Last week, the FDA  hinted it would be seriously looking at regulating Front of Pack (FOP) nutrition labeling systems. As a result, Smart Choices called it quits, and other programs are “on alert”. The FDA’s involvement can be of great assistance to the public, by creating a single unified system in ALL supermarkets and on ALL packages.

But first, wouldn’t it be nice if the FDA cleaned up the mess originally created when the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) brought us the nutrition facts label as we know it today?

Here’s a list of 10 things the FDA can do to improve the existing information on labels. Read more…

The concept of a soda tax has been floating around for a while. The idea is to tax sugary drinks in order to help reduce demand and also foot the bill for obesity related disease treatment down the road. The penny per ounce tax will supposedly reduce consumption by a few percent and raise billions of dollars over the next decade.

Proponents claim that, just like tobacco taxes helped reduce demand for cigarettes, so will a tax on sugary drinks. Opponents claims that such a tax is unfair because there’s not one single cause for obesity. Why not tax butter and potato chips as well?

Even though there’s currently no pending legislation at the federal or state level in the US, the beverage industry is taking no chances, according to USA Today.

The American Beverage Association has begun a $2 million ad campaign to oppose a tax on sugar-sweetened drinks, depicting it as a tax on “simple pleasures.”

Last month, the group joined forces with the National Restaurant Association and the Grocery Manufacturers Association to launch Americans Against Food Taxes, a coalition of 110 state and local groups.

Read more…

We don’t like soft drinks in the American diet. We wish people would consume less because soft drinks have no nutritional value and contribute to obesity.

But more taxes for Americans suck. We don’t like the government reaching in to our wallets. Here’s a better idea. Read more…

It’s been almost 20 years since the nutrition label as we know it was introduced. The intent was to empower consumers to make more informed (read: healthy) purchasing decisions. Unfortunately, the labels have not helped, as America continues to grow, and not in a good way.

While blaming the inadequacy of the nutrition panel is a naive approach to America’s relationship with its food, there are certain oversights or loopholes in the way packaged food information is provided to consumers today. For example, health claims or nutrient claims, which appear in large font on the front of package, embellish one positive trait, say “low-fat”. The nutritional cost may be a product high in sugar content as compensation. But such details appear in the side panel (the nutrition label is never up front), and consumers don’t always bother to check.

We’ve compiled a list of improvements that can make labels and packaging even more informative, hopefully providing consumers with  better tools to make a decision. Consumers will benefit from increased transparency of nutrition and ingredient information. Read more…