adding the beans and simmering for like another hour. Amazing
>> >> how much curing salts and fat is removed thataway... tastes just fine
>> >> with the beans.
>> >
>> >Why do I not believe that you're "removing" any of the salt by cooking
>> >it for an hour with some beans? Makes no sense at all to me.
>>
>> Read more carefully...
>
>Yes, I got that part. I don't understand why you'd cook already-cooked
>meat and already-cooked beans together for another hour. All I can is
>mushy beans.
>

Could bake franks and beans too and not have mushy beans... I just
find simmering on the stove top easier for one or two servings. Canned
beans don't become mushy when slowly simmered. Half of that hour was
used up just bringing the beans to the simmer, reast of the time is
for the sausage to flavor the beans, otherwise ay as well cook em
separately. I suppose I could have put the heat full on and stood
there stirring, but my philosophy is that the best cooks are those who
use the least heat, not the most. Like I said, the only reason for
the first simmering in water is to remove excess salt/fat... you can
always forego that step, but I don't want all that salt and fat...
just this morning I simmered the remainder of that three pound pack to
remove the salt and fat, sliced a hunk on rye for brunch, and the
remainder is in the fridge for quick-fix meals over the next few days.
I suppose I could have frozen it instead but I already have some in
the freezer and once that package is opened it's supposed to be
consumed within a few days even if in the fridge, so being already
cooked I'm more likely to use it up than to forget it's there and then
have to toss it, plus it's more economical to cook it all once, saves
time and cleaning the pot. And once cooked it's really not a lot, I
never checked but I'd guestimate it loses about 1/3 its weight with
the simmering... some is water but a good deal is fat (I can see it
floating), and it's far less salty. I don't really care what any
individuals think, I only posted this info for those who may want to
benefit from this healthful cooking tip. This method also ensures
it's fully cooked, many who pan fry/grill sausage do not check that
it's fully cooked through... they tend to use high heat to brown the
exterior but then pull it off before the interior is cooked... I like
these products fully cooked, one never knows how they were stored
before purchase.

On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:40:14 -0500, James Silverton wrote:

> Default wrote on 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT:
>
>>> Hello All!
>>>
>>> I bought a can of soup labelled "Organics Organic Classical
>>> Tomato Soup", assuming that it would be enough for two since
>>> it said "Don't add water". However, when I came to eat it, I
>>> had to wonder what perverse marketing logic went into the
>>> packaging since it was marked "Serving size 1 cup" and
>>> "Servings per container about 1 1/2".
>
>> Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many
>> products. That's to make it easy to compare one product with
>> another.
>
> That may be true but why should a can contain 1 1/2 servings?

apparently, it's a twelve-ounce can. (you didn't say.) should all
packaging be in an even number of servings? i'm not sure i understand your
puzzlement here.

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:31:41 -0600, Sqwertz wrote:

> On 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT, Default User wrote:
>
>> Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many products.
>> That's to make it easy to compare one product with another.
>
> And they're really outdated.
>
> According to the FDA: "Serving sizes on Nutrition Facts Labels are
> loosely based on the amount of a product normally eaten in one
> sitting or reference amounts, determined from nationwide food
> consumption surveys."
>
> I'd like to know when the last time they did one of these
> "nationwide food consumption surveys".
>
> -sw

christ, if they did that now, twelve ounces would be 'one-half serving.'

your pal,
blake

On a bag of Wise potato chips:

Serving size: 1 oz.

Servings per bag: 3/4.

I actually sent the bag to Wise with a 'WTF' note.

blake wrote on Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:28:29 -0500:

>> Default wrote on 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT:
>>
>>>> Hello All!
>>>>
>>>> I bought a can of soup labelled "Organics Organic Classical
>>>> Tomato Soup", assuming that it would be enough for two
>>>> since it said "Don't add water". However, when I came to
>>>> eat it, I had to wonder what perverse marketing logic went
>>>> into the packaging since it was marked "Serving size 1 cup"
>>>> and "Servings per container about 1 1/2".
>>
>>> Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many
>>> products. That's to make it easy to compare one product with
>>> another.
>>
>> That may be true but why should a can contain 1 1/2 servings?

> apparently, it's a twelve-ounce can. (you didn't say.)
> should all packaging be in an even number of servings? i'm
> not sure i understand your puzzlement here.

What's the point of either over-eating or having a half serving left
over?

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 13:39:51 -0500, "James Silverton"
> wrote:

> blake wrote on Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:28:29 -0500:
>
>>> Default wrote on 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT:
>>>
>>>>> Hello All!
>>>>>
>>>>> I bought a can of soup labelled "Organics Organic Classical
>>>>> Tomato Soup", assuming that it would be enough for two
>>>>> since it said "Don't add water". However, when I came to
>>>>> eat it, I had to wonder what perverse marketing logic went
>>>>> into the packaging since it was marked "Serving size 1 cup"
>>>>> and "Servings per container about 1 1/2".
>>>
>>>> Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many
>>>> products. That's to make it easy to compare one product with
>>>> another.
>>>
>>> That may be true but why should a can contain 1 1/2 servings?
>
>> apparently, it's a twelve-ounce can. (you didn't say.)
>> should all packaging be in an even number of servings? i'm
>> not sure i understand your puzzlement here.
>
>What's the point of either over-eating or having a half serving left
>over?


What if it contained 1 cup and I only wanted 6 ounces? In other
words, no one size container fits everyone.
--
Susan N.

"Moral indignation is in most cases two percent moral,
48 percent indignation, and 50 percent envy."
Vittorio De Sica, Italian movie director (1901-1974)

The wrote on Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:39:04 -0500:

>> blake wrote on Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:28:29 -0500:
>>
>>>> Default wrote on 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT:
>>>>
>>>>>> Hello All!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I bought a can of soup labelled "Organics Organic
>>>>>> Classical Tomato Soup", assuming that it would be enough
>>>>>> for two since it said "Don't add water". However, when I
>>>>>> came to eat it, I had to wonder what perverse marketing
>>>>>> logic went into the packaging since it was marked
>>>>>> "Serving size 1 cup" and "Servings per container about 1
>>>>>> 1/2".
>>>>
>>>>> Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for
>>>>> many products. That's to make it easy to compare one
>>>>> product with another.
>>>>
>>>> That may be true but why should a can contain 1 1/2
>>>> servings?
>>
>>> apparently, it's a twelve-ounce can. (you didn't say.)
>>> should all packaging be in an even number of servings? i'm
>>> not sure i understand your puzzlement here.
>>
>> What's the point of either over-eating or having a half
>> serving left over?

> What if it contained 1 cup and I only wanted 6 ounces? In
> other words, no one size container fits everyone.

In general, I have long considered a standard cup to be a good serving
of soup and cans that contain 2 cups or are intended to be diluted to
that are useful. The second cup can be kept in the fridge for several
days. Discarding a few ounces or overeating is distasteful.
--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

"Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
...
> Lynn from Fargo wrote:
>> On Nov 19, 2:40 pm, "James Silverton" >
>> wrote:
>>> Default wrote on 19 Nov 2009 20:01:07 GMT:
>>>
>>>>> Hello All!
>>>>> I bought a can of soup labelled "Organics Organic Classical
>>>>> Tomato Soup", assuming that it would be enough for two since
>>>>> it said "Don't add water". However, when I came to eat it, I
>>>>> had to wonder what perverse marketing logic went into the
>>>>> packaging since it was marked "Serving size 1 cup" and
>>>>> "Servings per container about 1 1/2".
>>>> Serving sizes are standardized by the FDA in the US for many
>>>> products. That's to make it easy to compare one product with
>>>> another.
>>> That may be true but why should a can contain 1 1/2 servings?
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> James Silverton
>>> Potomac, Maryland
>>>
>>> Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
>>
>> Because nobody eats HALF a can . . . or saves it for later!
>> Lynn in fargo
>
> Ahem! I ate half of a can of soup today and saved the other half in a
> Rubbermaid container for tomorrow.
>
> Sincerely yours,
> Nobody
>
> --
> Janet Wilder
> Way-the-heck-south Texas
> Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.



Me too, Janet. As much as I love soup, there's always some of the canned
stuff left over. Yummy homemade soup, no contest. There's no such thing as
a 'serving size'

Jill