Reply to Why don’t Americans give a f*** about what they eat?

Forum Index » Diet, Nutrition & Weight Loss

Reply to "Why don’t Americans give a f*** about what they eat?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]Awesome example of why we need the feds involved in nutrition standards, in spite of what the FREEDOM crowd says:

Outshine No Sugar Added Strawberry Fruit Ice Bars
https://www.outshinesnacks.com/en/products/frozen-...bars/no-sugar-added-strawberry

Third ingredient? Sorbitol. Which is another word for sugar. Not that they intend to confuse people, of course.

I'm all for people making their own food choices, but in order to do that, we need to have legit information. And we don't.
[/quote]

Sorbitol is a sugar alcohol, which is a separate thing and likely can't legally be listed as "sugar" on an ingredient list.  Should the label include a detailed explanation of the difference between sugar and sugar alcohols?  Maybe.  But I don't think we are going to get dire warnings about every type of sweetener on food packaging, esp. on a snack with just a few grams of carbs.

Anyway, I don't think anyone is having serious weight and overall health issues caused by buying Outshine bars.  [/quote]

Our current food system allows manufacturers to sell things as healthy, aka sugar free, because they use sorbitol or aspartame or hfcs instead. It’s fraudulent.[/quote]

They listed it on the box as what it is: sugar free.  I don’t find anything to be misleading and they aren’t calling it heathy.  An Outshine bar is a treat and meant to be a dessert. Something sweet when you want something sweet.  [b]At 90 calories and 4 grams of sugar, no one is getting over weight from too many outshine bars after dinner.[/b]  [/quote]
+1
They’d get diarrhea before they had any blood sugar issues.

Guys. Everyone knows that “sugar free” on a clearly sweet thing - popsicles, juice, yogurt, etc - means “fake sugar.” That’s what it means in this country. The phrase you’ll find to indicate that no sweetener has been added is “no sugar added.” This isn’t difficult.[/quote]

Except that the example cited above says “no sugar added.” So, no.[/quote]

They’re popsicles! No one buys them thinking they’re healthy. No one![/quote]

Funny how they call them fruit bars instead of popsicles though, huh? It’s almost like they’re trying to make you think they’re, I dunno, healthier?[/quote]

The first two ingredients are water and fruit.  Seems appropriate they are called fruit bars.  Popsicles typically contain no real fruit/juice.  [/quote]

Fruit bar: puree the fruit, freeze into the mold. No added sugars, no extra chemicals. Literally just frozen fruit.

The fact that anyone *must* analyze nutritional labels to figure out exactly what they're eating (because it's generally not the same as advertised) is why the FDA and consumer protection entities exist. Marketers for substances meant for consumption should be an occupation regulated as closely as law and medicine. [/quote]

Omg.  You have issues.  It really doesn’t matter.  Americans are obese because they gorge on terrible high calorie food and don’t move.  It isn’t the outshine bar and it’s few grams of fake sugar.  You could one every day it it wouldn’t make a dent in your weight.  [/quote]

It’s ONE example! We could make it easier on the consumer by instituting a simple stoplight label on the front of packaging: green for anytime foods, yellow for things with more added sugar, fat and salt, red for things that should be eaten sparingly. Then people wouldn’t have to invest time in reading the fine print. But manufacturers have fought that for decades.[/quote]

Putting stoplight labels on food is not feasible. Different people have different nutritional needs. Kids vs adults, diabetic vs non-diabetic, allergies, metabolic disorders, athletes vs sedentary, etc.

That’s why the current nutrition info is ideal. It tells you grams of fiber, protein, carbs, added sugars, ingredients, GF?, whatever you want to know. Individuals can choose what is appropriate for themselves. The government or food corps don’t know and should not label a food good or bad because it’s different for different people.

Example. A lot of of people avoid carbs. I train for marathons and in the days leading up to a race, I look for high carb foods. On a regular week, I’ll look for high protein. I avoid fake foods and preservatives as much as possible always. Sometimes I need low fiber, refined carbs for instant energy, sometimes not. Some days I’ll crave salt and eat a bag of potato chips and I don’t consider it a “bad” food. Some days I crave a big hamburger and fries—my body tells me this is “good”.

I have family members with celiac—what works for me, might not work for them.[/quote]

The UK seems to find it feasible: https://www.nutrition.org.uk/healthyliving/helpingyoueatwell/324-labels.html?start=3#:~:text=Using%20the%20government%20scheme%2C%20a,calories%20and%20kilojoules)%20it%20provides.

I'd also add that they do a MUCH better job on allergen labeling for restaurant menus.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics