New Nutritional Labeling

katya_be

What do you think about the new labeling?

For the first time in 20 years, the nutrition labels will get a major update. Different nutritional information will be highlighted, and serving sizes in some products, such as 20-ounce sodas, will be updated to reflect the bottle as a single serving, instead of the 2.5 servings listed now. Companies will have up to 2 years to switch to the new labels, but expect to see the updates in stores as early as next year.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/02/FDA-nutrition-labels-calories-serving-size-added-sugar

navyrigger46

Not necessarily for or against it. I don't have a problem with either system. That being said, the stated goal is to get people to pay closer attention to their intake which, frankly, ain't gonna happen. People who don't care about it now, aren't going to start caring about it because the government mandates a change in the nutrition facts labeling.

Rigger

katya_be

It will also no longer list calories from fat. It won't be as convenient

The_Enginerd

The only part I don't like is this:

"In addition to altering the layout of items within the nutrition labels, the FDA proposes changing the way serving sizes are calculated. Current serving sizes are based on the amount people should eat, not how much they actually consume. A quick glance at the nutrition label on a 5.3-ounce bag of M&M's shows 220 calories—but snack on the entire 3.5-serving package and you've actually consumed 770. A 28-ounce (2.5 serving) bottle of Gatorade lists 80 calories, but contains 200."

It makes for a grey area, I believe it would be a bigger benefit for people to actually learn what a realistic serving size is, and with the emphasis placed on servings per container in the new label, I don't know that's it's needed. A 5.3 ounce bag of M&M's is a big damn bag! If you think that's a single serving, the problem is you.

The_Enginerd

It will also no longer list calories from fat. It won't be as convenient

I like this part. Something I've learned since being on here, that recomendation for a low fat diet is based on out of date recomendations and it wasn't a good idea. Even though fat has a higher calorie density, it's important in your diet and is satiating.

maldesh

I just wish manufacturers would always use measurements like cups/tablespoons instead of (or in addition to) ounces or grams. I don't know what an ounce of pasta looks like. I don't have a scale, but I do have measuring cups. And even if I don't, it's a lot easier to eyeball a cup than it is an ounce considering that an "ounce" of some kind of food will be wildly different depending on that particular food's density.

Josalinn

I think its a great idea, although I am unsure about the added sugars sub category, I mean if its add or not and I'm eating it, I'm still getting the calories. I think it also adds to the vilification of sugar.

3 years seems reasonable considering the process the government has to go through: notification, public comment, reworking it, notice again, public comment, until it is as good as it gets.

I don't know that it is based on what you "should eat" since it feels like any serving of ice cream is about 200-300 calories, and that can rang from half a cup to a whole cup. People like seeing "small numbers" and when you have hand to mouth syndrome or eat in front of the TV/computer and don't pay attention, you'll still see the whole bag of M&Ms. I know when I get a Snapple and its 2 servings a bottle, I drink the whole thing, so might as well do the math for people and be like hey there are 200 cals in this whole bottle.

I don't like the missing calories from fat either. That just seems...wrong. Also they seem to be deciding on what DV should be. 2000 cal/day may not be ideal for everyone, but there really isn't an ideal cal intake for all people. 2000 however is a nice easy number to calculate things with.

Last point. this is going to f*** up our database something awful.

Josalinn

I just wish manufacturers would always use measurements like cups/tablespoons instead of (or in addition to) ounces or grams. I don't know what an ounce of pasta looks like. I don't have a scale, but I do have measuring cups. And even if I don't, it's a lot easier to eyeball a cup than it is an ounce considering that an "ounce" of some kind of food will be wildly different depending on that particular food's density.

Weight is more uniform. I might cram all the pasta into a measuring cup and you might loosely put it in. Or in another example, elbo pasta vs. spaghetti. What does 1 cup of dry spaghetti look like? But 2 oz of either is still 200 calories.

beertrollruss

As someone with high blood pressure, I'm very happy to see that potassium will be required.

I agree with the other posters about the serving size. I use a scale to weigh the recommended serving size and it's helping me control my weight.

OverDoIt

If it helps people and makes it easier for them I am all for it. You would be suprised at how many people do not even know what the nutrition facts actually mean. Maybe this will draw more attention to what is in peoples diets.

melsinct

I just wish manufacturers would always use measurements like cups/tablespoons instead of (or in addition to) ounces or grams. I don't know what an ounce of pasta looks like. I don't have a scale, but I do have measuring cups. And even if I don't, it's a lot easier to eyeball a cup than it is an ounce considering that an "ounce" of some kind of food will be wildly different depending on that particular food's density.

The problem is that your way of measuring (by volume) is inaccurate compared to weight. An ounce is always an ounce, a gram is always a gram. A cup of flour, for instance, will vary wildly in weight, depending who is doing the scooping. Volume measurement is not precise, which is why people on MFP sing the praises of food scales. It is all what you are used to. I can easily eyeball an ounce of almonds or other things I eat regularly.

I like the new labels, especially the added sugars. Maybe people will start realizing their "healthy" flavored Yoplait yogurts have as much sugar as a candy bar.

Josalinn

The poster above me is spot on.

Also here is the FDA report
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm387418.htm
The FDA says:

•Update serving size requirements to reflect the amounts people currently eat. What and how much people eat and drink has changed since the serving sizes were first put in place in 1994. By law, serving sizes must be based on what people actually eat, not on what people “should” be eating. Present calorie and nutrition information for the whole package of certain food products that could be consumed in one sitting.