Misleading food packaging
Options
DietPrada
Posts: 1,171 Member
I work in the food and wine sector.
Today we had some products to try, and give feed back on both the product and the packaging. (informal focus group).
There were "yogurt coated cranberry balls" and "chocolate coated honeycomb balls". I did not eat them for obvious reasons.
What I did note however was that they had pitched themselves as "a healthy alternative" "guilt free" "gluten and GMO free" ... written all over the package. The ingredient descriptions also make a point twice to state that it contained no added sugar, although the first ingredient on the chocolate one was "sugar", and they both had 50% sugar content according to the nutrition label.
I was not popular with my colleagues when I pointed out that sugar was sugar, no matter what flowery wording you used and that products like these in fact do more harm in general than the ones who are marketed honestly (the "junk food" if you like). One colleague even commented "well, it tastes healthy".
I really and honestly believe that products like this marketed as "healthy" contribute significantly to obesity and type 2 diabetes.
Today we had some products to try, and give feed back on both the product and the packaging. (informal focus group).
There were "yogurt coated cranberry balls" and "chocolate coated honeycomb balls". I did not eat them for obvious reasons.
What I did note however was that they had pitched themselves as "a healthy alternative" "guilt free" "gluten and GMO free" ... written all over the package. The ingredient descriptions also make a point twice to state that it contained no added sugar, although the first ingredient on the chocolate one was "sugar", and they both had 50% sugar content according to the nutrition label.
I was not popular with my colleagues when I pointed out that sugar was sugar, no matter what flowery wording you used and that products like these in fact do more harm in general than the ones who are marketed honestly (the "junk food" if you like). One colleague even commented "well, it tastes healthy".
I really and honestly believe that products like this marketed as "healthy" contribute significantly to obesity and type 2 diabetes.
12
Replies
-
Well, I guess they could be considered "guilt free" if you don't have a conscience when it comes to healthy eating.
1 -
3
-
For someone without metabolic issues, I can see "yogurt coated cranberry balls" being harmless but, of course, my recipe would probably be very different from theirs.
It has always been a pet peeve, even before LCHF, the way packaging presents sugar. As if "added white powder" is so very different from all the other forms of sugar they add. But really, the info is on the nutrition label, buyers should learn to read.
They don't realise how lucky they are to have you in their focus group. If they created products to please you they would have an almost untapped market.
::flowerforyou::1 -
I also think it should be a civil legal matter how they break up the sugar. The ingredients (in US) are required to be listed in order of content - highest content to least contest, so the first ingredient is the "main" one, etc. So instead of "sugar", they will add a little fructose, a little sucralose, a little corn syrup, a little dextrose, etc. So instead of 10g of "sugar" they will have 1g of 10 different types of sugar. So no one ingredient is high on the list and it looks like very little sugar, but if added up it would be listed first.
http://www.responsiblefoods.org/sugar_names
2 -
The simple fact is, no matter how they break it down or market it, people won't care. The current path for society is indulgence at all levels of life - hence all the madness in the news of late. I think that educating a single person who then chooses to share that knowledge, while barely a drop in the bucket, is the only way to go, as a single person can be intelligent and brilliant, but in groups, we are often caught up far too often in the "crowd mentality." I know I've become far more cynical in my "old age," but too many of these things anymore are simple facts.
Changing labels might help 1% of people, but the reality is that proper nutritional education is more critical.4 -
If the sugar is part of the chocolate, then one could say "no added sugar" since there was already sugar in that ingredient. That's my understanding of current guidelines.
I hate labeling guidelines. "No added sugar" doesn't mean "no sugar."2 -
KetoGirl83 wrote: »But really, the info is on the nutrition label, buyers should learn to read.
::flowerforyou::
You could read like Superman and still be way off base, thanks to lax enforcement of labeling laws by the feds. The food and drug lobbies were smart to get the states out of the picture.
2 -
Not to mention the 20-25% ALLOWED errors!!!! SMDH2
-
Meat doesn't have labels, neither does fresh veggies. So, I don't have many labels to read. Finding an accurate choice in the MFP database is a whole different story sometimes!4
-
I'm sure people think granola bars and nature valley bars "taste healthy" too but it doesn't mean it IS healthy! It's either healthy or it's not, and it sounds like it's not, lol. If they asked for your honest feedback, give them it. We're all going to be reading the labels and I can already tell you that I'm not buying either or those two things
1 -
I'm sure people think granola bars and nature valley bars "taste healthy" too but it doesn't mean it IS healthy! It's either healthy or it's not, and it sounds like it's not, lol. If they asked for your honest feedback, give them it. We're all going to be reading the labels and I can already tell you that I'm not buying either or those two things
If they truthfully called "protein" bars, "Sugar Sticks", they might not count as vegetables any more....3 -
"Our results indicate significant contributions from cooking to both modern and ancestral human energy budgets. They also illuminate a weakness in current food labeling practices, which systematically overestimate the caloric potential of poorly processed foods."
http://www.pnas.org/content/108/48/19199.full
As if it weren't difficult enough already.....0 -
-
Meat doesn't have labels, neither does fresh veggies. So, I don't have many labels to read. Finding an accurate choice in the MFP database is a whole different story sometimes!
It depends on how it is packaged. Buy a bag of salad mix and you will see a label. Same goes for bags I have of chicken hind quarters or breasts. When I buy bulk meat and produce, there usually are not labels. When packaged, they often have nutrition facts.1 -
I know it's still a couple of years out, but I think it's a step in the right direction that the new USDA food labels require a line item for total added sugars in packaged foods: http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/LabelingNutrition/ucm385663.htm1
-
I'm super guilty of buying products with generous labeling,with words like "organic" and "no added sugar" as snacks for my toddler. I do peruse ingredients on the more every-day snacks (apple sauce) to make sure it really is just apple and maybe citrate to preserve, but still. I'm guilty.2
