Revolutionary “New” Nutrition Facts Label… For Your Consideration

On June 6, 2011 I wrote a blog informing readers about a challenge initiated by UC Berkeley to create and submit a “new” Nutrition Facts label -since thankfully the old one is finally up for renewal.

I couldn’t resist the temptation to submit my own “new” Nutrition Facts label… below is a link to the detailed version of my entry.

Grant Roberts – New Nutrition Facts Label Submission

Obviously the purpose of a Nutrition Facts label should be to help consumers make healthier choices providing an informative icon to make a quick, intelligible decision when comparing one food product to another.

If a label is truly informative, it shouldn’t take any more than a few seconds to spot the obvious differences and choose the healthier option.

Sounds easy enough… but until now the old FDA Nutrition Facts label was only reiterating the same ambiguous USDA dribble that is purposefully confusing to consumers (see Who Do We Trust below).

The “new” Nutrition Facts label that I have submitted for consideration changes all of that. I have maintained the familiar look – but the information represents a revolutionary new way of thinking and important illuminating considerations when it comes to identifying what really matters when buying food.

Synopsis of the Revolutionary Change

Standard Serving Sizes for all categories of food shall be realistic and uniform.

The focus on calories (an nondescript unit of measure) will shift to delivering the “essential” nutrients.

The label must “add up” and be easily accountable in both Calories and Grams

The three (3) macronutrients Protein, Fat and Carbohydrate will be displayed prominently in percentage per serving totaling 100% (e.g. 30%protein, 30% fat, 40% carbohydrate)

The three (3) macronutrients Protein, Fat and Carbohydrate will be defined categorically:

Protein will be listed as a complete or incomplete source of the essential amino acids – listing the missing amino acids to aid all consumers (particularly vegetarians who generally must eat foods in combination to acquire all of the essential amino acids).

Fat will be divided into source: Saturated, Monounsaturated and Polyunsaturated

Any amount of Man Made Trans Fat will be disclosed – no more less than .5g per serving = zero

Carbohydrates will be listed as:

Natural Sugar / Starch

Added Sugar

Artificial Sweetener

Fiber

The Glycemic Load of the serving will be prominently listed and described as either a high, medium or low glycemic food

Total number of ingredients will be listed and divided into natural source and artificial

Deletions:

Cholesterol will no longer be listed due to the lack of scientific evidence of ANY negative impact

Reference to a 2000-calorie diet since it is not representative of the average populations goal and is purposefully confusing.

Daily values likewise as they are based on the same fictitious 2000-calorie goal

Who Do We Trust?

Nutrition Facts                     V                       Nutrition Fiction

It is simply inexplicable that the USDA is charged with advising Americans what constitutes a healthful diet while simultaneously supporting the food industry through the provision of subsidies and devising the strategies to improve farm income and expand agriculture markets. It is impossible for the USDA to serve two masters without bias… especially since the USDA serves the Food Industry – a $500 billion enterprise, laden with capital and lobbyists to protect and influence their interests.

Until the public revolts and demands change, the USDA will remain the greatest obstruction to providing consumers with pertinent information that will allow an individual to make an informed decision to achieve / maintain a desired level of fitness (maintaining a healthful body composition through the delivery of the essential nutrients needed to support and sustain life in a disease free state)

The USDA guidelines are purposefully vague so that no food product or manufacturer is omitted or disparaged – the USDA never says “don’t eat something” instead uses a less industry offensive term: use sparingly,  allowing even the junkiest of junk food to fit neatly into the ambiguous daily caloric availability.

Literally a Legal… Case and Point

THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff,

V.

THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA), FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION (FDA)

Defendants

Following the release of the USDA’s Guidelines in the year 2000, the USDA was charged with what amounts to acts of duplicity, purposeful vagueness of information and bias to the benefit of the food industry in the creation of the nations nutritional advice USDA Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

The USDA was found GUILTY of conspiracy when the court ruled the USDA had violated the federal law that prohibits bias to special interest groups that revealed a full 6 or the 11 Guideline creation advisory board were food industry representatives / spokespersons.

Despite the verdict, the USDA dietary then and to date remains ambiguous at best. The USDA’s imprecise and influenced recommendations are used to reward industry with the lucrative government food services contracts for the nations schools, military, prisons, public employees and hospitals worth billions of dollars. This is ill informed cycle is perpetuated with the egregious use of the weak and indefinable advice that forms the unsound foundation of our educational institutions curriculum for future nutritionists, dietitians and health-care providers.

Please join the Revolution…Vote with your Fork.

© 2011 Copyrights Grant Roberts, All Rights Reserved