Food Labeling Nonsense
I thought I’d forgo my regularly scheduled “Dear Mark” Monday post (or “Dear Readers” as the case may be) for a subject very near and dear to my heart: the constantly-evolving, ever-confusing ways of the food rating labelers. Whether it’s the AHA-approved red “Heart Healthy” stamps that implore overweight diabetics to stuff themselves with “healthy” whole grains or the mention of antioxidant and fiber content somehow making that sugary breakfast cereal good for your kids, packaged food distributors seem to love making outlandish claims that bear little to no fruit. It’s incredibly effective, though, for the same reason people will believe anything they hear on TV or uttered by someone with an official title. We’ve already got a far-reaching bunch of bureaucrats at the FDA deciding which macronutrients to highlight and which to demonize on the official nutritional labels that adorn the back of every packaged food item, so the natural next step is a mishmash of extraneous labeling that tries to make nutritional recommendations based on the FDA data (which is itself based on flawed, misguided, or even blatantly false science).
Like most nutritionists, dietitians, and even doctors, they probably think they’re promoting the right message. After all, Conventional Nutritional Wisdom is pretty clear about what’s healthy and what’s not, and everyone else just follows suit. It’s just that they’re totally, utterly, completely incorrect about nearly everything. In some cases, they may even be willfully ignorant.
I almost feel bad for the folks behind NuVal (well, not really), one of the more “promising” nutritional rating labels to be rolled out in the coming months, because theirs seems to be the most earnest rating system. Based on the Overall Nutritional Quality Index algorithm, foods are given a rating, from 1 to 100 (with 100 supposedly being the healthiest). A “panel of nutrition and medical experts” (along with the good folks at Topco Associates) designed the algorithm, which takes over thirty different nutritional factors into consideration. Some of the favorable factors, like omega-3, vitamin, mineral, or antioxidant content, are unequivocally desirable (CW gets it right, sometimes); and I agree with some of the unfavorable factors, like trans fats and sugar content. But where they falter (and this is undoubtedly true of everyone in the food labeling game) is in selecting nutritional factors “based on their established relevance to public health as reported and published by the scientific community.” I have a great deal of respect for the scientific community at large, but as for what passes as mainstream nutritional science? No, thanks. I’ve seen what gets “reported and published,” and what gets cast aside and ignored.
Another similar rating system is nutrition iQ, which boasts a similar pedigree of unaffiliated, independent dietitians and medical experts. Instead of numbered ratings, they opt for colors. Red is bad (saturated fat, cholesterol, bad!), while green is great (vegetables, fruits – ok, I can get behind that). Various shades of orange indicate graininess and fibrousness, all “desirable.” Seems pandering and slightly condescending, but then again, I imagine that’s what they think of us.
And then there’s the Smart Choices labeling program – the poster child for industry meddling and conflict of interest. I know I shouldn’t be surprised or even disappointed, but I can’t help it. It’s just so blatant. Take a look at the participating companies and organizations (PDF): Coca-Cola, ConAgra Foods, General Mills, American Diabetes Association (oh, I’m sure these guys are regulating sugar and carbohydrate levels in foods to help patients manage insulin!), Nestle (I’d love to hear their thoughts on nutrition), to name just a few of the more ridiculous members in charge of labeling foods healthy or unhealthy. While there are the expected admonitions of saturated fat and dietary cholesterol levels, what amazed me was their brazenness in recommending up to 25% of calories from added sugar. Yes, added. That means a carb-rich cereal that’s already destined to become pure blood glucose can have an additional heaping of actual sugar and still get the green check mark on the box indicating “healthy.” Boy, diabetics sure must be thankful to have friends like these in their corner! Interestingly, the folks at Smart Choices have no plans to roll out a corresponding red check mark to indicate “unhealthy,” and I gotta admit – I’m a little disappointed. Their idea of “unhealthy” is likely more healthy than their approved foods.
The easiest way to avoid all this food label confusion is to – you guessed it – avoid food labels altogether. For the most part, we shouldn’t even really be eating foods that come in packages. Nut butters, bagged vegetables, shrink-wrapped organic meat – items like these are the exceptions (and these aren’t the type of mass-market processed foods that get the labels, anyway), of course, but as a general rule avoiding packaged foods is sound. If you follow the Primal Blueprint, of course, this isn’t really an issue at all. I imagine I’m preaching to the choir here, but it’s just too tempting, too fun to point out the dreck that masquerades as sensible nutritional advice (it’s slightly sad, too, but what do we have without laughter?). And hey, even if someone new stumbles across this post and never visits the site again, maybe they’ll think twice about the food labels coming soon to a store near you.
While I imagine their hearts are mostly in the right place, the food labelers cannot succeed. Oh, they’ll succeed as far as getting their message out about what’s healthy and what isn’t. They’ll have the renewed support of most nutritionists and dietitians, and the average citizen will see the green check or the 90+ rating on the granola bars and feel vindicated when they eat them – but they’ll be working against reality. People won’t get healthier just because they listen to the ratings; they’ll just get fatter and unhealthier. The various ratings agencies and nutritional “experts” simply cannot win this battle when they don’t even know who they should be fighting. The enemy is within, the fox is guarding the henhouse, and the real losers are the people who still buy into CW’s outdated, long-refuted garbage.
Subscribe to Mark’s Daily Apple feeds
Posted By: Mark Sisson
Bruno, could you consider trying for a month to eliminate carbs? Since Mark has the upcoming 30-day primal challenge, plan it out. Figure out your meals and snacks ahead so you don’t get caught in the “I have nothing to eat so I’ll just grab a sandwich”. I’ve only been eating primal for 2-3 months but the difference is amazing, excess fat has literally melted away, my energy levels have improved and as a frequent headache (stress, migraine, and random headaches) sufferer I have noticed at least a 50% reduction in the occurrence of various headaches.
I am striving now to incorporate more exercise of the weightbearing variety as I already spend about 20 hours a week walking for one of my jobs. More muscle = an even leaner, healthier me.
sounds like a good plan I am sure ready for some good change in my life.I was wondering if the heavy carb load has anything to do with the sinus area?
This is exactlywhat my mother has been telling me since I was a ‘younger’ child (I’m 16 now).
I don’t know if the product ‘Danone Actimel’ is available in America, but here in Ireland it’s a pretty big thing. The advertisements claim that 1 actimel a day helps to boost your immune system. The advertisements, shown especially during children’s programs, feature a group of cartoon ‘heroes’ called Team Actimel who get to work defending the child from germs and diseases as soon as the actimel (a yoghurt drink) is consumed. So every parent in the country stocks up on the product – after all how can the good old television be lying to them.
The scary thing is that in actual fact the ONLY scientific investigation done showed that it did not make the test subjects sick.
I’ve also noticed over the last couple of months that breads with ‘wholegrain’ on the front are rarely 100% wholegrain. The ingredients will show wholegrain flour 26%, wheat flour 25%. This shouldn’t be allowed!!
undoubtedly, this masquerade to con people into buying the product tells us that there is more to the puzzle.
chemical warfare through our foods. MSG, citric acid, and other preservatives are a form of terrible warfare on the people of the world~~
Tammy, you are way off base scientifically…which is the bottom line.
MSG is a natural product. It enhances flavors, just like common table salt. I don’t know of all the sources, but one is a byproduct of sugar beet processing. (Almost 40 years ago I worked in a sugar beet processing factory for a few months. Beet molasses is bitter to humans, so it went to animal feed. But they extracted the MSG first.)
Citric Acid is also a very natural product and of no consequence to human ingestion. It works as a preservative because it lowers the pH to the point that bacteria can’t survive. Just like vinegar and pickling.
It is very important that in the battle with the ADM’s and Kelloggs of the world and the USDA that we are accurate in our science(s). We must educate ourselves to move past mythology or the cascade effect (how the “lipid hypothesis” became mainstream!) As a sort of scientist, I get frustrated with plain old error, let alone opinions w/o foundation.
The bad boys are not MSG (granted, some people have a sensitivity) or citric acid. They are soy because of its estrogenic effects, grains generally, grain oils. At least, that’s where I am at these days.
Reasonably scientifically speaking, of course!
It’s interesting how Asians have consumed soy for the last 5,ooo or so years and still have lower rates of cancer (etc) than Americans.
Then again, Asians eat fermented, traditionally prepared soy products, none of that hexane treated junk you find in vegetarian burgers and cream cheese.
And even then, not in “it’s a health food therefore eating more = better health” amounts.
Moderation is key, peoples
Oh really OnTheBayou?
http://www.truthinlabeling.org/
As a person with food allergies, label reading is a big deal. You cannot believe that “dairy free” and “milk free” are not the same thing. I’m actually taking a seminar with Eat, Live, Learn to learn this new foreign language called label reading. I will be putting more of this info out there in future posts. I’m the Dairy-Free Examiner, which is naturally “paleo”.
http://www.examiner.com/x-8953-Chicago-DairyFree-Food-Examiner
Really, Dave from Hawaii.
I distinctly said that some people have problems with MSG.
I also said, and my main point to Tammy was, it is not a preservative. It is not.
Please don’t read what I didn’t say.
Lessons I’ve learned over the years concerning various products, especially packaged foods. If one must use a packaged product, and sometimes it is a necessity then:
1. Do not believe any statement on the front of the package. It is for advertisement purposes only. It may be true but it is intended to hide other truths of more importance.
2. The only part of the package that even approaches the truth is the food labeling grid that lists amounts of carbs, sodium, fiber, etc. It is not the whole truth of course but it can be used as a guideline. I use it only for the amount of carbs and sodium. And finally but most important,
3. Never ever never never trust the government. The people that make the labeling rules and regulations are politicians that are bought and sold on a daily basis by the large corporations. Nobody believes a politician when he/she makes a speech so why believe the end result of a law that was created by said politician?
That’s a pretty broad brush there, James, about governments. You do hit the nail on the head about the corporations owning – I’ll insert this – most of the politicians.
Just look at the rounding down rules for an example of deceit on nutritional labels.
Bayou…Oh I agree whole heartedly. When shopping my philosophy is “If God didn’t make it, don’t eat it.” If it needs a label so that you know what your eating you shouldn’t eat it. You should know what it is by looking at it. So basicly I am restricted to the fruit and veggie isle and the meat and fish case. Careful on the meats alot are injected with “A solution” no thanks.
But when did God start growing fruit with those little ID numbers?
Bread/grains are eaten just about everywhere and have been for eons. It’s real food, you bunch of wackos.