5 Food Package Claims That Deserve a Double Take

Reader Comments
Back to article

dis is one dat i thought was blank...dat 4 sure!!

alli pederson of IL 9:54PM March 22, 2010

One of the foods to get smacked down was a custard pie. I'm sorry, but does anyone REALLY buy custard pie thinking it's a health food? Give me a break, FDA! I agree with Eva--the info is right there on the package and it comes down to customer responsibility.
Besides, in an age when we have scam artists setting up "dummy" web sites with coding specifically intended to trick the FDA, is chasing after a cereal company really a good use of our tax dollars???

Julie Hayward of MO 2:15PM March 22, 2010

How 'bout actually reading the package instead of just looking at the front part that says "Whole Grain! Fruit! 0 Grams Trans Fat!" You know, it DOES list the grams of sugar per serving, and the serving size, and the types and amounts of fat (including saturated and trans), and the calories per serving on the label. In fact, it's required to do so by the FDA. So consumers do have easy, constant access to most necessary information. If Sally M. wants healthy cereal for her kids, maybe she should actually read the package instead of believing what the advertisers say (never a good idea).
And yes, people should know how to read a nutrition label. We've only covered it, what, FOUR times this year in school. Ignorance is not an excuse when information is readily available.

Eva of IA 7:49PM March 21, 2010

One thing I have wanted to see on a nutrition label is for the company to display how many good and bad carbohydrates are contained in the food. As it stands, the label doesn't distinquish between the two. It simply tells you the overall amount.

Jason of FL 12:34PM March 21, 2010

I am a big fan of Nutrition magazine published by the Center for Science In The Public Interest. It is like a Consumers' Report for nutrition. I am also a big fan of Mrs. Obama. Many people thought the war on childhood obesity was a "puff piece" for her to appear involved on the national stage. In reality, the discussion is now focused on what kids eat growing up ( formula, cereals, baby food preps) noting sugar, salt, fat and trans fat contents, and carrying that theme into school lunch programs, school vending machines, and other snacks. The next light will be turned on beverages with sugar, high fructose corn syrup, sugar substitutes, caffeine etc and continuing to energy drinks. I'm sure there is a reason, but it takes companies too much time to change labeling on products. The same goes for fast food restaurants and their posting of nutritional info. Regretably, science moves slowly, but it seems compliance, once assured, is much slower.

synopsis of MA 9:38AM March 17, 2010

that corporations generally want to lie to us about many, many things, but that is obviously the case. That's why the "small-government" advocates are fools or worse. They'd have no rules, unlimited lies.

Muser of NM 10:21PM March 13, 2010