Posted on 03/13/2004 12:11:13 PM PST by Jean S
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. health officials on Friday asked restaurants to list calories and food packagers to update food labels so that ever-fatter Americans can easily figure out how many calories they are getting in a serving.
Health and Human Services (news - web sites) Secretary Tommy Thompson said he was asking companies to improve their labels voluntarily, but said urgent action was needed because of the country's obesity epidemic.
"Far too many Americans are literally eating themselves to death," Thompson told a news conference.
The government said it would ask packagers to stop one trick that fools many consumers -- labels on small packages that suggest they contain three servings when realistically they will be eaten by only one person.
A quick look at such a label suggests the whole package contains only 100 calories when in fact it contains 300.
Food labels now lay out how many calories there are per serving, how many servings are in the package, how much fat, cholesterol, sodium, carbohydrates, sugar, fiber and protein it contains and details of some key vitamins.
The moves come just days after government statistics showed that obesity and a lack of exercise were quickly overtaking smoking as the leading cause of death in the United States.
More than 30 percent of U.S. adults are obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (news - web sites). They have a higher risk of heart disease, diabetes and some forms of cancer.
The Food and Drug Administration (news - web sites), part of HHS, issued its own report with recommendations to improve food labeling.
Its obesity working group said FDA should educate consumers more about a healthy diet and weight and encourage restaurants to provide calorie and nutrition information.
VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE
Thompson, who has been talking to food manufacturers and restaurant chains, said he was not ready to resort to regulation. "Let's try this first. Let's see if we can't get voluntary compliance," he said.
Some of the FDA's moves will include evaluating changes to the "Nutrition Facts" panel to place more emphasis on the importance of calories -- including increasing the hard-to-read type size of the labels.
In return, the agency will consider letting food manufacturers put health claims on foods that meet FDA's definition of reduced or low calorie.
The Center for Science in the Public Interest, which has pushed for government regulation of restaurant food menus and junk food advertising, said parts of the report made sense.
But CSPI Executive Director Michael Jacobson said it did not go far enough.
"We should be getting junk food out of schools in favor of fresh fruits and vegetables (and) requiring, not just recommending, calorie counts on fast-food menu boards," he said in a statement.
But Rhona Applebaum, executive vice president and chief science officer of the National Food Processors Association, welcomed the proposals.
"It is important that any changes to nutrition labeling requirements be thoroughly researched and consumer-tested, to ensure that they do not make nutrition labeling more difficult for consumers to understand, and thereby less effective," Applebaum cautioned.
The National Restaurant Association's Steven Grover said there could be many ways to act on the recommendations.
"What we're talking about is providing really more market based solutions. That might be a menu board, it might be a brochure, it might be a table tent," he said.
(Additional reporting by Deborah Cohen in Chicago)
"It is important that any changes to nutrition labeling requirements be thoroughly researched and consumer-tested, to ensure that they do not make nutrition labeling more difficult for consumers to understand, and thereby less effective," Applebaum cautioned.How many consumer advocates does it take to inform a consumer?
Nonsense!
"Far too many Americans are literally eating themselves to death," Thompson told a news conference.
I could be wrong but, I tend to think those folks who are "literally eating themselves to death" are not also members of the group inclined to read labels.
Because, granted, there are times when I'd like to be informed of the trans-fatty acid content (a useful fact which will likely soon appear on labels). But, for those those of us who actually care about it, current labels already present enough Nutrition Facts to prevent suicide by ingestion.
Calories eaten minus calories burned pretty much equals calories stored.
Amendment V:
"...nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation."
Since labeling is for the "public use" then any regulation requiring labeling must have a corresponding funding mechanism to compensate the "private property" owners for the cost of supplying this information.
Otherwise any such regulation is unconstitutional.
In the early '90's Newt Gringrich hinted at this constitutional issue when he referred to "unfunded federal mandates" during the wonderful days of he Contract with America.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.