| Online: | |
| Visits: | |
| Stories: |
| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Why the Newly Proposed Nutrition Labels are Good
Current Nutrition Labels Need Updating
Physician-Chef Points Out the Pros, Cons of 3 Suggested Changes
It’s nothing new to the American consumer that food packaging emphasizes only part of a product’s health story, and the fact that nutritional labels have not been overhauled in 20 years hasn’t helped, says cardiologist and professional chef Michael S. Fenster, MD.
A proposed update for nutrition labels, which could take a year or more to appear on store shelves, is being driven by First Lady Michelle Obama, as part of her “Let’s Move” campaign.
“Our current nutrition labels are the same as those implemented in the 1990s, except with the 2006 addition of trans fats information. It’s based on nutrition data and eating habits from the 1970s and 1980s,” says “Dr. Mike,” author of “Eating Well, Living Better: The Grassroots Gourmet Guide to Good Health and Great Food.”
From the perspective of physician and foodie, he analyzes what’s good about the First Lady’s proposed nutrition labels, and what could be improved.
3 Pros and Cons of Michelle Obama’s Proposed Nutrition Labels
Pro Calorie counts would be displayed in a bigger, bolder font. Emphasizing calories allows consumers to think with a helpful “energy in / energy out” baseline. Do I really need the calories in this product when I could stand to lose a few pounds? That’s a reasonably good question to promote.
Con Basing the value of food primarily on calories over-simplifies the evaluation process. An energy drink may have zero calories, but it’s not better for you than an apple, which may have 100 calories. We cannot overlook nutrition!
Source: http://omtimes.com/2014/03/newly-proposed-nutrition-labels-good/
