Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Nutrition Labels and Hidden Sugars
JaneSnowe
Posts: 1,283 Member
in Debate Club
There's been some discussions in other threads about added and hidden sugars in foods so I thought we could use a thread specifically for this topic.
Here's the question: Is sugar ever actually hidden in food?
I'd love to hear viewpoints from both sides.
Here's the question: Is sugar ever actually hidden in food?
I'd love to hear viewpoints from both sides.
0
Replies
-
Hidden? No. Unknown to some folks, and unknown for some foods, perhaps. My local mexican joint recently swapped lard for HFCS. Do most patrons know that the sugar content of the tortilla probably doubled or tripled? Probably not. Do they know that the glycemic load of their tortilla probably doubled? I doubt it.
I think "hidden" is the wrong word. Added sugar. That said, I'll be curious to see MFP posts when the label thing launches. I predict some folks WILL be surprised about the added sugar content of some foods. Who know though.4 -
I think about it from a logical perspective. For instance, there are some foods like ketchup that at one point I didn't think of as having added sugar, but yet it's there. I would consider it "hidden" in that sense. Whereas, it's common knowledge that a normal cookie contains added sugar.4
-
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Hidden? No. Unknown to some folks, and unknown for some foods, perhaps. My local mexican joint recently swapped lard for HFCS. Do most patrons know that the sugar content of the tortilla probably doubled or tripled? Probably not. Do they know that the glycemic load of their tortilla probably doubled? I doubt it.
I think "hidden" is the wrong word. Added sugar. That said, I'll be curious to see MFP posts when the label thing launches. I predict some folks WILL be surprised about the added sugar content of some foods. Who know though.
Good point. I was thinking more in terms of food that comes with a nutrition label. But that's interesting that they'd swap lard for HFCS.0 -
I agree with Sabine. The sugar isn't hidden. You just have to know what to look for in the ingredients list.4
-
Yeah, I'm seeing it more and more in tortillas.Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Hidden? No. Unknown to some folks, and unknown for some foods, perhaps. My local mexican joint recently swapped lard for HFCS. Do most patrons know that the sugar content of the tortilla probably doubled or tripled? Probably not. Do they know that the glycemic load of their tortilla probably doubled? I doubt it.
I think "hidden" is the wrong word. Added sugar. That said, I'll be curious to see MFP posts when the label thing launches. I predict some folks WILL be surprised about the added sugar content of some foods. Who know though.
Good point. I was thinking more in terms of food that comes with a nutrition label. But that's interesting that they'd swap lard for HFCS.
But yeah, good point about foods with and without nutrition labels.
1 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
Yeah, I'm seeing it more and more in tortillas.Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Hidden? No. Unknown to some folks, and unknown for some foods, perhaps. My local mexican joint recently swapped lard for HFCS. Do most patrons know that the sugar content of the tortilla probably doubled or tripled? Probably not. Do they know that the glycemic load of their tortilla probably doubled? I doubt it.
I think "hidden" is the wrong word. Added sugar. That said, I'll be curious to see MFP posts when the label thing launches. I predict some folks WILL be surprised about the added sugar content of some foods. Who know though.
Good point. I was thinking more in terms of food that comes with a nutrition label. But that's interesting that they'd swap lard for HFCS.
But yeah, good point about foods with and without nutrition labels.
I definitely wouldn't expect it in freshly made tortillas at a local Mexican restaurant, having made them myself and having watched others make them. Can you notice a difference in the flavor since the switch?0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
Yeah, I'm seeing it more and more in tortillas.Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Hidden? No. Unknown to some folks, and unknown for some foods, perhaps. My local mexican joint recently swapped lard for HFCS. Do most patrons know that the sugar content of the tortilla probably doubled or tripled? Probably not. Do they know that the glycemic load of their tortilla probably doubled? I doubt it.
I think "hidden" is the wrong word. Added sugar. That said, I'll be curious to see MFP posts when the label thing launches. I predict some folks WILL be surprised about the added sugar content of some foods. Who know though.
Good point. I was thinking more in terms of food that comes with a nutrition label. But that's interesting that they'd swap lard for HFCS.
But yeah, good point about foods with and without nutrition labels.
I definitely wouldn't expect it in freshly made tortillas at a local Mexican restaurant, having made them myself and having watched others make them. Can you notice a difference in the flavor since the switch?
I don't notice a taste difference (but haven't had the old recipe and new recipe side by side), but they definitely last longer. They sell them by the dozen. I've switched to getting them from a new place when we do buy them. One with good old fashioned lard.0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »I think about it from a logical perspective. For instance, there are some foods like ketchup that at one point I didn't think of as having added sugar, but yet it's there. I would consider it "hidden" in that sense. Whereas, it's common knowledge that a normal cookie contains added sugar.
Ketchup is pretty sweet. That's actually why I don't care for it.
I've yet to hear about a food that surprised me with the added sugar (even apart from reading labels, which I do carefully). There are some that have more (in at least some brands) than I would have expected, like many kinds of bread (I don't buy supermarket bread much, so might have been more aware if I did) and pasta sauce (again, something I don't buy).
I do think lots of people don't read labels/ingredients, but that's on them, and suggests to me that they don't really care.1 -
The local restaurant example is where you seem most likely to consume sugar without knowing it, depending on the kind of restaurant and ingredients they use, since no nutritional information is going to be available.0
-
ForecasterJason wrote: »I think about it from a logical perspective. For instance, there are some foods like ketchup that at one point I didn't think of as having added sugar, but yet it's there. I would consider it "hidden" in that sense. Whereas, it's common knowledge that a normal cookie contains added sugar.lemurcat12 wrote: »I've yet to hear about a food that surprised me with the added sugar (even apart from reading labels, which I do carefully).I agree with Sabine. The sugar isn't hidden. You just have to know what to look for in the ingredients list.
I don't really like the idea of "hidden" sugars because in most cases it sounds way more sinister than I think the reality of the situation is. It's not a bunch of dastardly super villains rubbing their hands together as they pour a vat of sugar into the city's water supply. But to play devil's advocate, I had no idea there was sugar in McDonald's French fries until I saw that movie. They're a salty, supposed-to-be-crunchy snack, pretty much as far apart from sugar as I could imagine. And there's no ingredients list.3 -
NorthCascades wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »I think about it from a logical perspective. For instance, there are some foods like ketchup that at one point I didn't think of as having added sugar, but yet it's there. I would consider it "hidden" in that sense. Whereas, it's common knowledge that a normal cookie contains added sugar.lemurcat12 wrote: »I've yet to hear about a food that surprised me with the added sugar (even apart from reading labels, which I do carefully).I agree with Sabine. The sugar isn't hidden. You just have to know what to look for in the ingredients list.
I don't really like the idea of "hidden" sugars because in most cases it sounds way more sinister than I think the reality of the situation is. It's not a bunch of dastardly super villains rubbing their hands together as they pour a vat of sugar into the city's water supply. But to play devil's advocate, I had no idea there was sugar in McDonald's French fries until I saw that movie. They're a salty, supposed-to-be-crunchy snack, pretty much as far apart from sugar as I could imagine. And there's no ingredients list.
There's sugar in McDonald's french fries?
ETA: yep! lookie there! http://www.livestrong.com/article/1002598-whats-really-inside-those-mcdonalds-french-fries/2 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »The local restaurant example is where you seem most likely to consume sugar without knowing it, depending on the kind of restaurant and ingredients they use, since no nutritional information is going to be available.
You're probably right. When I go out to eat I don't worry about calories or ingredients because we go out so infrequently. And admittedly, it can in some cases be difficult for even an informed consumer to find accurate nutrition information about restaurant food so for the sake of simplicity I wanted to focus on foods with nutrition labels.
I keep seeing references to the upcoming change in US nutrition labels, followed by comments about how great it will be that sugars will no longer be hidden. It seems so strange to me...if someone cares about sugar, just read the ingredients.
1 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »I think about it from a logical perspective. For instance, there are some foods like ketchup that at one point I didn't think of as having added sugar, but yet it's there. I would consider it "hidden" in that sense. Whereas, it's common knowledge that a normal cookie contains added sugar.lemurcat12 wrote: »I've yet to hear about a food that surprised me with the added sugar (even apart from reading labels, which I do carefully).I agree with Sabine. The sugar isn't hidden. You just have to know what to look for in the ingredients list.
I don't really like the idea of "hidden" sugars because in most cases it sounds way more sinister than I think the reality of the situation is. It's not a bunch of dastardly super villains rubbing their hands together as they pour a vat of sugar into the city's water supply. But to play devil's advocate, I had no idea there was sugar in McDonald's French fries until I saw that movie. They're a salty, supposed-to-be-crunchy snack, pretty much as far apart from sugar as I could imagine. And there's no ingredients list.
There's sugar in McDonald's french fries?
ETA: yep! lookie there! http://www.livestrong.com/article/1002598-whats-really-inside-those-mcdonalds-french-fries/
Super Size Me says so.
EAT but now you found out for yourself
0 -
I don't understand how the sugar can be hidden if it's listed on the ingredient label. Either the sugar occurs naturally in the food, or it's added. If it's added, it'll be on the ingredient label.2
-
It seems they do. That's ALSO an issue without the current label breakdown: keeping track of all the names for sugar.Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »I think about it from a logical perspective. For instance, there are some foods like ketchup that at one point I didn't think of as having added sugar, but yet it's there. I would consider it "hidden" in that sense. Whereas, it's common knowledge that a normal cookie contains added sugar.lemurcat12 wrote: »I've yet to hear about a food that surprised me with the added sugar (even apart from reading labels, which I do carefully).I agree with Sabine. The sugar isn't hidden. You just have to know what to look for in the ingredients list.
I don't really like the idea of "hidden" sugars because in most cases it sounds way more sinister than I think the reality of the situation is. It's not a bunch of dastardly super villains rubbing their hands together as they pour a vat of sugar into the city's water supply. But to play devil's advocate, I had no idea there was sugar in McDonald's French fries until I saw that movie. They're a salty, supposed-to-be-crunchy snack, pretty much as far apart from sugar as I could imagine. And there's no ingredients list.
There's sugar in McDonald's french fries?
ETA: yep! lookie there! http://www.livestrong.com/article/1002598-whats-really-inside-those-mcdonalds-french-fries/
Supersize Me says so.
0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »I think about it from a logical perspective. For instance, there are some foods like ketchup that at one point I didn't think of as having added sugar, but yet it's there. I would consider it "hidden" in that sense. Whereas, it's common knowledge that a normal cookie contains added sugar.lemurcat12 wrote: »I've yet to hear about a food that surprised me with the added sugar (even apart from reading labels, which I do carefully).I agree with Sabine. The sugar isn't hidden. You just have to know what to look for in the ingredients list.
I don't really like the idea of "hidden" sugars because in most cases it sounds way more sinister than I think the reality of the situation is. It's not a bunch of dastardly super villains rubbing their hands together as they pour a vat of sugar into the city's water supply. But to play devil's advocate, I had no idea there was sugar in McDonald's French fries until I saw that movie. They're a salty, supposed-to-be-crunchy snack, pretty much as far apart from sugar as I could imagine. And there's no ingredients list.
There's sugar in McDonald's french fries?
ETA: yep! lookie there! http://www.livestrong.com/article/1002598-whats-really-inside-those-mcdonalds-french-fries/
Apparently it's there to brown the outside of the fries when they're cooked. Kind of like how caramel is brownish. I don't know. I've never worked at a McDonald's, I can only go by what I've read. Anyway, you sound as surprised as I was.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »The local restaurant example is where you seem most likely to consume sugar without knowing it, depending on the kind of restaurant and ingredients they use, since no nutritional information is going to be available.
You're probably right. When I go out to eat I don't worry about calories or ingredients because we go out so infrequently. And admittedly, it can in some cases be difficult for even an informed consumer to find accurate nutrition information about restaurant food so for the sake of simplicity I wanted to focus on foods with nutrition labels.
I keep seeing references to the upcoming change in US nutrition labels, followed by comments about how great it will be that sugars will no longer be hidden. It seems so strange to me...if someone cares about sugar, just read the ingredients.
We eat out a couple of times a week. I usually try to just do protein/veg.1 -
So people are incredulous when they hear that McDonald's fries have sugar in them. There isn't an ingredients list to check, at least not when you're placing an order. (Maybe that's changed in the years since I've been in one.) Does this count as a "hidden" sugar?0
-
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »The local restaurant example is where you seem most likely to consume sugar without knowing it, depending on the kind of restaurant and ingredients they use, since no nutritional information is going to be available.
You're probably right. When I go out to eat I don't worry about calories or ingredients because we go out so infrequently. And admittedly, it can in some cases be difficult for even an informed consumer to find accurate nutrition information about restaurant food so for the sake of simplicity I wanted to focus on foods with nutrition labels.
I keep seeing references to the upcoming change in US nutrition labels, followed by comments about how great it will be that sugars will no longer be hidden. It seems so strange to me...if someone cares about sugar, just read the ingredients.
We eat out a couple of times a week. I usually try to just do protein/veg.
When we ate out more often, even a few times a week, I knew what to order at each place so as not to blow my calories and end up starving later. Now it's a rare treat for me. Sometimes I miss going out regularly. 0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »So people are incredulous when they hear that McDonald's fries have sugar in them. There isn't an ingredients list to check, at least not when you're placing an order. (Maybe that's changed in the years since I've been in one.) Does this count as a "hidden" sugar?
Apparently the ingredients are on their website. I don't eat there, so I guess I'm one of the incredulous
http://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en/food/product_nutrition.snackssides.6050.small-french-fries.html
heh: apparently sausage and egg has sugar in it too:
http://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en/food/product_nutrition.breakfast.334.sausage-burrito.html
The tortilla doesn't. It just has transfats and "intersified" fats.0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »So people are incredulous when they hear that McDonald's fries have sugar in them. There isn't an ingredients list to check, at least not when you're placing an order. (Maybe that's changed in the years since I've been in one.) Does this count as a "hidden" sugar?
The topic is "Nutrition Labels and Hidden Sugar". I'd like to keep the conversation focused on foods with labels, not restaurant food since not every restaurant provides nutrition info (yet). In those cases you could complain about hidden fat, hidden salt, hidden msg, hidden gluten, hidden anything.
I didn't know fresh tortillas would have sugar, that surprised me; but restaurants can do pretty much anything they want to make their food taste better so I don't expect much from them.0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »So people are incredulous when they hear that McDonald's fries have sugar in them. There isn't an ingredients list to check, at least not when you're placing an order. (Maybe that's changed in the years since I've been in one.) Does this count as a "hidden" sugar?
There's an ingredients list online. They have some nutritional information available in the restaurant, not sure what (I haven't been to a McD's in years). Looking online, the amount of sugar used in the fries isn't enough to be reported on the label under sugars (how many grams can be rounded down to 0)? [Edit: just looked this up, apparently less than half a gram can be reported as 0.] So not really hidden if you care enough to look at the ingredients list but as close as I've seen.
The question becomes whether this matters, though. People don't think McD's fries are that good for them, and that they aren't (IMO, although obviously overall diet matters, not a one time food choice) isn't really due to the sugar at all. And the amount is so small.
People have this idea that they (or Americans in general) are getting huge amounts of sugar in this hidden form. It seems not -- the stats I've seen indicate that most sugar people are getting is from obvious sources, and if you care what might be in a food that information is available (but for the local restaurants, and then you can ask, I suppose).
But I still think the new label is a fine idea!3 -
Yep, dextrose is added to be precise. BUT, very, very little is added. It's so little it doesn't even register in the nutrition facts for a large French fry (<1 gram of sugar). Despite the claims of the alarmist, pseudoscience filled, painful to read LiveStrong article, it is not there to "increase addictions and craving".NorthCascades wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »I think about it from a logical perspective. For instance, there are some foods like ketchup that at one point I didn't think of as having added sugar, but yet it's there. I would consider it "hidden" in that sense. Whereas, it's common knowledge that a normal cookie contains added sugar.lemurcat12 wrote: »I've yet to hear about a food that surprised me with the added sugar (even apart from reading labels, which I do carefully).I agree with Sabine. The sugar isn't hidden. You just have to know what to look for in the ingredients list.
I don't really like the idea of "hidden" sugars because in most cases it sounds way more sinister than I think the reality of the situation is. It's not a bunch of dastardly super villains rubbing their hands together as they pour a vat of sugar into the city's water supply. But to play devil's advocate, I had no idea there was sugar in McDonald's French fries until I saw that movie. They're a salty, supposed-to-be-crunchy snack, pretty much as far apart from sugar as I could imagine. And there's no ingredients list.
There's sugar in McDonald's french fries?
ETA: yep! lookie there! http://www.livestrong.com/article/1002598-whats-really-inside-those-mcdonalds-french-fries/
Apparently it's there to brown the outside of the fries when they're cooked. Kind of like how caramel is brownish. I don't know. I've never worked at a McDonald's, I can only go by what I've read. Anyway, you sound as surprised as I was.
http://nutrition.mcdonalds.com/getnutrition/nutritionfacts.pdf
4 -
The only surprise I've had was tomato paste. I was actually more concerned about the trans fats than the HFCS but both were a shock and completely unexpected. If I wasn't logging my calories here I never would have known. Not because I don't care but because it never crossed my mind there would be anything other than tomatoes in tomato paste. Live and learn.
Of course the information was on the label but I don't think there is anything wrong with the hidden sugar message. If consumers know and care about it the food industry will respond.1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »I think about it from a logical perspective. For instance, there are some foods like ketchup that at one point I didn't think of as having added sugar, but yet it's there. I would consider it "hidden" in that sense. Whereas, it's common knowledge that a normal cookie contains added sugar.
Ketchup is pretty sweet. That's actually why I don't care for it.
I've yet to hear about a food that surprised me with the added sugar (even apart from reading labels, which I do carefully). There are some that have more (in at least some brands) than I would have expected, like many kinds of bread (I don't buy supermarket bread much, so might have been more aware if I did) and pasta sauce (again, something I don't buy).
I do think lots of people don't read labels/ingredients, but that's on them, and suggests to me that they don't really care.
I think you're right about folks not reading ingredients. I also think we need to keep track of what the various names are for sugars. And combine both of those, when making decisions, if added sugars concern us. I can choose the pasta sauce with 3 grams of sugar versus the one with 15 grams of sugar. And choose full fat dressing versus low or no fat dressing....0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »I think about it from a logical perspective. For instance, there are some foods like ketchup that at one point I didn't think of as having added sugar, but yet it's there. I would consider it "hidden" in that sense. Whereas, it's common knowledge that a normal cookie contains added sugar.
Ketchup is pretty sweet. That's actually why I don't care for it.
I've yet to hear about a food that surprised me with the added sugar (even apart from reading labels, which I do carefully). There are some that have more (in at least some brands) than I would have expected, like many kinds of bread (I don't buy supermarket bread much, so might have been more aware if I did) and pasta sauce (again, something I don't buy).
I do think lots of people don't read labels/ingredients, but that's on them, and suggests to me that they don't really care.
I think you're right about folks not reading ingredients. I also think we need to keep track of what the various names are for sugars. And combine both of those, when making decisions, if added sugars concern us. I can choose the pasta sauce with 3 grams of sugar versus the one with 15 grams of sugar. And choose full fat dressing versus low or no fat dressing....
That's a good point. Even if we don't know every name for sugar, the current label lists the amount in grams.
I agree with Lemurcat. The new label is fine. I'm glad it'll be easier to see the calorie count.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »I think about it from a logical perspective. For instance, there are some foods like ketchup that at one point I didn't think of as having added sugar, but yet it's there. I would consider it "hidden" in that sense. Whereas, it's common knowledge that a normal cookie contains added sugar.
Ketchup is pretty sweet. That's actually why I don't care for it.
I've yet to hear about a food that surprised me with the added sugar (even apart from reading labels, which I do carefully). There are some that have more (in at least some brands) than I would have expected, like many kinds of bread (I don't buy supermarket bread much, so might have been more aware if I did) and pasta sauce (again, something I don't buy).
I do think lots of people don't read labels/ingredients, but that's on them, and suggests to me that they don't really care.
I think you're right about folks not reading ingredients. I also think we need to keep track of what the various names are for sugars. And combine both of those, when making decisions, if added sugars concern us. I can choose the pasta sauce with 3 grams of sugar versus the one with 15 grams of sugar. And choose full fat dressing versus low or no fat dressing....
That's a good point. Even if we don't know every name for sugar, the current label lists the amount in grams.
I agree with Lemurcat. The new label is fine. I'm glad it'll be easier to see the calorie count.
Right, the current label lists it in grams, but without knowing the names, it's hard to tell for pasta sauce (for example) what's added and what's part of the tomatoes. I like information.
And yes, big calorie count, and apparently more realistic portion sizes.1 -
Most I've seen are just tomatoes, so that would surprise me too, and I'd avoid that brand.0
-
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »I think about it from a logical perspective. For instance, there are some foods like ketchup that at one point I didn't think of as having added sugar, but yet it's there. I would consider it "hidden" in that sense. Whereas, it's common knowledge that a normal cookie contains added sugar.
Ketchup is pretty sweet. That's actually why I don't care for it.
I've yet to hear about a food that surprised me with the added sugar (even apart from reading labels, which I do carefully). There are some that have more (in at least some brands) than I would have expected, like many kinds of bread (I don't buy supermarket bread much, so might have been more aware if I did) and pasta sauce (again, something I don't buy).
I do think lots of people don't read labels/ingredients, but that's on them, and suggests to me that they don't really care.
I think you're right about folks not reading ingredients. I also think we need to keep track of what the various names are for sugars. And combine both of those, when making decisions, if added sugars concern us. I can choose the pasta sauce with 3 grams of sugar versus the one with 15 grams of sugar. And choose full fat dressing versus low or no fat dressing....
That's a good point. Even if we don't know every name for sugar, the current label lists the amount in grams.
I agree with Lemurcat. The new label is fine. I'm glad it'll be easier to see the calorie count.
Right, the current label lists it in grams, but without knowing the names, it's hard to tell for pasta sauce (for example) what's added and what's part of the tomatoes. I like information.
And yes, big calorie count, and apparently more realistic portion sizes.
Oh I see what you're saying. That's very true!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 423 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions