Tele-Deception

by ADMIN on JULY 1, 2011

Here’s the scenerio…

You’re sitting down with your kids watching cartoons … have you ever noticed what the commerials are saying, what they’re telling you and your child what to do? It’s astounding what kid-directed hype food companies can get away with.

There are definitely a few that push my buttons as a Registered Dietitian – but the most recent offender is a commercial for Nutella.

Go HERE to view the commercial. Watch and then read on…

Seems like the perfect scenario, right? The ad touches on all the hot buttons of a mom’s morning: hectic life, screaming kids, kids won’t eat, guilt of them not eating, the need to find something nutritious and delicious.

Now don’t get me wrong, Nutella is certainly delicious (I do love a good dollop of the chocolately-hazelnut spread on a banana or by a mini spoonful for a treat) – but does it have the nutritional quality that you want to send your kids out the door with?

The ad says that it’s made of “hazelnuts, skim milk, and a hint of cocoa” – what they neglect to point out is that the very first ingredient is sugar followed by saturated fat-filled palm oil. Kinda left out those ingredients, didn’t they?

How can a manufacturer get away with this kind of misleading hype? It turns out that there are specific rules and regulations put out by Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU), under the Council for Better Business Bureaus, which food companies can voluntarily follow to be able to tout foods to children. One rule includes:

Ads for foods should clearly depict the appropriate role of the product within the framework of the eating occasion depicted. Ads for a mealtime should depict food within a nutritionally balanced meal. Snack foods should be clearly depicted as such, and not as substitutes for meals.

This seems reasonable and was clearly developed in order to create responsible advertising to children; but it doesn’t negate the fact that potentially poor food choices are being promoted to kids.

In the Nutella commercial the product is served on “multi-grain toast and whole wheat waffles” to make it part of a ‘nutritionally balanced diet’. In the ad there are glasses of milk and orange juice in front of the kids to round out the meal. But does that make it OK to serve a food with the primary ingredients of sugar and saturated fat to kids for breakfast every day?

That’s what the manufacturers want you to think.

What do YOU think?!

New Food Labeling?

by ADMIN on JULY 1, 2011

The food industry likes telling us what to buy…

Remember the big debacle with “Smart Choices Program“? It was a food package labeling system that placed a green check mark on foods that were considered ‘healthy’ by standards developed by a group of food executives, academic, and health advocates.

The problem was that the program didn’t take into account the amount of sugar (added or total), and green check marks were starting to show up on foods like Froot Loops and Fudgsicles. Oops. These foods definitely shouldn’t be touted as the ‘best choice’.

So in the fall of 2009 the government suspended Smart Choices and began taking a closer look at front of pack labeling systems.

After taking several into account, the FDA started throwing around the idea of highlighting specific nutrients from the Nutrition Fact Panel on the front of the package. Though this isn’t the FDA’s final decision on what to use, the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) jumped on this idea and pressured all their food and beverage manufacturer members to employ the Nutrition Keys ‘voluntarily’.

Recently, the name was changed from Nutrition Keys to Facts Up Front.

The one below represents the basic four nutrient icon. It includes calories, saturated fat, sodium, and sugar.

Companies can also choose to employ the icon with ‘nutrients to encourage’. These include at least two of the follow: potassium, fiber, protein, vitamin A, vitamin C, vitamin D, calcium, or iron. These are the nutrients that the Institute of Medicine (IOM) has declared ‘short fall’ nutrients – meaning the majority of Americans don’t get enough of them.

You’ll start to see this Nutrition Key on many food packages around the grocery store.

My thoughts on this:

• This isn’t what the government said they should do, the food companies simply chose an idea and ran with it. The fact that some of the manufacturers didn’t necessarily want to use it, but were ‘convinced’ to use it, speaks to some sort of underlying agenda of the GMA. What could it be?

• Food packaging is already cluttered with health claims and symbols. Will people really notice these keys and use them if they already barely understand, or even look at, the Nutrition Facts Panel? It’s just another way to show the same information.

• Positive nutrients are only optional. I think this is completely backwards. In my opinion the positive nutrients should take precedence. We should we encouraging people to choose foods that are nutrient dense rather than foods that are ‘less bad’. Of course all packaged foods will have the bad nutrients – but they may not have any positive nutrients, either. This should be highlighted so people realize they’re choosing nutrient-poor foods!

For example: diet coke will look really good on this system. Zero calories, zero saturated fat, minimal sodium. But the drink also has NO positive nutrition either. So if the Nutrition Keys mandated showing positive nutrients, people would look at and compare foods for their benefits in addition to their detriments.

What do you think?

Are Health Claims Misleading You?

by ADMIN on AUGUST 31, 2011

SOURCE

The average grocery store carries about 40,000 products. That’s a lot of food. And a lot of confusion.

Have you ever chosen a food because the packaging had these qualifiers: “Whole Grain” or “Supports your child’s immunity” or “Promotes Heart Health.” If you have, you’re not alone.

In a study completed by the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University, parents inferred that cereals containing health claims were more nutritious overall and may promote the health of their children. For example, the ‘whole grain’ claim on Lucky Charms and the ‘calcium and vitamin D’ claim on Cinnamon Toast Crunch made one – quarter of parents believe that these cereals were healthier than other children’s cereals.

Three-quarters of parents believed that the ‘immunity’ claim on Cocoa Krispies meant that eating this cereal would help keep their kids from getting sick.

But the reality is that these cereals are still high in sugar and low in fiber and nutrients – not necessarily the best choice. Even though a cereal may say it’s “whole grain”, it may only have 1 gram of fiber per serving!

How to Choose the Right Foods

There are Four types of claims to watch out for:

• Health Claims. These are the “Real Deal” and are based on ‘significant scientific agreement’. These claims connect a nutrient with a disease or health problem.

Example: “Three grams of soluble fiber from oatmeal daily in a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol may reduce the risk of heart disease.”

These claims are not, however, allowed to claim to diagnose, treat, or cure a disease.

• Qualified Health Claims. A step down from Health Claims, these are based on a less scientific proof. In other words, the link between the nutrient and disease is weaker.

Example: “Supportive but not conclusive evidence shows that eating 1.5 ounces of walnuts a day, as part of a low cholesterol and low saturated fat diet and not resulting in increased caloric intake, may reduce the risk of coronary heart disease.”

As you can see, the company can only use a Qualified Health Claim if they admit that the science is not strong.

• Structure – Function Claims. These are sneaky claims that act like health claims without stating the link between the nutrient and the disease. And without science to back it up!

Example: A high fiber product “Keeps your bowels moving” is basically implying that the product treats constipation without stating it outright because there’s no proof for that product. Or a high calcium product that “builds strong bones” without explicitly claiming to prevent osteoporosis.

Structure-Function claims are the ones to watch out for since there is no science to back them up. They’re just another marketing ploy to help the company make money … and make you spend more!

So next time your in the grocery store, look past the claims on the package and find out for yourself if that food is good for you or your family.

Check out the Nutrition Facts Panel and Ingredient List – it’s here that you’ll discover whether the product is has a lot of added sugar, is high in saturated fat, trans fat, or calories. Or better, whether it’s a great source of fiber, protein, or unsaturated fats.

Don’t always believe the hype that’s written on the front of the package or singled out in ads – these statements are typically there simply to make you buy more. Those sneaky food manufacturers.

Be your own Nutrition Sleuth!