The food industry has reportedly halted a new front-of-packaging (FOP) labeling campaign pending Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance. According to an October 23, 2009, press release, the Smart Choices Program™ voluntarily postponed active operations after FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg indicated “that the agency intends to develop standardized criteria on which future front-of-package nutrition or shelf labeling will be based.” While awaiting FDA guidance, the program will no longer enroll new companies or encourage use of the logo. “We welcome the FDA’s interest in developing uniform front-of-package and shelf-labeling criteria,” said program chair Mike Hughes. “The Smart Choices Program shares that exact goal, and was designed to provide a voluntary front-of-package labeling program that could promote informed food choices and help consumers construct healthier diets. We continue to believe the Smart Choices Program is an important step in the right direction.” See Reuters, October 23, 2009; FoodNavigator-USA.com and UPI.com, October…
Tag Archives nutrition
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a letter to the food industry to provide guidance on front-of-package (FOP) labeling and warn that the agency “will consider using our regulatory tools” if the industry fails to provide “a common, credible approach to FOP and shelf labeling.” According to FDA, consumers are less likely to read the nutrition facts label on the back or side of a food package and thus rely on information appearing on the front of the package. Acknowledging that food companies have begun relying on “symbol programs” to convey nutritional information, FDA states that it is assessing the criteria established by food manufacturers and comparing them with its regulatory criteria. FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg stated during a conference call with journalists that the agency plans to “take enforcement for egregious examples,” observing that “[s]ome nutritionists have questioned whether this information is more marketing oriented than nutrition…
Connecticut Attorney General (AG) Richard Blumenthal has announced that his office will be investigating “a potentially misleading national food label program that deems mayonnaise, sugar-laden cereals and other nutritionally suspect foods ‘Smart Choices.’” Targeting Hellman’s Real mayonnaise (light and non-light), Breyer’s ice cream, processed cereals, and Lipton beverages bearing the symbol, Blumenthal is seeking information from the organizations administering the program and major food companies that make the products. According to his press release, information sought includes “the consumer research and selection criteria driving the Smart Choice program; the process and fees involved in administering the program; and any payments or developmental role that major food manufacturers might have provided for the program.” Kelly Brownell, director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale, is quoted as saying, “It is very important that consumers have truthful and non-deceptive nutrition information if they are to make informed choices.”…
This article examines a new food-labeling campaign called the Smart Choices Program™, which uses the government dietary guidelines to identify “smarter food and beverage choices” for consumers. According to reporter William Neuman, the industry-backed system has apparently provoked the ire of some nutritionists who question the use of the green checkmark on “sugar-laden cereals like Cocoa Krispies and Froot Loops.” The Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Department of Agriculture have also warned the program’s managers that the agencies will be monitoring the results to see whether the labels “had the effect of encouraging consumers to choose highly processed food and refined grains instead of fruits, vegetables and whole grains.” “What we don’t want to do is have front-of-package information that in any way is based on cherry-picking the good and not disclosing the components of a product that may be less good,” one senior FDA advisor was quoted as…
U.S. researchers have reportedly developed a nutrient-density classification system that offers “a positive, scientific approach to inform people about what to eat rather than what not to eat.” V.L. Fulgoni 3rd, et al., “Development and validation of the nutrient-rich foods index: a tool to measure nutritional quality of foods,” Journal of Nutrition, August 2009. The researchers apparently compared several formulas, or nutrient-rich food (NRF) indices, to the Healthy Eating Index (HEI) set by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans Committee, which called for “a scientifically valid definition of nutrient density to help with nutrition guidance.” This definition would help consumers choose nutrient-dense foods better suited to fulfill the HEI recommendations. According to the study, the NRF index most closely aligned with HEI is based on 100 calories and weighed nine “nutrients to encourage” (calcium, fiber, iron, magnesium, potassium, protein, and vitamins A, C and E) against three…
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), U.S. Department of Agriculture and Office of the Acting Secretary for Food Safety have announced a public meeting to address an upcoming session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the international food standards body established by the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization and World Health Organization. Slated for October 8, 2009, the meeting will consider U.S. draft positions pertaining to the 31st Session of the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU) to be held November 2-6 in Dusseldorf, Germany. CCNFSDU studies nutritional problems and advises the Codex on general nutritional issues; drafts general provisions concerning the nutritional aspects of all foods; develops standards, guidelines and related texts pertaining to foods for special dietary uses; and considers provisions on nutritional aspects proposed for inclusion in Codex standards. The U.S. agencies will also hold a working group on October…
A recent study has reportedly claimed that the average American woman enrolled in the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is 5.8 pounds heavier than someone of the same socioeconomic background who does not receive food stamps. Jay L. Zagorsky, et al., “Does the U.S. Food Stamp Program Contribute to Adult Weight Gain?”, Economics & Human Biology (July 2009). According to the researchers, “this association does not prove that the Food Stamp Program causes weight gain,” but may show that increased income, either from cash or food stamp coupons, increases food spending in general. “However, the estimates indicate that food demand is inelastic and increased food spending does not necessarily mean increased caloric intake. Even so, the program could still contribute to weight gain since people tend to overconsume products that are free,” stated the study authors. Noting that the average recipient receives approximately $80 per month in food stamp…
This article explores how the method of estimating the calories in food, developed in the late 19th century, may provide misleading information on the amount of energy people actually get from a food. The calorie counts are calculated by burning small samples of food, and science writer Bijal Trivedi observes, “Nutritionists are well aware that our bodies don’t incinerate food, they digest it. And digestion— from chewing food to moving it through the gut and chemically breaking it down along the way—takes a different amount of energy for different foods.” Trivedi compares the nutrients in a health-food bar and a chocolate brownie and discusses research showing that more highly refined, cooked and softer ingredients tend to be absorbed more readily when eaten, thus contributing higher actual caloric intake than raw or chewy foods. Despite the acknowledged inaccuracies in calorie counts, most nutritionists have apparently decided that the measuring system should not…
A federal court in California has denied the request for class certification filed by plaintiffs who allege that Van’s International Foods falsely advertised its frozen waffle products by listing incorrect nutritional information in their labels. Hodes v. Van’s Int’l Foods, No. 09-1530 (C.D. Cal, decided July 23, 2009). While the court found that the claims met the numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation requirements of Rule 23(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it found that the named plaintiffs failed to satisfy Rule 23(b)(3). According to the court, common questions of law and fact do not predominate over individualized issues, and the class action device is not superior to other methods for adjudicating the controversy. The named plaintiffs had sought to certify a nationwide class of consumers, and the court was concerned about the manageability of the class action, stating, “the Court has concerns about how Plaintiffs will identify each…
Consumers who sued the company that makes Van’s brand frozen waffles and a number of retailers, alleging that the calorie and nutrition information on the packaging did not accurately reflect what was in the products, have filed a motion to certify a nationwide class. Hodes v. Van’s Int’l Foods, No. 09-01530 (C.D. Cal., motion filed June 15, 2009). Additional information about the complaint appears in issue 295 of this Update. According to the motion, the defendants have filed motions to dismiss since the suit was filed in March 2009, and thus, no discovery has taken place. The named plaintiffs discuss how their complaint fulfills class certification requirements, contending that all class members were injured in the same way, that is, “they purchased Van’s waffles products in the belief that the waffles had the nutritional value represented by the labeling.” The plaintiffs argue that no conflicts of laws issues arise because they…
