The New York Times reports that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Friday finalized major changes to the nation's food labels, "with calorie counts now shown in large type and portion sizes that reflect how much Americans actually eat." The change is described as "the first significant redrawing of the nutrition information on food labels since the federal government started requiring them in the early 1990s.
"Those labels were based on eating habits and nutrition data from the 1970s and ’80s and before portion sizes expanded significantly. Federal health officials argued that the changes were needed to bring labels into step with the reality of the modern American diet."
The changes, the Times writes, "jump out. The calories are in large bold numbers, and are easier to spot at a glance. A single ice cream serving is two-thirds of a cup — compared with the current half cup." In addition, the new label has a line for "added sugars," which was criticized by the Sugar Association as being without "scientific justification."
The Times reports that "most food manufacturers will be required to use the new label by July 2018. Producers with less than $10 million in annual food sales will have an additional year to comply."
"Those labels were based on eating habits and nutrition data from the 1970s and ’80s and before portion sizes expanded significantly. Federal health officials argued that the changes were needed to bring labels into step with the reality of the modern American diet."
The changes, the Times writes, "jump out. The calories are in large bold numbers, and are easier to spot at a glance. A single ice cream serving is two-thirds of a cup — compared with the current half cup." In addition, the new label has a line for "added sugars," which was criticized by the Sugar Association as being without "scientific justification."
The Times reports that "most food manufacturers will be required to use the new label by July 2018. Producers with less than $10 million in annual food sales will have an additional year to comply."
- KC's View:
-
This strikes me as a no-brainer. And when organizations like the Sugar Association take such entirely predictable and self-serving positions, it seems to me that they do nothing but undermine their own credibility.
