Big Country Outdoors

country store archery

Nutrition Labels and gaps Lies: Serving size sleight of hand

For years, consumers and organizations concerned surveillance have been screaming that U.S. law Labeling full of loopholes and the need for a serious review. After years of talk, the Administration Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says it is planning for something. But is it enough?

There are many questions the labeling of foods that may complain, but one of the biggest problems (due to its relationship with the crisis of obesity) is portion size.

I'm not talking about supersizing. The worst thing is that the actual calories are disguised sleight service hand size. and others are some examples:

Tostitos touch lemon. Calories per serving: 150. Not bad for tortilla chips, eh? Not so fast. Check serving size: 1 oz. That is a whopping of six. There are 10 servings per container. That is 1500 calories in the bag.

Most guys can release half of the bag for a cool 750 calories. Well, suppose you have some restraint and only eat one third of the bag (20 cards). You still get 500 calories. But who are detained the 6 tokens?

Vitamin Water. While it might rant about how the sugar water is being marketed as health food, I keep conjuring serving size for now.

The label says there are 50 calories per serving. Wow, only 50 calories! You add up all those vitamins. Should be good for you and perfect for the diet, right? Think again. Watch the serving size and servings per container: 8 oz per serving and 2.5 servings per container.

Sorry, but is there any reason to 2.5 parts other than to hide the actual calorie content?

When you see the whole bottle is 20 ounces, you realize that contains 125 calories, not 50. Although 20 ounces is a big bottle, I know many individuals who do not chug the whole thing.

Sobe Lifewater? The same trick in 20 oz bottles

Healthy Choice soup, vegetable country. They do this in inconvenient packaging microwavable plastic lid. Only heat and eat.

It says 90 calories and 480 milligrams of sodium per serving. Go less than a hundred calories. Wait a minute though. Turn the container around and see that the serving size is 1 cup servings per container, says "about 2."

Huh? Seems pretty obvious to me that this vessel microwave-ready is designed for one person to eat in one sitting, why not just put 180 calories per container on the label (and 960 mg of sodium). I guess 90 calories 480 mg sodium and sounds … well … as a healthy choice!

Ben and Jerrys chocolate fudge brownie ice cream.

This delicious ice cream infamous with its own Facebook fan page has 270 calories per serving.

We all know that ice cream is loaded with calories and should only be an occasional treat, but 270 calories per serving, which is not so terrible it is?

Look a little more on the label. The portion size is ½ cup. Who eats a half cup of ice cream? In fact, they have not eaten a whole pint of themselves?

According to Ben and Jerry, there are 4 servings that container paints. 4 servings 270 calories = 1080 calories! That's about half a day worth of calories for an average woman.

I could go on – cookies, brownies, muffins, pasta, cereal box (you eat ¾ cup of cereal), etc, but I think you get the point.

What is the solution to this mess? News reports last week said that the FDA can crack. Count me among those who delight in hearing this news. One of his ideas is to publish the nutritional information including calories, on the front of food labels.

The problem is that this movement itself could actually make things worse. Suppose Tostitos began publishing "150 calories per serving" right at the front of the bag. Most people would assume the chips were low in calories. Put calorie information on the front label clearly would help only if the amount of calories in the whole package or a normal human being serving size!

Ah, but the FDA says they are on top of that too. Also want to standardize and re-defining portion sizes. Sounds great, but there are critics who say that consumers take it as an endorsement to eat larger portions so the strategy could backfire.

Suppose, for example, the government decided not to eat one-half cup of Ben and Jerry's to have the new serving size 1 cup, or half of the small containers. Now by law the label says 540 calories per serving instead of 270. Is that as get official permission to eat twice?

I am not against the latest initiative by the FDA, but what really needs is some honesty in labeling.

Food manufacturers should not be allowed to manipulate the serving sizes in a way that trick into believing that there are fewer calories that actually exist in an amount that is likely to eat.

It would be good to have calories for the entire package on the label at a glance. A new rating scale for the energy density would be cool too, if it could be easily interpreted. It would be nice to have chosen serving size for quantities that are more likely to be commonly consumed. But the standardization of serving sizes for all types of food is difficult.

My European friends tell me that food labels are listed there in 100g portions, making comparisons easy. But if we take into account the amount of daily needs calories each individual may vary (easily 3 times or more to run the gamut from completely sedentary to elite athlete, not to mention the differences between men and women), normalization is applied to the whole world can not be possible.

I think the recent laws requiring calories on restaurant menus are a positive step that will influence the behavior of some people. But there is no labeling changes alone address the obesity crisis. A real solution will to have to include personal responsibility, nutritional education, self-discipline, hard work and lifestyle change.

Changes in labeling laws not affect the world because people are more likely to care about what the labels say they are the ones who have already made a commitment to change their lifestyles (and are less likely to consume processed and packaged foods – which have labels – first). In fact, for those who care, all the information you need is already on labels just a little math and watch out for sneaky tricks label.

There is no real solution to this distortion portions and the label is the problem: Become calorie conscious. Education course that includes reading labels, but goes much further. This is how I define "Calorie counting"

1. Get a good calorie counter book, chart or other electronic device / software and know how much of calories of all foods consumed on a daily basis. Search the caloric value of foods you eat from time to time.

2. Always have a plan meals every day – on paper – print the calories for each food, the food every day. Use this menu as a daily goal and objective.

3. Educate yourself about the average calorie requirement of men and women and learn how to calculate your own calorie needs as closely as possible on the basis of their activity, weight, body composition, height, sex and age.

4. Get a kitchen scale and use good food.

Keep counting calories and making nutrition by the numbers until you eat unconsciously competent and adequate amounts to maintain your ideal weight easily becomes second nature.

Obviously, that calories are all there to nutrition is like saying that putting s all there is to golf. quality and quantity of calories are important. However, is a mistake to ignore the side of the calorie game. Portion size matters and even healthy foods are stored as fat if you eat too much ..

You can play "archery blindfolded, to guess the calories and food portions if desired. Hey, you might get lucky and succeed. Personally, I would not recommend depending on the luck – or government – for something as important as your body and your health.

About the Author

Tom Venuto is a natural (steroid-free) bodybuilder, fat loss expert and author of the best seller, Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle: Fat Burning Secrets of the world’s best bodybuilders and fitness models. Get a FREE fat loss mini-course and learn how to get rid of stubborn fat naturally by visiting
http://www.BurnTheFat.com

Whitetails In Texas – Show # 12 – Trophy Hunters TV