Calorie Counter

You are currently viewing the message boards in:

Activity-equivalent calorie labelling



  • yarwellyarwell Posts: 10,573Member Member Posts: 10,573Member Member
    RoxieDawn wrote: »
    I am curious of everyone's thoughts on this and debate the pro's and con's of doing such labeling in the UK

    If they add anything else to the packaging I won't be able to read any of it.

    Apparently 50% of survey respondent's find current labels "confusing" but I haven't seen research to say whether adding a 3rd layer of advice - nutrition label, traffic lights, exercise equivalent - would help these people or whether they are just a bit challenged in this area.

    It might nudge someone the right way, if they find "x minutes of walking" easier to relate to than "y calories" when making a choice.
  • CipherZeroCipherZero Posts: 1,373Member Member Posts: 1,373Member Member
    I would love to see "entire package" as a serving size in parallel with a sane "per serving" size.
  • andylllIandylllI Posts: 379Member Member Posts: 379Member Member
    I think the idea is a bad one. It's quite ableist. Not everyone can exercise. I think it excludes groups that can't because of physical limitations or health problems or who don't have a safe space to exercise and I think it's another example of shame based anti obesity "education."
  • yarwellyarwell Posts: 10,573Member Member Posts: 10,573Member Member
    CipherZero wrote: »
    I would love to see "entire package" as a serving size in parallel with a sane "per serving" size.

    really ? IDShot_540x540.jpg

    UK labels major in the per 100 grams nutritional data, per serving is less common and optional. EU rules :-

    "Per portion nutrition information on “back of pack”

    You may give nutrition information per portion (e.g. half a pizza) and/or per
    consumption unit (a single unit of food you might take from a packet, e.g. one biscuit
    or one chicken nugget), as long as this information is given in addition to the
    mandatory per 100g or per 100ml information.

    When you provide nutrition information per portion and/or per consumption unit as
    set out above, this information must be easily understandable by the consumer (e.g.
    “one burger”), and you must quantify the portion or consumption unit used on the
    label in close proximity to the nutrition declaration.

    You must also state the number of portions and/or consumption units contained in the
    package. EU FIC does not specify where this information should be placed on the
  • kommodevarankommodevaran Posts: 17,960Member Member Posts: 17,960Member Member
    Bad idea. Calories are burnt continously, and exercise burn is individual.

    I know people get eating disorders all the time, but this has potential to trigger lots of ED.

    As if insane "serving sizes", traffic lights and %DV wasn't enough.

    Coca Cola used the same argument, just from a little differerent perspective, just a few months ago and nobody liked it then.
  • playmadcatsplaymadcats Posts: 199Member Member Posts: 199Member Member
    For me consistent labelling would be the key, rather than how it's done. In confectionery machine at work we have three items next to each other that use the traffic light system you can just make out the calories fat and salt numbers.etc.
    What you can't make out is the per quantity written above these numbers. One is per 100g one is per pack, the other per serving (packet contains two servings). In each case people usually consume the whole item. most people don't realise.and several of workmates are picking stuff due to the calories not realising the packet is double or treble.
    On the activity scale can see the same arising. May work to a point as a rough guide, but only if everything's measured in the same way.
  • Timshel_Timshel_ Posts: 22,916Member Member Posts: 22,916Member Member
    When I was training people years back I would always break down meals to exercise. Numbers have less impact than a relaetable effort.
  • Debbie_FerrDebbie_Ferr Posts: 587Member Member Posts: 587Member Member
    It IS a creative, out-side-the-box kind of thinking. kudos for that. but it's too general. and how does a 125 lb person vs a 200 lb person translate that label info into their specific situation ?

    The problem is the average person doesn't even know how much exercise they need to do to burn off 100 calories, or how many calories they burn walking for 20 minutes, or cycling for 20 minutes !! they are totally and utterly clueless.
    I feel this is where education has failed.
    This is where there's a disconnect.

    Better yet, why not distribute widespread charts (obviously not on the food item- since it would never ever fit ) Available at stores, restaurants, online, etc

    It's quite simple:

    1- Look at your candy bar wrapper label
    ie how many calories.

    2 - look at your chart
    a chart that has body weight vs. exercise for 20 minutes.
    Find your body weight in the left hand column
    Find your exercise preference across the 1st row. (ie walk @ 3mph. run @ 5 mph. cycle @ 10 mph. swim @ 2 mph)
    See where they intersect, for the APPROX calories burned in 20 minutes !

    3- make your decisionS
    Calories in ~ Are you eating the candy bar? How many calories is it.
    Calories out ~ How many minutes will you exercise? and what's your approx calorie burn?

    after awhile, you won't have to look at the chart. you'll have your info memorized.
    (which of course is a rough estimate anyways)
    as an example, for me, 120 lbs, I burn approx 60 calories walking 20 minutes (3mph)
    I make many a decision based on that rough estimate !!

    edited April 2016
Sign In or Register to comment.