As far as your comment, why should anyone other than you be responsible for your health? It seems to me it's our own responsibility to know and understand what we put in our body - that's not the government's role. -- NL
My health should not depend on reading the fine print on a food package.
If that's true, I could write a contract for a house, car or any high dollar item and somewhere in the mountains of paperwork say that no matter how much you pay me, the item reverts back to me in two months. Tell me how ethical that is and who would be to blame? 66
Lion makes a valid point, which you totally ignored. The Government is not responsible for your inability to read about or understand facts about diet or about contract law.
A 'meeting of the minds' is necessary to validate a contract. Your 'high dollar' example is clearly fraud which invalidates such contracts. The state would not enforce.
Show such an intent to defraud in fine print mandatory food labeling.
In fact, the state could even be partly liable to see that the mandated label is correct.
I don't think a company would willfully put something into a food that is harmful. I do think as long as they don't know what it does, the stuff gets into the meal. Ignorance is bliss, in other words. My point which seems to be forgotten is a lot of foods are advertised as low-fat but then they put an unknown into the mix and people are under the mistaken idea they can get away with treating it without some sort of caution.
Hey, it's low fat. Now you can enjoy it without a worry. Wrong.
I already know what this garbage can do to you. No matter what the companies try to call it, it's still junk food. I'm going to start searchiing the tiny labels they put on this stuff. If you don't, that's your choice.
Why would a fine print in a contract be fraud? Isn't it your responsibility to make sure you're not cheated? I could even write it in Latin. Isn't that the same as a lay person having any idea of what Hydrogenated oil is?