Food Labeling Anger

SailingMike

Some time ago I wrote to the FDA to encourage them to change the food labeling rules so that a container that LOOKS like a single serving was labeled as a single serving.

Food packagers INTENTIONALLY mislead the un-aware into thinking the calories listed are for the entire package. Those that know better know that is RARELY the case.

What they do is list what ever low number of calories sounds good and then divide that into the package size and add "Servings per Container" information. Unfortunately MANY people I know miss that tidbit entirely and the rest of us have to do math to figure out the real calories and nutritional information.

The most blatant examples are when you see things like "3.5" servings per container... 3.5???!!! Are you kidding me?

OK... so now you know the issue will you please write a letter to the FDA to insist that the "Servings Per Container" labels are more fairly represented:

1. in WHOLE servings
2. A container that looks like ONE serving (Can of soup, small bag of chips, etc) be labeled as ONE serving per container.

Here is the address:

ATTN: Food Labeling
Food and Drug Administration
10903 New Hampshire Ave
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002

BETTER to send a real letter, but if you MUST do it on line here is the website:
http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ContactFDA/default.htm

KatyE213

I absolutely agree, same thing going on here in the UK. One of the so-called salads in Tesco gave the calories "per tablespoon". Er really???? Only because if it was per pack, or even per half pack, it would be an astronomical figure! GRRRR :mad:

Qarol

And don't let them put zero when there's less than one for a serving. I run into this problem with carbs. If a serving has less than 1g, they're allowed to list zero. I hate this.

JeffGDDG

Agreed. I'd even go so far as have them put the information for the entire package on the label. Let us figure out our own serving size info.

killagb

And don't let them put zero when there's less than one for a serving. I run into this problem with carbs. If a serving has less than 1g, they're allowed to list zero. I hate this.

This is the bigger problem. I have no problem just calculating out the calories if the company has to make it look better with a small serving size....but when it's listed at 0, but it's not truly zero....that's a problem, because you CAN'T calculate what it should be then. Pam cooking spray is a prime example of this...it's 0 calories for 1/3 of a second spray.....but if you use a more real amount, it's going to be up to possibly 50 calories.

lmarshel

I've actually run into some packaging where the servings per container was completely wrong on the package. I buy a box of pre-packaged pasta dinners at Sam's Club. The package says 4.5 servings per container...you would think that's 4.5 in the whole box. But there are 2 trays in the box, and the 4.5 servings is per tray. So the box is a total of 9 servings. Guess "container" is open to interpretation? We had to weigh the trays to confirm serving size.

Pretty sneaky... :grumble:

SeasideOasis

And don't let them put zero when there's less than one for a serving. I run into this problem with carbs. If a serving has less than 1g, they're allowed to list zero. I hate this.

This is the bigger problem. I have no problem just calculating out the calories if the company has to make it look better with a small serving size....but when it's listed at 0, but it's not truly zero....that's a problem, because you CAN'T calculate what it should be then. Pam cooking spray is a prime example of this...it's 0 calories for 1/3 of a second spray.....but if you use a more real amount, it's going to be up to possibly 50 calories.

Good to know....-=Stares daggers at my Pam can in the kitchen=-

SailingMike

... actually I think it is a 1/4 second spray! Who can do that???

LIES.

Write your letters folks... its the only way to get change. The FDA must hear from ALL of us!

SailingMike

And don't let them put zero when there's less than one for a serving. I run into this problem with carbs. If a serving has less than 1g, they're allowed to list zero. I hate this.

This is the bigger problem. I have no problem just calculating out the calories if the company has to make it look better with a small serving size....but when it's listed at 0, but it's not truly zero....that's a problem, because you CAN'T calculate what it should be then. Pam cooking spray is a prime example of this...it's 0 calories for 1/3 of a second spray.....but if you use a more real amount, it's going to be up to possibly 50 calories.

Counting the calories may work for you, but the point is most people miss that entirely as you see here with fitness savvy persons!

WRITE LETTERS!

SailingMike

I absolutely agree, same thing going on here in the UK. One of the so-called salads in Tesco gave the calories "per tablespoon". Er really???? Only because if it was per pack, or even per half pack, it would be an astronomical figure! GRRRR :mad:

I am sure the UK has an equivalent of our FDA... WRITE TO THEM.

bachooka

And don't let them put zero when there's less than one for a serving. I run into this problem with carbs. If a serving has less than 1g, they're allowed to list zero. I hate this.

It's not less than one for calories... it's less than 5... meaning even though your can of splenda says zero in actuality it is four and they don't have to say it because it's less than 5. RIDICULOUS!

tam120

Same with trans fat, if it has less than 0.5 g per serving they can show 0 and put 0 trans fat in big letters on the front of the package with a little disclaimer "per serving".

SailingMike

And don't let them put zero when there's less than one for a serving. I run into this problem with carbs. If a serving has less than 1g, they're allowed to list zero. I hate this.

This is the bigger problem. I have no problem just calculating out the calories if the company has to make it look better with a small serving size....but when it's listed at 0, but it's not truly zero....that's a problem, because you CAN'T calculate what it should be then. Pam cooking spray is a prime example of this...it's 0 calories for 1/3 of a second spray.....but if you use a more real amount, it's going to be up to possibly 50 calories.

If you want to give the manufacturer of PAM a bad time... here is the website for their complaints:

http://www.conagrafoods.com/utilities/corp_feedback.jsp#

I just sent a complaint to them, because I noticed that label just a day or so ago.

Good to know....-=Stares daggers at my Pam can in the kitchen=-

nerdyandilikeit

mfp_1

As others have said, serving sizes are often bogus. Sometimes one product will show twice the serving size of another.

That's why I prefer 'per 100 g' values.

killagb

Holy old threads.

paigemarie93

I got a Muller Corner for my breakfast once because it said 105 calories on the front.
When I tracked it I found out it was actually 185 cals & that they counted a portion as 100grams instead of the whole 170grams.
Annoying.

paigemarie93

Buuuut, almost all of the foods in the UK have the calories per serving & the calories per whole & it says how many servings is in the food.
I've never come across something that has a .5 serving though

onedayillbamilf

And don't let them put zero when there's less than one for a serving. I run into this problem with carbs. If a serving has less than 1g, they're allowed to list zero. I hate this.

This is the bigger problem. I have no problem just calculating out the calories if the company has to make it look better with a small serving size....but when it's listed at 0, but it's not truly zero....that's a problem, because you CAN'T calculate what it should be then. Pam cooking spray is a prime example of this...it's 0 calories for 1/3 of a second spray.....but if you use a more real amount, it's going to be up to possibly 50 calories.

This. I think my cooking spray says something stupid like "1/5 of a second". Damn walmart brand.

TeaBea

Stouffer's red box meals out to come with a warning lable.

A coworker brought in a Stouffer's "red box" Mac'n Cheese. Wow! Her red box meal was 1-2 oz bigger than the Lean Cuisine Mac'n Cheese (also Stouffer's brand) but it was 2 servings and each "serving" was still higher in calories. Her slightly bigger meal had more than twice the calories. Yikes!

mfp_1

killagb wrote:
Pam cooking spray is a prime example of this...it's 0 calories for 1/3 of a second spray

SailingMike wrote:
... actually I think it is a 1/4 second spray! Who can do that???

onedayillbami wrote:
I think my cooking spray says something stupid like "1/5 of a second". Damn walmart brand.

US Federal regulations say the "Reference amount customarily consumed" (RACC) for spray oil is 0.25 grams. It may be expressed as "About _ seconds spray (_ g)"

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=101.12

Do your sprays mention 0.25 grams?

Toddrific

Re-rez!

Bloody labels piss me off.

Maxwell House International Coffee (instant powders) give instructions to use 4 tsp per 6 oz cup of water...then it says a serving size is 1 1/3 tsp!!!! What the hell!