National Metric Week is Coming: Can You Help?

The logo for this year's National Metric Week

The logo for this year’s National Metric Week

Believe it or not, we actually have a National Metric Week in this country. It’s always the week in which October 10th falls (As in 10/10). This year it’s the week of October 6-12. The annual recognition of the importance of the metric system in the United States is promoted by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

From the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics

Part of its formal position on the subject of metric system adoption reads in part:

The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics supports efforts by the U.S. government to make a transition to the metric system (SI) as the nation’s primary measurement system and to reestablish the U.S. Metric Board to support and encourage the use of the metric system. However, the Council recognizes the leadership responsibility of schools to ensure that all students have experiences that enable them to measure in both the metric and the customary systems as well as to solve problems related to measurement in either system.

The second part of that statement wouldn’t be necessary if we had converted to the metric system during one of our several attempts in the past 200+ years. (And yes, there was more than the one in 1975.)

If the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics think it’s important for our children to covert to the metric system (how I read the above statement) then it must be pretty important because these are the folks who teach our children math!

As if that wasn’t enough, I located the following in of the 2013 version of the National Education Association Handbook under its “Resolutions” section:

B-57. Metric System
The National Education Association believes in the adoption of the International System of Units (SI metric system). The Association advocates that the SI system be taught at all educational levels. Page 238.

And here’s what the National Science Teachers Association has to say to say on the subject (in part):

The efficiency and effectiveness of the metric system has long been evident to scientists, engineers, and educators. Because the metric system is used in all industrial nations except the United States, it is the position of the National Science Teachers Association that the International System of Units (SI) and its language be incorporated as an integral part of the education of children at all levels of their schooling.

Metric system conversion is a Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) issue

As I’ve pondered our metric system history issues for more than a year, I’ve come to the conclusion that conversion to the metric system is fundamentally an education/STEM issue. For those of you not familiar with the STEM acronym STEM, it stands for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics.

It’s a concept I’m very familiar with since I’ve been writing about regional STEM issues for the national laboratory where I work for many years.

Students well-grounded in STEM fields are critical to our country’s future

As if the above wasn’t enough, here’s what the U.S. Department of Education has to say about STEM education in our country:

The United States has become a global leader, in large part, through the genius and hard work of its scientists, engineers and innovators. Yet today, that position is threatened as comparatively few American students pursue expertise in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)—and by an inadequate pipeline of teachers skilled in those subjects. President Obama has set a priority of increasing the number of students and teachers who are proficient in these vital fields.

Further down on the same page it states:

Only 16 percent of American high school seniors are proficient in mathematics and interested in a STEM career.

Even among those who do go on to pursue a college major in the STEM fields, only about half choose to work in a related career. The United States is falling behind internationally, ranking 25th in mathematics and 17th in science among industrialized nations. In our competitive global economy, this situation is unacceptable.

STEM job projections from the Department of Education

STEM job projections from the Department of Education

This is a pitiful situation as far as I’m concerned.

Plus, STEM Careers Pay Well

The U.S. Census reports the “Per capita money income in the past 12 months (2011 dollars” is $27,915 in our nation.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Occupational Outlook Handbook, here are the pay ranges for some STEM careers and many of them only include those for people with bachelors or masters degrees.

Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations                      $32,760 to $107,420
Architecture and Engineering Occupations                              $37,900 to $114,080
Computer and Information Technology Occupations               $46,260 to $100,660
Math Occupations                                                                     $70,960 to $99,380
Physicians and Surgeons                                                         $189,402 to $407,292

The bottom line: Resources spent learning U.S. customary units in our schools is a waste of time and our children need to be well versed in the metric system to get high-paying careers in science and medicine.

I urge you to take advantage of national metric week this year to acquaint yourself with the metric system (if you’re not already familiar with it) and set a good example for those around you. Measure using those “other” marks on your rulers for a change and take a look at the milliliter side of your clear class measuring vessels the next time to pour in your ounces and cups.

It’s really not that difficult and, in fact, no country that has converted to the metric system has wanted to go back to its old way of doing things…something to think about.

For additional Metric Week resources, visit the U.S. Metric Association’s pages and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Thanks,
Linda

Kid in a U.S. Metric System History Candy Store

[Continued from column last week on researching at the Library of Congress]

Some of my Library of Congress resources

Some of my Library of Congress resources

Since my plane didn’t leave until 6 p.m. on Monday I ended up asking for some materials on our U.S. metric system history be collected from their storage location and delivered to the Adams building so I could take a look at them.

• The library gets two deliveries a day, one in the late morning and another in the afternoon (that was going to be too late for me). My great appreciation to those folks who helped me get the materials in the morning delivery.

• When you submit the electronic request (the only way you can get materials from off-site) you get an email notifying you the request for the publication has been received, another when it has left the storage facility and another when it arrives at your specified delivery location.

When I arrived, I was thrilled to see so much material and set about going through it and noting in which of three “bins” the items should reside: not useful for my purposes, ask my library to acquire so I could spend more time with them and, finally, seek to acquire for my collection.

Metric excitement and legislative aftermath
As I went through the books, some of which were self-published in an attempt to jump on the metric adoption bandwagon back in the 1970s, one thing that struck me was the excitement the authors had over the notion that the U.S. was finally adopting the metric system.

For instance, the introduction to the book Let’s Cook it Metric by Elizabeth Read, 1975, begins with:

For the past thirty years I have worked as a dietitian or nutritionist and have been amazed and appalled at the lack of knowledge of measurements of most people. Then I realized that our standard system of measurement is really a mish-mash of archaic terms based on parts of the human body. This year, 1975, will undoubtedly be the year that Congress will pass metric legislation.

Well, she was right about the legislation passing. Too bad it was too weak to really have propelled us forward and another 30 years later we’re still buying things in pounds, yards and gallons.

Expanding my research collection
Upon arriving home, I began looking for the publications I wanted to buy and since I had done most of my primary research almost a year ago, I did a cursory search on the term “metric system” on Amazon.

Slated for publication May 27, 2014

Slated for publication May 27, 2014

To my shock, I came across a yet-to-be-published book titled: Whatever Happened to the Metric System: How America Became the Last County on Earth to Keep Its Feet. The publication date is listed as May 27, 2014 and the author is John Bemelmans Marciano.

While Amazon lists him as the author and illustrator of quite of few the children’s books in the Madeline series, he has also written Anonyponymous: The Forgotten People Behind Everyday Words  and Toponymity: An Atlas of Words.

I have a call in to his publisher since I couldn’t find any other straightforward way to contact him. I’m very interested in what prompted him to work on this subject as well as what it might contain.

How much research is too much?
While I could research on this topic endlessly, what I’m most interested in is enough and correct information to inform the script for my documentary.

Due to my communications/research background, I even have an information gathering philosophy: I don’t need to see everything that was ever produced on my subject but enough so, as new information on the subject might come to light, nothing contradicts what I’ve asserted and hopefully only supports or expands upon it.

At least that’s what I’m aiming for. You never know…

Honored and archived
I also must say that I was extremely honored on Monday when I received word that this blog will be archived by the Library of Congress. The notification read in part:

To Whom It May Concern:

The United States Library of Congress has selected your website for inclusion in the Library’s historic collection of Science Blogs. We consider your website to be an important part of this collection and the historical record.

The Library of Congress preserves the Nation’s cultural artifacts and provides enduring access to them. The Library’s traditional functions, acquiring, cataloging, preserving and serving collection materials of historical importance to the Congress and the American people to foster education and scholarship, extend to digital materials, including websites.

My many thanks to Jennifer Harbster with the Library of Congress for taking the time to submit my blog for consideration. I truly appreciated her helping me with these efforts in multiple ways.

I will continue to do everything I can to make this blog interesting and useful.

Thank you for your kind attention,

Linda

Shortchanging American Children with Our Measurement System

While over the past year I’ve looked at metric adoption from a number of angles, the thing I keep coming back to again and again is how we’re shortchanging our children. Granted, my own daughter is almost 25 years old now so my own progeny concerns me less than our children as a whole and the generations that will follow them.

Students in the Lab with metric beaker

Metric units are used internationally for science

We are doing them a huge disservice every year that we continue to use U.S. customary units (for those new to this blog, we imported imperial units and then futzed with them so they no longer align with any other country in the world) in our education system. Metric units were designed to work together in very logical ways rather than the hodgepodge of units that make up our current measures.

Right now we teach our children both U.S. customary and metric units and under the new Common Core Standards (talked about this in a previous blog) measurement standards are dropped from the curriculum once students hit sixth grade. Still, every minute our customary units are taught in school is a minute wasted and that time would be better spent on other subjects. And every minute that metric units get second billing to U.S. customary units means that we’re ill preparing our children for careers in science, medicine and any activity that will take them out of the country or deal with others internationally.

Increasingly our children will study abroad—but they won’t know the measures used almost everywhere else in the world.

In fact, our children are less likely to stay within our borders during their education than at any point in our history and, according to the U.S. Department of Education,

Over 80,000 Americans study abroad at the college or university level each academic year. The number of U.S. students going abroad has increased by about two percent annually over recent years, and this type of study opportunity is now an established part of American academic life.

Of course, the minute most of our students hit the ground in another country they face an additional hurdle beyond language and culture: lack of familiarity with the metric system that almost everyone else uses. Luckily, the metric system is easy to learn but why make our children have to learn one more thing on the fly when they shouldn’t have to.

In fact, within the first month on this project I was flying to Washington, D.C. to visit friends and begin my research when I happened to sit next to a middle-school math teacher (one of many coincidences I’ve encountered on this project but that’s another blog).

She basically said that her students didn’t think it was a good use of their time to learn the metric system because they’d never use it again. She also said her counterargument was that it was like learning a second language and it might come in handy since other people use it.

Even as early as I was in this project, I offered her the following counterargument to use instead…

Sure, you don’t need to learn the metric system if you:

  • Never plan to leave the country;
  • Don’t plan on a well-paying job in science or technology;
  • Don’t plan on a well-paying job in medicine;
  • Don’t plan on doing anything associated with international trade (including manufacturing and distribution).

Students arriving here will have difficulty learning our illogical measurement system

Not only does our metric adoption hang up our students leaving the country, it also hangs up students coming to our country to study here and they mean big economic business:

(July 13, 2013) Association of International Educators released new economic data today showing that the 764,495 international students studying across the United States supported nearly 300,000 jobs and contributed $21.8 billion to the U.S. economy in the 2011-2012 academic year. Further analysis shows that for every 7 enrolled international students, 3 U.S. jobs are created or supported by spending in the following sectors: higher education, accommodation, dining, retail, transportation, telecommunications, and health insurance. 

International students must start scratching their heads almost the minute they arrive here because they’ve never encountered a system as messed up as ours. “Wait,” I imagine them saying to themselves, “I thought this country was advanced.”

While I’m not suggesting that students wouldn’t come here to study because we don’t use the metric system, it just makes it more difficult for them than it needs to be. International tourism is also one of the reasons Hawaii has considered adoption of the metric system to make it easier for travelers to get around once they arrive. To me, that just adds one more reason to change over to the metric system.

Those with our children’s interests at the forefront will assist with metric adoption

As this movement progresses, it will very important to let parents, grandparents, guardians, etc. know the disservice we’re doing to our current and future generations by clinging to our outmoded ways. Riled parents would probably be one of the most effective ways to give this movement some momentum—but they need to understand the issue first—something I’m hoping to help with.

Let’s give our kids a break and provide them with the best system available and help prepare them for today’s world—it’s the least they deserve from us even if the switchover will take a bit of effort on our part.

Linda

If You Can’t Under”stand” the Heat, It’s Probably Celsius

Austalia's metric conversion stamp

Part of Australia’s conversation information

I really like the metric system except for one thing: Celsius. The rest of the day-to-day mental adjustments are pretty easy. A yard plus three inches is a meter, a pound is roughly a half a kilogram and I don’t go that many places that I don’t know how far away they are (plus I can read whatever dial in the car is called for). The one thing I’m having trouble wrapping my head around is the Celsius system. I haven’t talked about temperature measurements much in this blog, now is the time.

Celsius thermometer

Celsius thermometer

When I spoke to my daughter (who spent almost a year in Japan) I asked her how difficult it was to adopt the metric system since that is what’s used there (and 95 percent of the rest of the world, for that matter). She said it very easy with the exception of the temperature system. I’m starting to see what she means.

Try a phone app

A couple of weeks ago I converted my weather phone app over to Celsius and I’m still having a little trouble figuring out just how hot or cold it is outside but I’m getting better.

Under the Fahrenheit system, 32 degrees is freezing and 211 degrees is hot enough to boil water (unless you live at my altitude, in which case it boils at a lower temperature, really). Under the Celsius system (and yes, Celsius should be capitalized, since it’s named after Anders Celsius), 0 degrees is freezing and 100 degrees boils water. (It’s more complicated than that but that’s the easy version.) That’s quite a change for someone who’s grown up with the Fahrenheit system.

Anders Celsius

Anders Celsius
1701-1744

What that means to me that while I find the metric system usually more precise and easy to picture in my head, that all breaks down with temperatures for since one degree in Celsius is equal to approximately 1.8 degrees in Fahrenheit. To me that’s less precise.

Apparently, in some parts of the world (so I’ve been told) to make up somewhat for this lesser specificity, they report the temperature with decimals, as in 22.3 oC. “And where does Centigrade enter into this?,” I hear you ask. The important thing to know is that the word Celsius has pretty much supplanted the older term of Centigrade. If you’re new to all of this, learn the term Celsius and you’ll be golden.

A mnemonic device

Temperature comparisons

Temperature comparisons

A while ago I wrote a blog on the above transitional conversions and David Pearl (aka Metric Pioneer), a metric system advocate, commented with the following to help people (myself included) grasp some temperature context.

Thirty is warm;
twenty is nice;
ten is cold;
zero is ice.

Interestingly, I found the same rhyme (but in reverse order) on the Weather Channel’s site. (Of course, if you go there, it has some “cool” projects, like how to make your own thermometer. Check it out.)

Of course, I can already hear some people advocating that even if we convert our other measures over to metric, we should really hold on to our Fahrenheit units “because they’re easier.” Yeah, I’ll admit that it might be a little more work to make the adjustment but let’s just suck it up and do a full conversion so we’re no longer out of step with the rest of the world. I’m sure we’ll “warm” to it.

With all that said,  I’m willing to bet that most people with more than two I.Q. points to rub together and a little effort can learn the metric system easily—all of it.

Linda

Note: The title references the old saying “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.” It’s attributed to Harry S. Truman, former president of the United States. Seems appropriate to use it in this context.

Living La vie Mètrique: An Australian’s Take on Metric System Adoption Part II

It’s forty-one years since the metric conversion process began in Australia, and thirty years ago the Metric Conversion Board lowered their flag, produced their last report and said “Mission Accomplished.”

So what has changed? Just about everything, that’s what!

Metric_kitchen

A metric kitchen

Here’s a photo of what’s in my kitchen cupboard: a kilo of flour, a liter of vinegar, a 100 gram jar of coffee. The water bottle is 600 mL, as that size replaced the Imperial pint. You can also get 1 L and 2 L sizes for milk and other liquids. The plastic container of pasta at the back has a capacity of two liters, and that size is stamped on the base; a lot of storage containers are marked like that.

(Note: All the photos in this article, plus a few extra are available here: http://www.imgur.com/a/hYZjb at a slightly larger size)

A loaf of bread is usually 680 g, as that replaced the 1½ pound loaf, but you find other sizes. The labels on the supermarket shelves include comparison prices (in $ per kilo or $ per 100 g) to make it easy to compare prices of different-sized packets.

All of the products except the tin at the far right are labelled in metric units only. The only ounces or fluid ounces I ever see are on goods intended for the US or UK markets.

Beer is sold in 750 mL “long necks” or 375 mL “stubbies.” Wine is also in 750mL bottles, or in casks (Americans call it box wine) of two or three liters.

Metric road sign

Metric road sign

Traffic signs are all metric. Speed limits are in kilometers per hour (abbreviated km/h), distances in kilometers and  height clearances in meters. Speed limits are usually 40 or 50 km/h around built-up areas, 60 km/h on arterial roads, 80 or 100 km/h (sometimes 110) on highways.

Walking and cycle tracks have distances marked in kilometres or meters on signposts. In fact, unless the distance is meters the unit is omitted, so if you see a sign saying “City 5.3” you can correctly assume it is kilometers.

Cars have had metric nuts and bolts for years, the same as the US, and we buy gas and oil by the litre. Engine capacity is in litres and power is in kilowatts instead of horsepower.

My gas meter reads in cubic meters and my water meter clicks over a notch every time a liter flows through it. Electricity bills have always been in kilowatt-hours, and on gas bills they convert the cubic meters into the energy consumption in megajoules (MJ) where it used to be in therms. (1 therm = 100 000 BTU)

At the hardware store, what you would call a “2 by 4” and we used to call a “4 by 2” is now sometimes advertized as 100 x 50 mm and sometimes as 90 x 45 mm. Timber is sold by the metre or in lengths which are multiples of 1200 mm to match the standard 1200 x 2400 mm plywood and plasterboard. (2 x 4s are actually a bit smaller than the advertized size, the metric dimension is the finished size.)

Nails and screws are listed with descriptions like “Nails, Bullet Head, Galvanised, 75 x 3.75 mm” and you can buy them in packs of 2 kg or more if you are building something big. Wood screws and self-tapping screws are described by length in millimeters but their thickness is by gauge. Some old measures keep hanging on.

Plumbing fittings, electrical conduits, switches: all their sizes are in millimeters, but I think the British Standard Pipe Thread might outlast civilization itself. I used to install water-saving showerheads and their flow was listed as 9.5 liters per minute.

The standard ceiling height for houses is 2400 mm (7ft 10½ ins) which was dropped from 8ft to accommodate a rational metric size. A standard door is 2040 mm high, about 6ft 8in. The builders do everything in millimeters; there are no centimeters and no misplaced decimal points.

Buying an appliance? Airconditioners, heaters and stoves all do their cooking in degrees Celsius. The capacity of your refrigerator is measured in liters. It’s easy to envision an array of milk cartons that the fridge will hold when making comparisons. The capacity of a washing machine or dryer is in kilograms.

TVs (and computer monitors) are usually measured in centimeters, but you still see a lot of them advertised in inches for the screen size. The dimensions of all products, appliances, furniture, curtains, bedsheets, is always in millimeters or centimeters and their weight is in kilograms.

Paper sizes changed, too. Australia previously used the British sizes with strange names like Octavo and Foolscap, and odd ratios of height to width. Now, ISO 216 sizes are used everywhere. Standard writing paper is A4, 210 x 297 mm; two of them side by side are an A3 poster-sized sheet if you turn it through 90º, and an A4 folded in half is an A5 which is suitable for a pocket notebook.

This makes things easy for enlarging and reducing on a photocopier; you scale the original up by 41% or down to 71% to get to the next size. You see fliers, bills, newsletters, posters, catalogs, brochures; all of them based on the A-series paper size.

Weather forecasts are all metric, as is information in the news. Temperatures are in degrees Celsius, rainfall in millimeters and wave heights in meters at sea, but wind speed is in knots for shipping and km/h on land.

When they were discussing irrigation and river flows on the news a while ago, (a hot topic on a continent that is mostly desert,) we heard about megaliters and gigaliters. That’s a thousand and a million metric tons of water. A serious amount of water.

The language hasn’t changed a lot. People still use terms like footage, mileage and say “going the extra mile,” but in describing metric measurements people will say so many ‘mil’ for millimeters or milliliters, and say ‘kilos’ for kilograms. The next pub might be a few ‘kays’ down the road.

There are still a few minor problems. Clothing sizes for one. For mens’ trousers and shirts it’s just a matter of measuring the neck or waist in centimeters. For womens’ clothing there is a supposedly standard set of sizes, but no two manufacturers are alike. Also, sizes have inflated over the years, as we have become a nation with a larger waistline. (I remember seeing a cartoon of a woman telling her husband “Size twelve? No, much too big. Get me a size ten, and make sure it’s the biggest size ten they’ve got.”)

Shoe sizes are much the same. My feet are the English size 9 but I wonder, 9 what? Why can’t they just measure the length from toe to heel? That’s how they do it for the flip-flops (thongs) you wear on the beach.

You can’t get incandescent light bulbs any more, they are all compact fluorescents, so instead of bulbs being described in watts, which is a measure of the power they consume, the output is described in lumens, and I have yet to learn how many lumens my living room needs.

There are still a few Imperial holdovers: some pubs serve craft beers in pints, people still ask about the weight of new-born babies in pounds, and computer typography is 72 (and a tiny bit) points to the inch. But on the whole, metric conversion is complete. Of course, there are lots of older buildings and a lot of industrial machinery, railway track, roads, bridges and dams built in Imperial measurements which will need maintaining for a long time, but they aren’t a major problem, and everything new is in metric measurements.

We have an entire generation of adults who have grown up using metric measures, and I don’t know anyone who would want to change back. And kids at school don’t need to wonder why there are sixteen ounces to the pound, fourteen pounds to the stone, and twelve inches to the foot.

Peter Goodyear

Footnote:
You can download a copy of the Metric Conversion Board’s final report, Metrication in Australia if you click on this link: http://themetricmaven.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Metrication-in-Australia-built-2013-06-24.pdf

It’s a PDF document, fairly short, (127 pages,) but quite comprehensive in covering the background of the decision to change to metric, how the change  was accomplished and the notable successes and failures encountered on the way.

The story of how it came to be publicly available is interesting, and is documented here: http://themetricmaven.com/?p=3612

Dividing We Fall: Base 12 and Resistance to Metric System Adoption

I’m not a math person, I’m a words person. That’s one of the reasons I find the metric system so appealing—it’s easy to learn, use and divide with. However, my readers should be aware that one of the metric counter arguments that will arise is the ease with which the foot and its 12 units can be divvied up as a reason to hold onto our current (if illogical) units.

Here’s the point that will be made: The foot—consisting of 12 inches—is superior to metric system units (of 10) because 12 is divisible in so many ways. The numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12 all go into it quite easily, while base 10 units are really only easily divisible by 1,2, 5 and 10.

That’s a crap argument and here’s why:

THE FOOT IS OUR ONLY POPULAR MEASUREMENT UNIT OF WHICH THAT IS TRUE.

Frankly, if all our measurement units were based on 12, I could almost see an argument that we should stay where we are. Not the best argument, mind you, but a stronger one. However, that is far from the case. Let’s take a look at a few of our other weights and measures and see where else the number 12 comes into play.

Teaspoons in a tablespoon = 3
Cups in a quart = 4
Pints in quart = 2
Quarts in a gallon = 4
Ounces in a pound = 16
Feet in a mile = 5,280
Pounds in a ton = 2,000

Hmmm, no luck so far. While I’m not saying there isn’t possibly another U.S. customary unit that uses 12 of something, it’s probably pretty obscure.

To interject some of my extensive research, in A History of Mathematics, Carl B. Boyer and Uta C. Merzbach point out (I used brackets below to include the numbers referenced in words to make it easier to follow):

A study of several hundred tribes among the of American Indians, for example, showed that almost one-third used a decimal system [10], and about another third had adopted a quinary [5] or quinary-decimal system [think abacus]; fewer than a third had a binary [2] scheme, and those using a ternary [3] system constituted less than 1 percent of the group. The vigesimal system, with the number 20 as the base, occurred in about 10 percent of the tribes.

As the book also points out:

As Aristotle had noted long ago, the widespread use today of the decimal system is but the result of the anatomical accident that most of us are born with ten fingers and ten toes.

And, according to the book, the number 10 even takes the upper hand when it comes to language:

The modern languages of today are built almost without exception around the base 10, so that the number 13, for example, is not described as 3 and 5 and 5, but as 3 and 10.

Given that we pretty much come with our own built-in decimal system it only makes sense (to me at least) that the metric system is the system that prevails around the world.

If those points aren’t enough, allow us to consider the Romans and their numerals. They were all about units of ten as you can see from the large number of “Xs.” (See chart from http://www.roman-numerals.org/chart100.html)

As a friend pointed out, there are other things that come in twelves, such as our months and recovery programs (as in 12 steps) but these are not numbers that we need to divide so go ahead and use a dozen of something where it makes sense, just not in our measurement system please.

Thanks,

Linda

And the Winner Is: Results of the American Culture/Metric System Poll

I could write almost endlessly about how to interpret the results of the metric system and our American culture poll but while I’m not a woman of few words, I do like to cut to the chase. To be clear, I knew going in that the results of the poll would be unscientific. However, I did ask questions that could reveal information that might be useful to me moving forward with the project.

I thank all of you who took time to respond and help get the word out on the poll. I greatly appreciate what you had to say.

1) Most of the people who responded to the poll already use the metric system. (66 percent)

Current use

This did not surprise me. Most people in this country have totally lost sight of the metric system so a poll on a subject would most likely interest those who already use it. And, as I’ve observed in the past, this blog has a large international following so that was reflected in the responses. What was heartening to see was that of those who don’t currently use the metric system, a majority thought it would be easy to learn. And right they are—if one is open to learning it. I applaud their adaptability, it’s a quality much needed in today’s world.

This leads the second thing I learned/confirmed with the poll…

2) By a 2 to 1 margin, it was thought resistance to the metric system was more laziness than due to potential problems conversion itself might cause. (26 percent versus 13 percent)

Why don't we use the metric system?

Okay, I’ll admit that the word choice for the most popular suggestion was somewhat loaded. I could have phrased it more gently but I think it somewhat gets to the heart of the matter. (I’m certainly lazy in some ways.)  Plus, if people didn’t like any of the answers I supplied, they were free to write in their own through the “other” category I included with all of the questions. And, in the interest of full disclosure, since it appears readers can’t view the write-ins (first time I’ve used this poll tool), all of them are at the bottom of this post for your inspection.

The answer to the other question in the poll is somewhat more problematic.

3) Almost half who responded to the poll indicated metric adoption would need to be forced, either through federal mandate (24 percent) or removal of U.S. customary units from products sold in this country (23 percent).

What it would take to adopt

Here’s what’s problematic about this: federal mandate is a viable, real-world option but I’m not sure how the second selection could be adopted as a practical matter. Sure, the federal government could require the removal of customary units (but that would be the equivalent of federal mandate) but short of that, removal of non-metric units would have to be voluntary. Some companies would like to go in that direction—but others would likely need to be forced by consumers—to get to the 100 percent mark.  Since the second option excludes government requirement that would take quite a forceful groundswell. Could happen, but unlikely—too much work. Still, I wanted to get a sense of whether people thought that approach could work, and they think it has potential.

Those are the surface findings. You are free to consider the data yourself and comment on it. After you look at the write-ins below (and look at the full responses in my previous post), you’ll have access to all the same information I do.

Speaking of write-ins, I want to highlight one of them that shows what this movement is up against. This is verbatim except for the quotation marks:

why to change it if the old one worked good so far?

I can only hope that was a joke.

Linda

Write-ins

Question on why Americans don’t use the metric system
– American exceptionalism
– Misguided legislative priorities
– It would be really expensive to change it. (Ie. Signs, teaching, books.)
– The advantages aren’t worth upfront cost, in money and inconvenience, to switch
– Fear of change.
– It was promised that we’d be using SI within a decade, but Govt did nothing
– The change is not Something that us required to improve
– non-metric habits
– republicans
– Structure of American Government
– It hasn’t been forced on us
– All of the above
– DON’T LIKE CHANGE
– it works- we have always done it this way.
– There is no “burning platform” to change
– Fear
– US Congress would not agree, because of big business influance and pressure.
– why to change it if the old one worked good so far?
– Arrogance!
– Lack of strong leadership that understands the implications of not changing
– Lack of metric education in the schools, Americans don’t understand it is easy.
– Education was too stuck on teaching conversion factors , not how to use metric.

Question on what it would take for Americans to adopt the metric system
– Complete decimation of the economy at the same time the metric world is growing.
– Repeal all regulations relating to units of measure
– get rid of republicans
– It has to be necassary
– It’s already happening; just look at the selection at Home Depot. No rush!
– nothing I can think ot
– Stop teaching STEM classes in English units
– Economic incentives
– Heavier teaching in grade school
– Convert American football to metric

Question on current use or difficulty to learn
– I already use it (i’m a scientist)
– I’m a physicist. I use it every day. But 14,000′ peaks are better that way.
– I know it well, but it would take a while to feel comfortable.
– I use the metric system at work

Waiting for the Metric System Change of the Guard

Having written about the anti-metric system-adoption stance taken by the director of our country’s National Institute for Standards and Technology last week, it got me thinking more about the counter arguments offered during our 200+ year history on why some people are so firmly against the metric system.

As far as I know, the first formal anti-metric group in the United States was the International Institute for Preserving and Perfecting Anglo-Saxon Weights with Charles Latimer as one of its organizers.

In his book The Measure of All Things: The Seven-Year Odyssey and Hidden Error That Transformed the World, Ken Alder says of him:

Charles Latimer was a devout Christian, a successful railway engineer, and an avid pyramidologist who believed that the ‘sacred inch’ had been built into the Great Pyramid at Giza and had been transmitted across the millennia to the United States. He also had visceral contempt for atheism, the French, and metric system.

Latimer went on to write a 65-page hardcover booklet published in 1880 titled The French metric system, or The Battle of the Standards: A discussion of the comparative merits of the metric system and the standards of the great pyramid.  In it he relates his beliefs mentioned above yet also noted:

Certainly the advantage of a decimal system is of paramount importance, and there is no reason why we should not have a decimal system, deduced from our measure of inch, foot and year, or multiples of our unit, the inch. (page 13)

Fast-forward a hundred years later and a book called Metric Madness: Over 150 reasons for NOT converting to the Metric System put out by the American Institute for Weights and Measures in 1980 (the organization began in 1917) relates:

Nobody disputes the advantages of decimals. The question is not whether decimals are better. This is precisely why we have decimalized so many of our measurements so extensively which, unfortunately, so many of the decimal proponents fail to realize. (page 58)

I find it interesting that so many anti-metric folks uphold the logic of a decimal system but want to decimalize our current units or retain our system for applications such as binary units (the second quote).

Let’s take a moment to look at the currently anti-metric Wall Street Journal:

• In November it published an anti-metric article to coincide with Thanksgiving last year called: “Cooking a Poundcake in a Metric Oven Is No Easy Task

which includes the line:

“The keepers of America’s metric flame are the roughly 300 members of the U.S. Metric Association. By most measures, their efforts in recent decades have failed.”

and in

• “Measuring Metric’s Limits in the Grocery Aisle” from April of last year.

It’s lead sentence reads:

The fight to persuade Americans to ditch English units for the metric system in their everyday lives is largely lost.

Pretty much shows the paper’s slant doesn’t it?

However, the publication didn’t always take such a position and in its informative book (that’s a review so I can now quote from it)* The Wall Street Journal Guide to the Metric System, published in 1977 indicates:

The metric system is a system of measurement that is simpler and more logical than the customary of English system of measurement…However, once the adult becomes familiar with only three of four basic metric units, the entire metric system falls into place and usually becomes the preferable measurement system. (page 9)

It also praises the metric system in other sections of the publication as well including how decimal arithmetic should be easy for Americans since our currency is based on the metric system (page 12).

While I don’t anticipate the Wall Street Journal warming up to the metric system anytime soon, Carl Bialik (who wrote the grocery store article above) pointed out in a May 31, 2013 article that the Washington Bridge collapse might have been contributed to by the use of dual measurement systems in this county.  In his article “Will This Bridge Fall? It’s Hard to Say” it says simply:

Adding to the confusion, states and the federal government maintain separate databases of bridge ratings and characteristics, and these don’t always line up, for reasons including the piecemeal adoption of the metric system and data sharing that takes place only once a year.

Who knows, maybe the Wall Street Journal will eventually swing its position back to where it was forty years ago and seek to help Americans (and its own writers) embrace, understand and use the metric system as it did once. It even has the book that it can dust off towards those goals

Fingers crossed.

Linda

* The book states that no part of it may be reproduced in any form by any means without permission except for brief extracts quoted for review.

Please Help Support a New Documentary on the Kilogram

Meter built into a building for public use (Photo by Amy Young)

Meter built into a building for public use (Photo by Amy Young)

All but one unit of the metric system can be scientifically derived. For instance, anyone anywhere can currently define a meter with the right equipment. This is important because any measurement standard that relies on a physical tool (think yardstick in this country and a meterstick elsewhere) means it is vulnerable to variability based on the material it’s made from—and every material is subject to change. Such differences can come from use (some of it gets worn off, making it shorter or lighter or accumulates dirt, making it longer or heavier) or even temperature. Optimally, you want a measurement standard that never changes under any circumstances.

The international standard for the length of the meter (for instance) is 1/299,792,458 of the distance traveled by light in a vacuum in one second.

If you can measure that (and laboratories around the world can), you can define the meter without any other external reference.

The outlier within the metric system is the kilogram. By definition, a kilogram is the weight of a piece of special metal kept at the International Bureau of Weights and Measures located outside of Paris called the International Prototype of the Kilogram. (It is equal to 2.20462 lbs for those still using U.S. customary units.) Periodically kilogram standards held by metrology centers from around the world are brought together to ensure their consistency against this single cylinder of metal kept carefully preserved for that purpose.

Kilogram standard (Photo by Amy Young)

Kilogram standard (Photo by Amy Young)

Work is currently underway for the development of a scientifically derived kilogram and while it’s not quite there, it’s getting close. When that happens, the kilogram will no longer require a physical standard or be subject to environmental fluctuations. This is a good thing.

It is this history and ongoing scientific work that is the subject of a documentary called State of the Unit: The Kilogram. Amy Young, who has been working on this project for two years, needs help raising completion funds for her project and I’m asking you to help.

To learn more about the documentary, its background, the people involved and for your chance to contribute, go to http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/52746223/the-state-of-the-unit-the-kilogram-documentary-fil.

This is the sort of project that will help raise awareness of the metric system in this country (though not the direct purpose of Amy’s efforts) and for that reason, I’m putting my support behind it.

How much support? While my own project has certainly taken its fair share of my resources, I’m contributing to the project. I ask you to consider doing the same.

The Kickstarter campaign for State of the Unit ends on Friday, May 17 at 5:33pm EDT. Amy’s goal is to raise a modest $26,800 to help her complete the project that she already has spent so much of time and money on. Unless she raises the full amount, she’ll get none of it. She’s close but the deadline is looming fast.

Please consider helping her further this important work.

I thank you in advance for contributing to metric system understanding and education in whatever ways you can.

Linda

(Note: Revised on 5/12 at 8:20 p.m. to correct a typographical error.)

Pharmaceutical Prescriptions, the Metric System and Your Safety (a Guest Post)

This week’s post was written by a contact I have in Australia. He asked me about how much of a medicine dosing problem we have here (citing a previous post of mine) and I sent him some basic information. After doing some research on his own, he put together this very nice article that he’s given me permission to share with you. Please enjoy.

In the September 1902 issue of The Journal of The American Medical Association, “Meyer Bros, Druggist” writes in the Miscellany column:

…It is not necessary to collect souvenir spoons in order to find out the great discrepancy in the size of a spoon when compared to the regulation “one fluid dram” measure. Unfortunately, some of the dose glasses are as far from the mark as any teaspoon. If physicians and pharmacists will give the subject particular attention, they can educate the public up to the point of using only accurately graduated medicine glasses when taking liquid remedies.

In the next paragraph he is quoted advocating the metric system:

The Metric System a Necessity — We have pointed out, says Meyer Bros.’ Druggist, on various occasions that the metric system would be adopted by the United States Government just as soon as our commercial relations with the world at large reached that proportion which would make the adoption of the metric system a matter of necessity. It seems that our country has reached that point. The committee on coinage, weights and measures has decided to report favorably the Shafroth bill providing for the adoption of the metric system by the government of the United States.

“One fluid dram”
In the intervening 111 years how much has changed? Well, the good news is that the pharmaceutical industry switched to metric measurements in 1971, only 69 years after the Meyer Brothers recommended it.

Up until then pharmacists and doctors used U.S. customary weights and measures for recording patient’s heights and weights. For dispensing medicines they had two systems: the metric system (grams and milliliters) and a medieval system called Apothecary’s Measure in which weights were measured in grains, scruples and drams, and liquids were measured in minims, fluid drams, (the “regulation ‘one fluid dram’ measure” mentioned in the Miscellany column) fluid ounces, pints quarts and gallons. It all sounds as if it would be used at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.

What is a grain? Apparently, a grain of wheat was a standard measure of weight. (It was later standardized at 64.799 milligrams.) Twenty grains make a scruple and three scruples are a dram (also written as drachm). Finally, eight drams equal one ounce, of which twelve ounces are a pound. Simple, isn’t it? For liquids, a minim is the volume of water weighing a grain, and of course, Apothecary’s ounces, pounds, pints, quarts and gallons are not the same as the U.S. customary measures with the same names.Grain

And to make sure we know it’s all medieval, apothecary’s measures were written using Roman numerals, so gr xx meant 20 grains.

Ron Aylor, a pharmacy technician in Georgia, has put a web site together to help train pharmacy technicians, and which includes a great explanation of Apothecary’s Measure and the symbols used to write them at: http://www.gpht.org/apothecary-system.html.

This assumes that every physician actually used those arcane symbols and Roman numerals to write prescriptions and didn’t just write “grains” instead. How many mis-doses have been dispensed by pharmacists or clerks who couldn’t decipher a physician’s handwriting to tell if he wrote “1 gram” or 1 grain” on a prescription, or didn’t know if the abbreviation “1gr” was for “one grain” or “one gram”?

The only thing more difficult to understand than the Apothecary system itself is why its use persisted for so long. The British Pharmacopia converted to metric measurements in 1963 and the US Pharmacopia in1971. You can still buy medication with the active ingredients listed as grains. The generic aspirin I found for sale over the internet is one example and some non-prescription herbal remedies also have their ingredients listed in grains, probably to avoid any taint of modernity or science.

“The Metric System a Necessity”
Around 70,000 children are admitted to hospital each year in the USA because they have taken an overdose of medicine. The majority of them have sneaked into the medicine cabinet and helped themselves, but it is astonishing that 18% (about 12,600 per year) are given an overdose of medication by their parents. (Note 1)

This happens because the dosing instructions are unclear, the measurements are misread, the parents use inaccurate household teaspoons for measuring doses of medicine and the whole procedure is unfamiliar or done in a hurry because the baby is crying and the parent is distracted.

This problem has been known about and discussed for a long time. In the article quoted previously from the Journal of the AMA, Meyer Brothers make the suggestion that customers should be taught to use properly graduated measures for dispensing medicines. This simple and straightforward action has still not been implemented completely in the century since it was proposed.

Question: If you prescribed a precise dose of medication would you tell the patient to measure it with:
A) a common household implement, or
B) a special-purpose accurate measuring device?

Good news if you manufacture medicines: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says you can do either. Over-the-counter (OTC) and prescription medicines are prescribed using measures of milliliters (mL), tablespoons (tbsp) or teaspoons (tsp). A standard teaspoon holds 5 mL, a tablespoon holds 15 mL.

In practice, a teaspoon is designed as a table accessory, not as a precise measuring device for medication and can vary between 3 and 7 mL depending on the design. This is a source of error up to 40% from the prescribed dose and was noted in the column by Meyer Brothers.

In addition to the inaccuracy of the spoon there are several human errors:

•  The abbreviations tsp and tbsp maybe confused, leading to under-dosing if the customer uses teaspoons where they should use tablespoons, or overdosing if they do the reverse.

• Patients may not understand the dose size. They are prescribed a dose of 5mL but take five teaspoons when they get home.

• Patients are given a dosing cup which holds 20 or 30 mL and fill it completely thinking it is the volume of the dose.

An underdosing error reduces the effectiveness of the medication and may be as bad as not taking any medication at all, as the dose is just too small to work. An overdose from the wrong sized spoon or overfilling the measuring device can lead to major medical complications or even death.

Surveys have shown that as many as 70% of adults preparing a dose of medicine for children made one of the errors listed above. (Note 2) Patients with visual impairment, poor English-language skills or impaired abilities are obviously likely to do make these sort of errors more often than the rest of the population. It is especially important to get doses right for children as OTC medications for them are most likely to be in a liquid form to make it easy for the child to ingest.

It is vitally important that things should change, but the Food and Drug Administration has only voluntary guidelines for the design and markings of dosing devices and it is still permissible to prescribe doses of OTC medicines in teaspoons or tablespoons and not mention milliliters at all.

The Institute for Safe Medication Practices (http://www.ismp.org/) is promoting two measures to improve prescribing practices:

1) They recommend that all doses should be prescribed in metric measurements only and not in teaspoons or tablespoons.

2) They are asking pharmacists to instruct their customers in the use and cleaning of dosing devices such as cups and oral syringes, and to supply them to their customers if they are not included with the medication.

(http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/healthcare/We-need-to-go-metric-to-prevent-errors-with-oral-liquids.html)

In Britain, to enable the public to get used to metric measurements, drug manufacturers supplied 5 mL plastic spoons to be given away with each bottle of medicine. This was a great help during the changeover to metric measurement there, and would be an inexpensive and effective way to get customers used to doses in milliliters here in the US.

Some manufacturers, but not all of them, supply dosing devices with their medications. These may be simple measuring cups and spoons or more sophisticated droppers or oral syringes. It is not mandatory to supply them and FDA guidelines for their marking and instructions are only voluntary. (Note 3)

Even when a measuring device is supplied with the medicine, if it is badly designed it can be confusing to the customer. The FDA guidelines document shows examples such as the label on the package listing a dose in teaspoons only, and the accompanying dosing cup marked with:Spoons

  • a scale of teaspoon, dessert spoon and tablespoon measurements all together
  • a scale of fluid ounces and,
  • a scale of milliliters

all of which would confuse anyone. Other errors they noted included stating a half-teaspoon dose or a 2 tsp dose on the packaging but not having a corresponding graduation on the cup.

All of these errors could be eliminated by a bit of careful thought at the design stage and some usability trials with customers.

Is it too difficult for an industry that makes profits of billions of dollars each year to make a simple device for measuring medicine doses, and to make the instructions and markings easy to understand? If the pharmacy companies are slow to act—on a problem that has persisted for over a century—why shouldn’t the FDA mandate a fix the problem?

Would it be too difficult to insist that all doses are in milliliters only? It would require minor changes to labels on bottles and packages, something that costs a few cents per bottle.

A national standard for describing and measuring doses would ensure a uniform method of measuring and dispensing medicines of all types, and would lead to customers performing the same procedure to dispense the medication, no matter what brand of medicine they purchased.

What would it cost? How many anxious visits to the hospital emergency room could be avoided?

Peter Goodyear

References:

Note 1 – http://healthland.time.com/2009/08/14/70000-u-s-kids-overdose-each-year-%E2%80%94-accidentally-%E2%80%94-on-everyday-household-meds/
Note – 2 Parents’ Medication Administration Errors

Role of Dosing Instruments and Health Literacy

H. Shonna Yin, MD et al  ARCHIVES of PEDIATRIC AND ADOLESCENT  MEDICINE/VOL 164 (NO. 2), FEB 2010

Note 3 – Guidance for Industry – Dosage Delivery Devices for Orally Ingested OTC Liquid Drug Products – FDA May 2011