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.
1. The information is on the package, but in many cases the quantity currently described as one serving is ridiculous. For example, who makes a bologna sandwich with 1 slice of bologna? If 11 of your buddies stopped at your place for a quick lunch, would a package of 12 slices of bologna serve all 12 of you? You know it wouldn't. So the labels are not reasonable. What's wrong with making them more reasonable?
2. For those who don't care what or how much they eat, no, larger print won't do a thing for them. But for those of us who do read labels, it would be nice to be able to actually see the numbers.
There, I answered your questions. Now answer mine -- what is the problem with 1 and 2? How does it harm anyone?
This. I bought a big individually-wrapped cookie at the local gas station a few days ago and looked at the nutritional information. There were 2.5 servings in the package. Who eats 35% of a cookie?
This. I bought a big individually-wrapped cookie at the local gas station a few days ago and looked at the nutritional information. There were 2.5 servings in the package. Who eats 35% of a cookie?
Haven't you ever heard of "leave some for another day?"
WASHINGTON — Major changes to nutrition labels on food packages became final on Friday, with calorie counts now shown in large type and portion sizes that reflect how much Americans actually eat.
It was the first significant redrawing of the nutrition information on food labels since the federal government started requiring them in the early 1990s. Those labels were based on eating habits and nutrition data from the 1970s and ’80s and before portion sizes expanded significantly. Federal health officials argued that the changes were needed to bring labels into step with the reality of the modern American diet.
Finally! It's about time we tackled the tough problems in this country?
What's next? A 970 page report on how to make military spec fruit cake?
Warning: Taking the advice from a fictional entity that can't run an efficient business, is trillions of dollars in debt, kills/cages people for no reason whatsoever may be hazardous to your health.
Slap that on the side of a box of Eggo Waffles.
I would rather enjoy my Eggo Waffle without the thought of government intrusion!
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqueg
Ever buy a bag of potato chips and learn that the nutritional info is based on a serving size of six chips? I'm pretty good at doing arithmetic in my head, but that is so absurd as to make the nutritional labeling pointless.
The more I know about the food I eat, the better.
I have to agree here......once one reads this it is easy to realize why one can't lose weight eating a whole bag of chips a few times a week.
Your bumble bee is exactly why when I respond I break out each quote......if you cannot understand a sentence, then maybe you should break out what you don't understand and then request another response.
However, you have not done that, or just do not have the ability to understand how to do that, even as easy as it is....
So what people like you do is blast an entire post (no matter the length), and just say "you're wrong" without providing anything specific (please reference your "bumble reference" for proof of what I say....
I've tried every way I know how to get you to clarify your comments, and with each attempt, it seems the water just gets more muddy...
I started this thread. I posted an example of what our government has attempted to do with regard to informing people about the contents of food packaging, later I also provided the example of similar product information requirements for new car sales in America. I think these are worthwhile efforts on the part of our government, though obviously not perfect in every regard.
You?
Others have made clear their heartburn over these efforts and/or changes that seems largely born from a lack of interest in what that information and/or packaging contains. Okay, doesn't matter to some, but clearly matters to others, right? Quite enough others for all the other reasons provided by other comments in these threads that also make just as much sense, all depending on whether education and concern about nutrition matters to you or not.
Should matter to everyone, but obviously it doesn't. That's no excuse or argument for government not to do right by the people who care.
I've tried every way I know how to get you to clarify your comments, and with each attempt, it seems the water just gets more muddy...
I started this thread. I posted an example of what our government has attempted to do with regard to informing people about the contents of food packaging, later I also provided the example of similar product information requirements for new car sales in America. I think these are worthwhile efforts on the part of our government, though obviously not perfect in every regard.
You?
Others have made clear their heartburn over these efforts and/or changes that seems largely born from a lack of interest in what that information and/or packaging contains. Okay, doesn't matter to some, but clearly matters to others, right? Quite enough others for all the other reasons provided by other comments in these threads that also make just as much sense, all depending on whether education and concern about nutrition matters to you or not.
Should matter to everyone, but obviously it doesn't. That's no excuse or argument for government not to do right by the people who care.
That's all, in a nutshell.
Thanks for proving my point.....
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.