How US labeling is decieving
Options
Replies
-
Uh no. 1 serving at 170 calories (21g of protein) fat content is 70 calories from fat.paints5555 wrote: »
Uh it's underhanded. When you set numbers up to work in your favor and confuse a buyer (you even admit that % are confusing) just so that it's easier to sell your product. It's NOT 90% and 10% fat. Just look at a serving and do the math. If Jennie O posted "54% of each serving is fat", you think they'd sell as much? Of course not. But with a little manipulation of math, then putting 90% lean DOES ATTRACT A CONSUMER even if they don't read the whole label.paints5555 wrote: »
I'm sorry did you bother to read the whole thread or just about Pop Tarts?paints5555 wrote: »
Yes, they come 2 to a sleeve and the serving size for poptarts has been 2 pastries for 7 years (since 2016). And understand that the required labeling is for the entire box - it is what you see when you buy it. So a "package" would not be useful unless you were going to eat the entire box as a serving. Since the shelf-life of poptarts is probably only a year or 2, anything showing less than 2 pastries is pretty old. The FDA serving size before that was 1 pastry (since 1995 or so). Before that, nutrition labeling was voluntary and manufacturers could use whatever serving size they wanted to. And unfortunately, it's that time before 1995 that people seem to think still exists- that manufacturers can use whatever serving size they want to make their product look better. It's been almost 30 years since that was true.
I think you missed the part where we were discussing how some serving sizes are laughable. Pop Tarts come 2 in a package. It's unlikely that many just eat 1 Pop Tart and rewrap the other for later. So just being a devil's advocate here, why doesn't Kellogg's put "1 package 400 calories". Wouldn't that help to solve any issue with having to only eat one then wrap the other? They don't because they know everyone will likely eat 2. And they don't really want to freak out their buyers too much. People read labels quickly if that and most of time they just look for how many calories per serving, not always what a serving consists of.paints5555 wrote: »In the US, food manufacturers do not just make up what they think should be a serving. FDA specifies what a serving size is for a particular type of food.
On the poptart question - where is everyone seeing that a serving is only 1 poptart? Reference amount from FDA is 110g which equates to 2 pastries. Every single label I just looked up for Kellogg's poptarts (both on the Kellogg's website as well as sites where they are being sold such as Target, Walmart, Sam's Club, etc.), a serving was listed as 2 pastries, not 1. Please don't tell me that you are believing what MFP says.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Even if you think the serving sizes are laughable, the information is there on the label. If you really care about what you are eating, you will read the label. And if you don't (my husband), all this discussion has no relevance since you won't read it ever.
Jennie O ground Turkey packaging claims 90% lean on the front of the package. What does that mean to you?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Yes, I've been reading it from the beginning and thought that one was discussed to death. We had moved on to pop tarts. 90% lean means 10% fat and 90% everything else as packaged. I don't eat individual foods in isolation so 1 particular food that has a higher % of calories from fat may not be meaningful in my overall daily diet. I count grams and find that %'s are way more confusing. The word "deceiving" in this post title implies that manufacturers are doing something underhanded or illegal. They are just following the law.
Part of the reason I started a thread like this long ago, was that I had a client eating keto. At first weight loss was good, then leveled off and then completely stopped. She didn't count calories because she was doing keto and told me she was eating the same foods. Well when Jennie O 90% lean turkey came up, I asked her how much of it she was eating. Ended up being a whole package for each meal. "But it's 90% lean!" she insisted thinking it's more protein than fat. Obviously after showing her the math and restructuring her intake, she started to lose weight again.
While you may be able to understanding labeling better than the average consumer, there are buzz words or phrases on them to entice a consumer who isn't as well versed in nutrition. Obviously if they were, we may not have the 70% overweight/obese population in the US that we have now.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You misunderstood what I said- the % fat is clear as a bell. Trying to add up % calories from fat and try to determine if everything balances out is confusing. Why make it harder than it has to be? The jennio turkey is 10% fat and a serving contributes 12g of fat to my 50g target for the day. I have 38g to eat from other foods. That is what is important to me and it is right there on the label. It could not be clearer.
basic math 170 divided by 10% is 17. I don't know what you're not understanding but 70 calories of fat IS NOT 10%. It's 41% by serving.
Which was the whole point of the thread. (mic drop)
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
Uh no. 1 serving at 170 calories (21g of protein) fat content is 70 calories from fat.paints5555 wrote: »
Uh it's underhanded. When you set numbers up to work in your favor and confuse a buyer (you even admit that % are confusing) just so that it's easier to sell your product. It's NOT 90% and 10% fat. Just look at a serving and do the math. If Jennie O posted "54% of each serving is fat", you think they'd sell as much? Of course not. But with a little manipulation of math, then putting 90% lean DOES ATTRACT A CONSUMER even if they don't read the whole label.paints5555 wrote: »
I'm sorry did you bother to read the whole thread or just about Pop Tarts?paints5555 wrote: »
Yes, they come 2 to a sleeve and the serving size for poptarts has been 2 pastries for 7 years (since 2016). And understand that the required labeling is for the entire box - it is what you see when you buy it. So a "package" would not be useful unless you were going to eat the entire box as a serving. Since the shelf-life of poptarts is probably only a year or 2, anything showing less than 2 pastries is pretty old. The FDA serving size before that was 1 pastry (since 1995 or so). Before that, nutrition labeling was voluntary and manufacturers could use whatever serving size they wanted to. And unfortunately, it's that time before 1995 that people seem to think still exists- that manufacturers can use whatever serving size they want to make their product look better. It's been almost 30 years since that was true.
I think you missed the part where we were discussing how some serving sizes are laughable. Pop Tarts come 2 in a package. It's unlikely that many just eat 1 Pop Tart and rewrap the other for later. So just being a devil's advocate here, why doesn't Kellogg's put "1 package 400 calories". Wouldn't that help to solve any issue with having to only eat one then wrap the other? They don't because they know everyone will likely eat 2. And they don't really want to freak out their buyers too much. People read labels quickly if that and most of time they just look for how many calories per serving, not always what a serving consists of.paints5555 wrote: »In the US, food manufacturers do not just make up what they think should be a serving. FDA specifies what a serving size is for a particular type of food.
On the poptart question - where is everyone seeing that a serving is only 1 poptart? Reference amount from FDA is 110g which equates to 2 pastries. Every single label I just looked up for Kellogg's poptarts (both on the Kellogg's website as well as sites where they are being sold such as Target, Walmart, Sam's Club, etc.), a serving was listed as 2 pastries, not 1. Please don't tell me that you are believing what MFP says.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Even if you think the serving sizes are laughable, the information is there on the label. If you really care about what you are eating, you will read the label. And if you don't (my husband), all this discussion has no relevance since you won't read it ever.
Jennie O ground Turkey packaging claims 90% lean on the front of the package. What does that mean to you?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Yes, I've been reading it from the beginning and thought that one was discussed to death. We had moved on to pop tarts. 90% lean means 10% fat and 90% everything else as packaged. I don't eat individual foods in isolation so 1 particular food that has a higher % of calories from fat may not be meaningful in my overall daily diet. I count grams and find that %'s are way more confusing. The word "deceiving" in this post title implies that manufacturers are doing something underhanded or illegal. They are just following the law.
Part of the reason I started a thread like this long ago, was that I had a client eating keto. At first weight loss was good, then leveled off and then completely stopped. She didn't count calories because she was doing keto and told me she was eating the same foods. Well when Jennie O 90% lean turkey came up, I asked her how much of it she was eating. Ended up being a whole package for each meal. "But it's 90% lean!" she insisted thinking it's more protein than fat. Obviously after showing her the math and restructuring her intake, she started to lose weight again.
While you may be able to understanding labeling better than the average consumer, there are buzz words or phrases on them to entice a consumer who isn't as well versed in nutrition. Obviously if they were, we may not have the 70% overweight/obese population in the US that we have now.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You misunderstood what I said- the % fat is clear as a bell. Trying to add up % calories from fat and try to determine if everything balances out is confusing. Why make it harder than it has to be? The jennio turkey is 10% fat and a serving contributes 12g of fat to my 50g target for the day. I have 38g to eat from other foods. That is what is important to me and it is right there on the label. It could not be clearer.
basic math 170 divided by 10% is 17. I don't know what you're not understanding but 70 calories of fat IS NOT 10%. It's 41% by serving.
Which was the whole point of the thread. (mic drop)
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Apples and oranges. My % fat is % by weight. Yours is calories from fat.2 -
Uh it's underhanded. When you set numbers up to work in your favor and confuse a buyer (you even admit that % are confusing) just so that it's easier to sell your product. It's NOT 90% and 10% fat. Just look at a serving and do the math. If Jennie O posted "54% of each serving is fat", you think they'd sell as much? Of course not. But with a little manipulation of math, then putting 90% lean DOES ATTRACT A CONSUMER even if they don't read the whole label.paints5555 wrote: »
I'm sorry did you bother to read the whole thread or just about Pop Tarts?paints5555 wrote: »
Yes, they come 2 to a sleeve and the serving size for poptarts has been 2 pastries for 7 years (since 2016). And understand that the required labeling is for the entire box - it is what you see when you buy it. So a "package" would not be useful unless you were going to eat the entire box as a serving. Since the shelf-life of poptarts is probably only a year or 2, anything showing less than 2 pastries is pretty old. The FDA serving size before that was 1 pastry (since 1995 or so). Before that, nutrition labeling was voluntary and manufacturers could use whatever serving size they wanted to. And unfortunately, it's that time before 1995 that people seem to think still exists- that manufacturers can use whatever serving size they want to make their product look better. It's been almost 30 years since that was true.
I think you missed the part where we were discussing how some serving sizes are laughable. Pop Tarts come 2 in a package. It's unlikely that many just eat 1 Pop Tart and rewrap the other for later. So just being a devil's advocate here, why doesn't Kellogg's put "1 package 400 calories". Wouldn't that help to solve any issue with having to only eat one then wrap the other? They don't because they know everyone will likely eat 2. And they don't really want to freak out their buyers too much. People read labels quickly if that and most of time they just look for how many calories per serving, not always what a serving consists of.paints5555 wrote: »In the US, food manufacturers do not just make up what they think should be a serving. FDA specifies what a serving size is for a particular type of food.
On the poptart question - where is everyone seeing that a serving is only 1 poptart? Reference amount from FDA is 110g which equates to 2 pastries. Every single label I just looked up for Kellogg's poptarts (both on the Kellogg's website as well as sites where they are being sold such as Target, Walmart, Sam's Club, etc.), a serving was listed as 2 pastries, not 1. Please don't tell me that you are believing what MFP says.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Even if you think the serving sizes are laughable, the information is there on the label. If you really care about what you are eating, you will read the label. And if you don't (my husband), all this discussion has no relevance since you won't read it ever.
Jennie O ground Turkey packaging claims 90% lean on the front of the package. What does that mean to you?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Yes, I've been reading it from the beginning and thought that one was discussed to death. We had moved on to pop tarts. 90% lean means 10% fat and 90% everything else as packaged. I don't eat individual foods in isolation so 1 particular food that has a higher % of calories from fat may not be meaningful in my overall daily diet. I count grams and find that %'s are way more confusing. The word "deceiving" in this post title implies that manufacturers are doing something underhanded or illegal. They are just following the law.
Part of the reason I started a thread like this long ago, was that I had a client eating keto. At first weight loss was good, then leveled off and then completely stopped. She didn't count calories because she was doing keto and told me she was eating the same foods. Well when Jennie O 90% lean turkey came up, I asked her how much of it she was eating. Ended up being a whole package for each meal. "But it's 90% lean!" she insisted thinking it's more protein than fat. Obviously after showing her the math and restructuring her intake, she started to lose weight again.
While you may be able to understanding labeling better than the average consumer, there are buzz words or phrases on them to entice a consumer who isn't as well versed in nutrition. Obviously if they were, we may not have the 70% overweight/obese population in the US that we have now.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Hey all..
I’m the possible outlier again..
IMHO-
I don’t think the math is being manipulated. Meat is traditionally sold by total weight. When one goes to a butcher.. it’s sold by weight not fat calories per serving.
The labels are marketing this. Total weight just like a butcher shop. This hasn’t changed in the history of meat selling. If anything, we have more information now on labels than ever before. Nothing is hidden.
We can break down the macros and calories by serving and it’s typically 40-60% fat calories per serving., but that’s for many animal products..
Fatty fish like King Salmon has more fat than some meats.. but meat sellers aren’t selling by macros or fat calories, they are selling based on total weight. It’s up to the consumer to know how fat % per serving works.
Yay to @ninerbuff to highlighting how fat grams per serving works.. I totally agree/ that’s important. but we’ve seemed to descend into a the labels made us fat argument.
Why we have an obesity epidemic.. that’s another great thread for discussion, but I don’t think it’s the hidden calories in the label - I personally don’t see any hidden calories.
When I buy ground beef at the butcher.. he asks what cut of meat I want ground and ideally how much fat or marbling in the grind . He does this based on total weight not to dupe me into not knowing how much fat I’m eating.
Going to a mass producer or supermarket.. if a consumer knows how to read a label they can do the math on fat calories and servings.
I think we like blaming a lot on marketing and labeling, but I don’t think most people who are overweight have solely issues with calories from fat. It’s overall consumption.
2 -
Well let's look at it a different way then.paints5555 wrote: »
Uh no. 1 serving at 170 calories (21g of protein) fat content is 70 calories from fat.paints5555 wrote: »
Uh it's underhanded. When you set numbers up to work in your favor and confuse a buyer (you even admit that % are confusing) just so that it's easier to sell your product. It's NOT 90% and 10% fat. Just look at a serving and do the math. If Jennie O posted "54% of each serving is fat", you think they'd sell as much? Of course not. But with a little manipulation of math, then putting 90% lean DOES ATTRACT A CONSUMER even if they don't read the whole label.paints5555 wrote: »
I'm sorry did you bother to read the whole thread or just about Pop Tarts?paints5555 wrote: »
Yes, they come 2 to a sleeve and the serving size for poptarts has been 2 pastries for 7 years (since 2016). And understand that the required labeling is for the entire box - it is what you see when you buy it. So a "package" would not be useful unless you were going to eat the entire box as a serving. Since the shelf-life of poptarts is probably only a year or 2, anything showing less than 2 pastries is pretty old. The FDA serving size before that was 1 pastry (since 1995 or so). Before that, nutrition labeling was voluntary and manufacturers could use whatever serving size they wanted to. And unfortunately, it's that time before 1995 that people seem to think still exists- that manufacturers can use whatever serving size they want to make their product look better. It's been almost 30 years since that was true.
I think you missed the part where we were discussing how some serving sizes are laughable. Pop Tarts come 2 in a package. It's unlikely that many just eat 1 Pop Tart and rewrap the other for later. So just being a devil's advocate here, why doesn't Kellogg's put "1 package 400 calories". Wouldn't that help to solve any issue with having to only eat one then wrap the other? They don't because they know everyone will likely eat 2. And they don't really want to freak out their buyers too much. People read labels quickly if that and most of time they just look for how many calories per serving, not always what a serving consists of.paints5555 wrote: »In the US, food manufacturers do not just make up what they think should be a serving. FDA specifies what a serving size is for a particular type of food.
On the poptart question - where is everyone seeing that a serving is only 1 poptart? Reference amount from FDA is 110g which equates to 2 pastries. Every single label I just looked up for Kellogg's poptarts (both on the Kellogg's website as well as sites where they are being sold such as Target, Walmart, Sam's Club, etc.), a serving was listed as 2 pastries, not 1. Please don't tell me that you are believing what MFP says.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Even if you think the serving sizes are laughable, the information is there on the label. If you really care about what you are eating, you will read the label. And if you don't (my husband), all this discussion has no relevance since you won't read it ever.
Jennie O ground Turkey packaging claims 90% lean on the front of the package. What does that mean to you?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Yes, I've been reading it from the beginning and thought that one was discussed to death. We had moved on to pop tarts. 90% lean means 10% fat and 90% everything else as packaged. I don't eat individual foods in isolation so 1 particular food that has a higher % of calories from fat may not be meaningful in my overall daily diet. I count grams and find that %'s are way more confusing. The word "deceiving" in this post title implies that manufacturers are doing something underhanded or illegal. They are just following the law.
Part of the reason I started a thread like this long ago, was that I had a client eating keto. At first weight loss was good, then leveled off and then completely stopped. She didn't count calories because she was doing keto and told me she was eating the same foods. Well when Jennie O 90% lean turkey came up, I asked her how much of it she was eating. Ended up being a whole package for each meal. "But it's 90% lean!" she insisted thinking it's more protein than fat. Obviously after showing her the math and restructuring her intake, she started to lose weight again.
While you may be able to understanding labeling better than the average consumer, there are buzz words or phrases on them to entice a consumer who isn't as well versed in nutrition. Obviously if they were, we may not have the 70% overweight/obese population in the US that we have now.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You misunderstood what I said- the % fat is clear as a bell. Trying to add up % calories from fat and try to determine if everything balances out is confusing. Why make it harder than it has to be? The jennio turkey is 10% fat and a serving contributes 12g of fat to my 50g target for the day. I have 38g to eat from other foods. That is what is important to me and it is right there on the label. It could not be clearer.
basic math 170 divided by 10% is 17. I don't know what you're not understanding but 70 calories of fat IS NOT 10%. It's 41% by serving.
Which was the whole point of the thread. (mic drop)
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Apples and oranges. My % fat is % by weight. Yours is calories from fat.
Recommended daily allowance for fat on a medium diet (not keto) is 58g to 111g per day. If you get 10g from one serving, on the low end that's still over 10% right? And just at 10% on high end. But what if you eat 2 servings? Ah, the percentage goes up right?
So to say that 90% lean 10% fat labeling on the front of the package is being "fully truthful" is a form of deception, no? Again, you need to be looking at it from a perspective of the average American who may be dieting and thinking that low fat is the way they should be going.
You can defend the companies and their labeling, but the reality is HEALTH is not a concern for them. Selling product is, and any way they can legally "sugar coat" a product to make it sound healthy, they will do because it's profitable.
I bet you that there will be lurkers here who may not have been reading labels more thoroughly, probably looking at them now if they are having issues losing weight.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
Overall consumption is the true culprit. Overweight people just eat way more than they need to. And while counting calories will be the straight up factor, what KIND of macro calories they would rather consume will make a difference to many. Many people don't want to allow fat to be a high percentage in their calorie make up.SafariGalNYC wrote: »
Uh it's underhanded. When you set numbers up to work in your favor and confuse a buyer (you even admit that % are confusing) just so that it's easier to sell your product. It's NOT 90% and 10% fat. Just look at a serving and do the math. If Jennie O posted "54% of each serving is fat", you think they'd sell as much? Of course not. But with a little manipulation of math, then putting 90% lean DOES ATTRACT A CONSUMER even if they don't read the whole label.paints5555 wrote: »
I'm sorry did you bother to read the whole thread or just about Pop Tarts?paints5555 wrote: »
Yes, they come 2 to a sleeve and the serving size for poptarts has been 2 pastries for 7 years (since 2016). And understand that the required labeling is for the entire box - it is what you see when you buy it. So a "package" would not be useful unless you were going to eat the entire box as a serving. Since the shelf-life of poptarts is probably only a year or 2, anything showing less than 2 pastries is pretty old. The FDA serving size before that was 1 pastry (since 1995 or so). Before that, nutrition labeling was voluntary and manufacturers could use whatever serving size they wanted to. And unfortunately, it's that time before 1995 that people seem to think still exists- that manufacturers can use whatever serving size they want to make their product look better. It's been almost 30 years since that was true.
I think you missed the part where we were discussing how some serving sizes are laughable. Pop Tarts come 2 in a package. It's unlikely that many just eat 1 Pop Tart and rewrap the other for later. So just being a devil's advocate here, why doesn't Kellogg's put "1 package 400 calories". Wouldn't that help to solve any issue with having to only eat one then wrap the other? They don't because they know everyone will likely eat 2. And they don't really want to freak out their buyers too much. People read labels quickly if that and most of time they just look for how many calories per serving, not always what a serving consists of.paints5555 wrote: »In the US, food manufacturers do not just make up what they think should be a serving. FDA specifies what a serving size is for a particular type of food.
On the poptart question - where is everyone seeing that a serving is only 1 poptart? Reference amount from FDA is 110g which equates to 2 pastries. Every single label I just looked up for Kellogg's poptarts (both on the Kellogg's website as well as sites where they are being sold such as Target, Walmart, Sam's Club, etc.), a serving was listed as 2 pastries, not 1. Please don't tell me that you are believing what MFP says.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Even if you think the serving sizes are laughable, the information is there on the label. If you really care about what you are eating, you will read the label. And if you don't (my husband), all this discussion has no relevance since you won't read it ever.
Jennie O ground Turkey packaging claims 90% lean on the front of the package. What does that mean to you?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Yes, I've been reading it from the beginning and thought that one was discussed to death. We had moved on to pop tarts. 90% lean means 10% fat and 90% everything else as packaged. I don't eat individual foods in isolation so 1 particular food that has a higher % of calories from fat may not be meaningful in my overall daily diet. I count grams and find that %'s are way more confusing. The word "deceiving" in this post title implies that manufacturers are doing something underhanded or illegal. They are just following the law.
Part of the reason I started a thread like this long ago, was that I had a client eating keto. At first weight loss was good, then leveled off and then completely stopped. She didn't count calories because she was doing keto and told me she was eating the same foods. Well when Jennie O 90% lean turkey came up, I asked her how much of it she was eating. Ended up being a whole package for each meal. "But it's 90% lean!" she insisted thinking it's more protein than fat. Obviously after showing her the math and restructuring her intake, she started to lose weight again.
While you may be able to understanding labeling better than the average consumer, there are buzz words or phrases on them to entice a consumer who isn't as well versed in nutrition. Obviously if they were, we may not have the 70% overweight/obese population in the US that we have now.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Hey all..
I’m the possible outlier again..
IMHO-
I don’t think the math is being manipulated. Meat is traditionally sold by total weight. When one goes to a butcher.. it’s sold by weight not fat calories per serving.
The labels are marketing this. Total weight just like a butcher shop. This hasn’t changed in the history of meat selling. If anything, we have more information now on labels than ever before. Nothing is hidden.
We can break down the macros and calories by serving and it’s typically 40-60% fat calories per serving., but that’s for many animal products..
Fatty fish like King Salmon has more fat than some meats.. but meat sellers aren’t selling by macros or fat calories, they are selling based on total weight. It’s up to the consumer to know how fat % per serving works.
Yay to @ninerbuff to highlighting how fat grams per serving works.. I totally agree/ that’s important. but we’ve seemed to descend into a the labels made us fat argument.
Why we have an obesity epidemic.. that’s another great thread for discussion, but I don’t think it’s the hidden calories in the label - I personally don’t see any hidden calories.
When I buy ground beef at the butcher.. he asks what cut of meat I want ground and ideally how much fat or marbling in the grind . He does this based on total weight not to dupe me into not knowing how much fat I’m eating.
Going to a mass producer or supermarket.. if a consumer knows how to read a label they can do the math on fat calories and servings.
I think we like blaming a lot on marketing and labeling, but I don’t think most people who are overweight have solely issues with calories from fat. It’s overall consumption.
And I really didn't harp on "hidden" things on labels. It's being deceptive especially when it comes to marketing. FORTIFIED WITH VITAMINS in Froot Loops cereal isn't the same as eating a cereal with natural occurring vitamins that are already in it.
And you have a point with fatty fish. It's not sold the same way as the prepacked meats because saturated fats aren't prevalent in them. The less saturated fat in meat, the better for the consumer. If a package puts 90% on it, the average buyer is thinking they are likely purchasing meat that's 90% lean. And you and I both know it's not, but the average buyer believes they are buying a healthier choice.
Again, can this infomation help people here who really didn't read labels fully? I think so. The more information people can get, then it also means they can make newer decisions based on more information.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
1 -
"I bet you that there will be lurkers here who may not have been reading labels more thoroughly, probably looking at them now if they are having issues losing weight."
And that's the whole point of the thread. If it gets even 1 person to read their labels more carefully, it's done it's job.1 -
@sollyn23l2 @ninerbuff - I definitely think people reading this thread will have to read labels more critically now. Win! 😉🏆
Good points all.1 -
A side note on labels on supplements:
Look for supplements making it seem like their product was "scientifically studied and tested". Hardly any supplements are tested at all (it's expensive) and only ones with USP labeling have been certified for purity.
When a supplement line uses "scientifically studied and tested", they are talking about a "key" ingredient in their formula being tested. In most cases it will be caffeine. Caffeine has been scientifcally studied and tested and does help improve energy and performance. So while they aren't lying about the "key" ingredient, the way they word it on their labels makes it sound like they are the only one with this "key" ingredient, but sometimes never mention the ingredient on the label itself. And since most supplements use a "proprietary blend", you really don't get what dosage is being used in the product. It may not even be the dosage that was used in the actual study.
here's an example: https://www.muscletech.com/products/hydroxycut-hardcore-elite?_pos=3&_fid=475f630e9&_ss=c&variant=39510083928160
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition 0 -
It's always good to know what you're really getting when you're buying canned or packaged items. Like the tuna I mentioned. Same exact can, but fat content can be way higher because of the time of year it was canned and shipped.sollyn23l2 wrote: »"I bet you that there will be lurkers here who may not have been reading labels more thoroughly, probably looking at them now if they are having issues losing weight."
And that's the whole point of the thread. If it gets even 1 person to read their labels more carefully, it's done it's job.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
It's always good to know what you're really getting when you're buying canned or packaged items. Like the tuna I mentioned. Same exact can, but fat content can be way higher because of the time of year it was canned and shipped.sollyn23l2 wrote: »"I bet you that there will be lurkers here who may not have been reading labels more thoroughly, probably looking at them now if they are having issues losing weight."
And that's the whole point of the thread. If it gets even 1 person to read their labels more carefully, it's done it's job.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Say what?!!!
How would you even start to know? Asking because hubs is a big tuna eater. That and (blecch!!!) pimento cheese. It’s always one or the other for lunch.
0 -
StarKist Tuna in spring water. Depending on the time of the year, the cans can have the same exact label, but the FAT content can be different due to the fact that the fish have a higher layer of fat when caught certain times of the year. One can may say 90 calories, while the other may say 130 calories. Since the labels on the front are the the same, only by checking the back labels will you know if you're getting the lower calorie tuna.springlering62 wrote: »
It's always good to know what you're really getting when you're buying canned or packaged items. Like the tuna I mentioned. Same exact can, but fat content can be way higher because of the time of year it was canned and shipped.sollyn23l2 wrote: »"I bet you that there will be lurkers here who may not have been reading labels more thoroughly, probably looking at them now if they are having issues losing weight."
And that's the whole point of the thread. If it gets even 1 person to read their labels more carefully, it's done it's job.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Say what?!!!
How would you even start to know? Asking because hubs is a big tuna eater. That and (blecch!!!) pimento cheese. It’s always one or the other for lunch.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition 2 -
StarKist Tuna in spring water. Depending on the time of the year, the cans can have the same exact label, but the FAT content can be different due to the fact that the fish have a higher layer of fat when caught certain times of the year. One can may say 90 calories, while the other may say 130 calories. Since the labels on the front are the the same, only by checking the back labels will you know if you're getting the lower calorie tuna.springlering62 wrote: »
It's always good to know what you're really getting when you're buying canned or packaged items. Like the tuna I mentioned. Same exact can, but fat content can be way higher because of the time of year it was canned and shipped.sollyn23l2 wrote: »"I bet you that there will be lurkers here who may not have been reading labels more thoroughly, probably looking at them now if they are having issues losing weight."
And that's the whole point of the thread. If it gets even 1 person to read their labels more carefully, it's done it's job.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Say what?!!!
How would you even start to know? Asking because hubs is a big tuna eater. That and (blecch!!!) pimento cheese. It’s always one or the other for lunch.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
That's interesting. Can you link to that data?0 -
Let me find it and I'll do that.neanderthin wrote: »
StarKist Tuna in spring water. Depending on the time of the year, the cans can have the same exact label, but the FAT content can be different due to the fact that the fish have a higher layer of fat when caught certain times of the year. One can may say 90 calories, while the other may say 130 calories. Since the labels on the front are the the same, only by checking the back labels will you know if you're getting the lower calorie tuna.springlering62 wrote: »
It's always good to know what you're really getting when you're buying canned or packaged items. Like the tuna I mentioned. Same exact can, but fat content can be way higher because of the time of year it was canned and shipped.sollyn23l2 wrote: »"I bet you that there will be lurkers here who may not have been reading labels more thoroughly, probably looking at them now if they are having issues losing weight."
And that's the whole point of the thread. If it gets even 1 person to read their labels more carefully, it's done it's job.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Say what?!!!
How would you even start to know? Asking because hubs is a big tuna eater. That and (blecch!!!) pimento cheese. It’s always one or the other for lunch.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
That's interesting. Can you link to that data?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
I didn't watch the whole video cause I'm at work, but I think Keith Kline discusses it because there are 2 Starkist cans on the table.neanderthin wrote: »
StarKist Tuna in spring water. Depending on the time of the year, the cans can have the same exact label, but the FAT content can be different due to the fact that the fish have a higher layer of fat when caught certain times of the year. One can may say 90 calories, while the other may say 130 calories. Since the labels on the front are the the same, only by checking the back labels will you know if you're getting the lower calorie tuna.springlering62 wrote: »
It's always good to know what you're really getting when you're buying canned or packaged items. Like the tuna I mentioned. Same exact can, but fat content can be way higher because of the time of year it was canned and shipped.sollyn23l2 wrote: »"I bet you that there will be lurkers here who may not have been reading labels more thoroughly, probably looking at them now if they are having issues losing weight."
And that's the whole point of the thread. If it gets even 1 person to read their labels more carefully, it's done it's job.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Say what?!!!
How would you even start to know? Asking because hubs is a big tuna eater. That and (blecch!!!) pimento cheese. It’s always one or the other for lunch.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
That's interesting. Can you link to that data?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-TSQ4I8YtI
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
I didn't watch the whole video cause I'm at work, but I think Keith Kline discusses it because there are 2 Starkist cans on the table.neanderthin wrote: »
StarKist Tuna in spring water. Depending on the time of the year, the cans can have the same exact label, but the FAT content can be different due to the fact that the fish have a higher layer of fat when caught certain times of the year. One can may say 90 calories, while the other may say 130 calories. Since the labels on the front are the the same, only by checking the back labels will you know if you're getting the lower calorie tuna.springlering62 wrote: »
It's always good to know what you're really getting when you're buying canned or packaged items. Like the tuna I mentioned. Same exact can, but fat content can be way higher because of the time of year it was canned and shipped.sollyn23l2 wrote: »"I bet you that there will be lurkers here who may not have been reading labels more thoroughly, probably looking at them now if they are having issues losing weight."
And that's the whole point of the thread. If it gets even 1 person to read their labels more carefully, it's done it's job.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Say what?!!!
How would you even start to know? Asking because hubs is a big tuna eater. That and (blecch!!!) pimento cheese. It’s always one or the other for lunch.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
That's interesting. Can you link to that data?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-TSQ4I8YtI
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Yeah, the tuna example didn't come up. I'm only interested in the why really and nothing else and for me personally I don't really look at nutritional labels for how many calories or fat something might have and when I do it's generally to look at the ingredients when I'm trying to decide which product I want. Yogurt for example can be au natural or it can be nothing more than full of thickeners, other additives and sugar, basically a dessert. Cheers0 -
StarKist Tuna in spring water. Depending on the time of the year, the cans can have the same exact label, but the FAT content can be different due to the fact that the fish have a higher layer of fat when caught certain times of the year. One can may say 90 calories, while the other may say 130 calories. Since the labels on the front are the the same, only by checking the back labels will you know if you're getting the lower calorie tuna.springlering62 wrote: »
It's always good to know what you're really getting when you're buying canned or packaged items. Like the tuna I mentioned. Same exact can, but fat content can be way higher because of the time of year it was canned and shipped.sollyn23l2 wrote: »"I bet you that there will be lurkers here who may not have been reading labels more thoroughly, probably looking at them now if they are having issues losing weight."
And that's the whole point of the thread. If it gets even 1 person to read their labels more carefully, it's done it's job.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Say what?!!!
How would you even start to know? Asking because hubs is a big tuna eater. That and (blecch!!!) pimento cheese. It’s always one or the other for lunch.
I am absolutely gobsmacked. Learn something new every day.
And I’m impressed the labeling takes that into account.
1 -
Very interesting fact about canned tuna. Thanks for sharing! I usually buy the store brand, so now I'm going to go home and check the labels! I'll keep track of the numbers for a few months and compare whenever I buy more. I too would be impressed if the labels were updated to reflect the changing nutritional information.0
-
@ninerbuff
Do you have any links to data that shows the calorie difference in tuna from different seasons? The video doesn't discuss it and all I am finding is water vs oil pack differences. I know that different varieties of tuna (light vs white for ex) have different profiles but I have never heard this one before.0 -
paints5555 wrote: »@ninerbuff
Do you have any links to data that shows the calorie difference in tuna from different seasons? The video doesn't discuss it and all I am finding is water vs oil pack differences. I know that different varieties of tuna (light vs white for ex) have different profiles but I have never heard this one before.
Having watched Wicked Tuna some time ago, I do seem to remember comments about differences in the tuna at the start of the season versus the end. I imagine it's linked to the abundance of food in the ocean (or lack thereof) depending on the time of year. A bit like bears at the start of the winter versus the end?0 -
paints5555 wrote: »@ninerbuff
Do you have any links to data that shows the calorie difference in tuna from different seasons? The video doesn't discuss it and all I am finding is water vs oil pack differences. I know that different varieties of tuna (light vs white for ex) have different profiles but I have never heard this one before.
Having watched Wicked Tuna some time ago, I do seem to remember comments about differences in the tuna at the start of the season versus the end. I imagine it's linked to the abundance of food in the ocean (or lack thereof) depending on the time of year. A bit like bears at the start of the winter versus the end?
Do fish hibernate, if we attach climate change to that theory I'd imagine funding would be available. j/k. Cheers0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions