Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
MILWAUKEE — The nation's dietitians, food makers and retailers want you to know how many calories are in that frozen pizza you devoured last night — and they don't want you to have to go looking for it.
MILWAUKEE — The nation's dietitians, food makers and retailers want you to know how many calories are in that frozen pizza you devoured last night — and they don't want you to have to go looking for it.
I think reading ingredients is more important than reading about caloric and fat quantities.
Those large companies would never go against their own self interest. They put as much crap in their food as possible so that it will stay fresh on the shelf and still have that "good mouth" feel as well.
I think it's a pretty good idea, very sad though. Ingredients, calories, etc are on pkgs already, and now they want them "front and center" so to speak.
Some of this, if not most, comes from people who think it is the mfg's fault for selling something to be eaten in moderation. BUT some people eat too much of the product, and get fat. It's not their fault, it's the mfg's fault for putting so much of this "crap" in their food.
When will people start take'n accountabilty for their own actions and quit blaming others? If it is bad for them, don't f'n buy it!
How 'bout they put COOL and GE on the label. Then I'll be impressed.
Exactly. People don't know that foods are GE have HFCS, Palm Oil, Cottonseed Oil, Enriched Flour, or Animal Fats.
They just see a "bagel", "muffin" or "bag of chips" and assume that it is just a snack. While this assumption is the fault of the consumer, the company can put lines like "heart healthy", "farm fresh" or "all natural" because that type of advertising on packaging is not regulated.
I learned something interesting last night. Wife was at a big groc store, by the chips, and a kid comes up to her and asked if she could get her a bag of chips that were out of the kids reach. Wife said "no, you better ask you mommy/daddy first". Kid left, kid had no shoes, dirty nasty shirt, and was a "chubby little thing"(wifes words). Wife is still in that isle and sees the kid come back w/her mom(out of ear shot), she sees the kid point, and the mom gets the bag of chips. Later meets them in another isle and she said the cart was full of "crap", nothing fresh, mostly all pre-made foods you just pop in the microwave.
So wife starts pay'n attention to other families. She said she started see'n little kids, she said anywhere from about 4 to 14 yrs old, getting food to help their parents. Great, but the kids would just run, grab, and go. Never really look'n at the pkgs.
Now, in defense of the "chubby little thing", kids can/do get chubby then grow and look "average"(what ever that is anymore).
We don't know what the "real" situation was w/each family, but I know I'm gonna pay more attention next time I go shopping/people watching.
I guess my point is that maybe the bigger labels will open kids' eyes as well as adults. It sure is a different world, maybe I'm too old fashioned. We're gonna teach the kids more about food, 4-H sure has helped. Not just on cooking the food but also purchasing the "right" food(in our opinion, anyway).
Location: The other side of the Cumberland Plateau
363 posts, read 583,500 times
Reputation: 538
IMO, it makes no difference how big or how plainly-written mfg. make labels, you can't force anyone to read or heed them.
Kids will learn their eating habits by what they see at home. If mom or dad serve up fresh fruits and veggies, that's what the kids learn to eat. And vice versa with pre-made, microwaveable foods. IMO, good (or bad) eating habits start at home.
I'll put my conspiracy/ulterior motive hat on for this one.
On the surface it sounds good and noble. Major food companies coming together to put SOME useful food information on the front of the packaging to allow for more informed purchasers by consumers is probably a good thing, but we know that the companies are not being altruistic in their decision to to go down this road. Of course they're not, and I don't blame them. For one thing it will be a marketing tool...with that information on the front and the "certification" that goes along with it, there were be am implicit seal of approval that will set some products apart from others.
First, what will be the certification process that grants the rights to put the information and "approval" on the package? Who will be administering the process? Since governments are not involved (at this point) I assume it will be self-regulating/industry administered. Will ALL potential manufacturers have access to certification or will size, politics, industry concerns exclude some producers/manufacturers? Will the certification process treat all equally or will some be excluded by the process, costs, license fees, politics, etc.? Will there be policing to ensure that manufactureres do NOT place such informationand approvals on their packaging if they are NOT entitled to do so, i.e., will unapproved or false claims/information that might appear on some packaging be dealt with such that consumers can have confidence in the veracity of the information presented (think misleading claims and counterfeit packaging for example)? A benefit of this process is that it might lead other manufacturers to modify their products in a good way so that they CAN put the information on reformulated products. I can see competitive pressures arising that could benefit consumers.
How about government interests? Since this will be self-regulating, will state, local, and federal agencies decide that THEY will have to get involved in some way...under the guise of ensuring accuracy, fairness, etc.? I can just see some local agency stepping in an saying the new label information does no go far enough or is misleading, and they might be right. Pennsylvania is notorious for prohibiting label claims on dairy products because it is "unfair" to the producers that cannot MAKE those claims to be subjected to competitors' claims about the content of a certain product.
Now about what the manufacturers WILL show on the front of their products...will the displayed information be used to divert attention from what they DON'T reveal? Will they depend on the buyer to make a quick decision based upon the calories and servings emblazoned on the front of the package and not take the time to investigate further? I think that is exactly what will happen with many. Yes, it is up to the consumer to look further, but then there are some that never have and never will. I actually see no problem with this because it IS the responsibility for the consumer to make use of ALL the information available.
Does this go far enough? No, but it is a step in the right direction, especially since it is coming from within the industry itself. I just wish they would go a bit farther. I don't want it to be a program that ends up deceiving or misleading the consumer or one that gives the consumer false impressions. There is the law of unintended consequences that could come into play; we'll just have to wait to see how it shows up here. It is not a perfect plan, but maybe it will lead to something even better.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. 
It SOUNDS good...
