If you’ve ever peered at the nutrition-information label on your bottle of organic cranberry juice, or, for that matter, the one on the side of the Pop-Tarts box, you’ve felt the pain. You know the one: that drilling ache right between the eyes as your brain tries to decode the calories, fat, fiber, sugar and other ingredients in the product.
If the Center for Science in the Public Interest has its way, and the group’s cogent report, “Food Labeling Chaos: The Case for Reform,” gets the attention they want, such headaches might ease.
In the 16 years since it became law, food labeling, like warnings on tobacco products, household cleaners and prescription drugs, has been an evolving practice. The public now regards such labeling as commonplace; the debate has become about the clarity and accuracy.
So, what needs fixing? Among the points made by the CSPI report are these recommendations:
–Nutrition info on food packaging should be simplified and made more user-friendly. (That vague calories-per-serving measure should be “Amount Per ½ Cup Serving” for example.)
–Practices that allow manufacturers to obfuscate nutrition measurements for multi-item packages or single-ingredient products (including meat and poultry) should be eliminated.
–Loose regulation of terms such as “all natural” or inaccurate claims of health benefits should be policed.
CSPI sent the report to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, noting in a cover letter that recent efforts by the agency to regulate labeling are commendable…but not far-reaching enough. The letter points out that a system requiring (and enforcing) accurate, accessible food-labeling products fits nicely with the Obama administration’s campaign to reduce diet-related disease for children and adults.
