Hi Geoffrey This issue comes up regularly in patent drafting. I realise patents are a specialised context, but I thought you might be interested anyway. In that context, "consisting of A and B" means only A and B and nothing else. On the other hand, "comprising A and B" is used in patents to mean "including, but not limited to, A and B". Cheers, Martin Martin Puchert From: Geoffrey Marnell <geoffrey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Organization: Abelard Consulting Pty Ltd Reply-To: <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:17:17 +1100 To: <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: atw: Usage survey: the expression "consists of" Hi austechies Can I get your feedback on how you interpret the expression ³consists of² or ³consisted of². In the following example: ³Drug therapy consisted of 0.25 mg of digoxin per day and 40 mg of propranolol twice a day.² do you read that as saying that the entire therapy included just digoxin and propranolol and nothing else? Or do you read it as saying that the therapy included digoxin and propranolol and possibly something else? Don¹t worry about what might or might not be correct (whatever that means). The issue is how you interpret ³consisted of²: as giving the full set of items or a sub-set of items. Cheers Geoffrey Marnell Principal Consultant Abelard Consulting Pty Ltd P: 03 9596 3456 M: 0419 574 668 F: 03 9596 3625 W: www.abelard.com.au <http://www.abelard.com.au/>