REPOST: Fat, calories, sugar: Nutrition labels getting a makeover

The Food and Drug Administration's priority this year will be to update nutrition labels, which has remained the same for decades.  CNN has the report.

Image Source: www.cnn.com

(CNN) -- Choosing healthier snacks may soon be easier.

The Food and Drug Administration says that updating nutrition labels is a priority this year, although it's unclear when the labels will change.

The labels have remained pretty much the same for decades. It wasn't until the late 1960s that most food labels listed any nutrition information at all.

At the time, labels with calorie or sodium counts were mainly used on products the FDA considered to have "special dietary uses" -- for people with high blood pressure who were watching sodium, for instance.

Most people were making meals at home then, so there wasn't a huge demand for this information. That changed as more people started eating processed foods.

Noticing the trend, the White House pulled together a conference of nutritionists and food manufacturers in 1969. But it wasn't until 1972 that the FDA proposed regulations about what those nutrition labels should show.

Nutrition labeling was voluntary at first. It wasn't until 1990 that the FDA required nutrition labels for most prepared and packaged foods. Labels for raw produce and fish remains voluntary.

"It's time to update (labels) to make (them) easier for consumers to use," said Margo Wootan, director of nutrition policy for the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

The nonprofit organization advocates for better safety and nutrition information in the food industry.

"This is a chance to make (the labels) better and help make it easier for people to choose healthier options," Wootan said.

There's been a shift in shoppers' priorities as nutrition is better understood, and people now have a better idea of what they should watch on a label, the FDA said.

The focus has been on fat content; now nutritionists say calorie counting may be more important and should be broken down better for consumers.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest gave the FDA its wish list for these labels. It wants a label that will emphasize calorie counts, perhaps in a bigger or bolder font size or in a number highlighted in some way.

The organization would also like added sugar to get its own line on labels. Studies show many Americans eat more sugar than they realize. Our bodies don't need sugar to function, according to the American Heart Association.

Right now, it's hard to know what's natural sugar and what's added from reading a label. Manufactures are allowed to combine the two.

The heart association recommends you limit added sugar to no more than half of the daily discretionary calories you're supposed to have. That means for American men, about 150 calories a day or nine teaspoons. For women it's a smaller amount -- no more than 100 calories per day from added sugar, or about six teaspoons of sugar.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest would also like to limit the amount of math you now have to do when counting calories. If you have ever looked at a label and realize you've eaten twice the serving size, you'll appreciate that request.

The organization also hopes to make the ingredient lists larger with better spacing.
More Americans are interested in what's on these food labels. The U.S. Department of Agriculture noticed a statistically significant jump in a study it released this month.
The study showed 42% of working-age adults between 29 and 68 looked at these labels most of the time when shopping, or even said they always did. Some 57% of Americans older than 68 did as well.

In a 2007 USDA study, 34% of working-age adults looked at the label, and 51% of Americans older than 68 did.

The increase is good news as the United States struggles with an obesity epidemic. More than a third of all Americans are obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Some studies have shown that people who read labels eat healthier. One 2005 study of African-American shoppers in North Carolina found that to be true. A 2012 study of college students in Minnesota saw similar results.

Annie Joubran is a health and nutrition enthusiast.  Learn more about her career in this Facebook page.

Feed a cold, starve a fever: The truth behind the medical proverb

I often hear the phrase, “Feed a cold, starve a fever” whenever I’m having stuck-in-bed blues due to cold or fever. I’ve managed to stick to this proverb in my recent bout with the flu and it somehow helped me get through my manic days. I don’t know if that’s the real reason, but it’s intuitive sense to eat when you have a cold since the condition could weaken the body for days. It’s also rational to starve while running a fever considering it could lower one’s appetite for a day or two and makes fasting relatively feasible.

Image Source: www.flickr.com

My curiosity has introduced me to an enormous body of research aiming to verify this medical maxim. Among the highlights of my inquiry are:

• A 2002 study confirms that the old wives got it right after all. The researchers discovered that a person’s nutritional status has significant effect on the regulation of immune response.
• Infection-induced appetite is a behavior intended to prevent pathogen invasion. In layman’s terms, decreased appetite due to fever helps boost the immune system, which is the body’s main line of defense against disease-causing microorganisms.

Image Source: www.askmen.com

 
• While this study suggests that calorie restriction (CR) in mice and rats has been found to decrease the occurrence of tumors and extend their life span by 20 to 30 percent, it also underlines that mice and rats are better off eating when it comes to flu. The researchers also noted that little is known about CR and cancer incidence in humans.

Image Source: www.farmersalmanac.com

After a day of researching, I’ve come to terms with the fact that the medical proverb isn’t as neat as it appears to be. I’ve got literary sources such as Geoffrey Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales and other scientific studies backing the claim that the proverb doesn’t quite qualify as a doctor’s advice.

Got some interesting news that you want me to cover? Get in touch with me, Annie Joubran, on this Facebook page.