Can You Really Trust Calorie Measurements on Food Labels?

re: Can You Really Trust Calorie Measurements on Food Labels?

Antoinetta_Ferrari — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 11:19:26 GMT

Why do people count feel like they have to count calories anyway? That doesn't change the quality of the food they eat. If people would just choose high quality foods and eat small portions, slowly, with enjoyment, they'd lose weight.

re: Can You Really Trust Calorie Measurements on Food Labels?

David R — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 04:28:03 GMT

If you count calories, you are eating too much.

re: Can You Really Trust Calorie Measurements on Food Labels?

mmc88121 — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 22:38:54 GMT

I recall when I was in school years ago and the nutrition labels first came out, I would compare the front label information with the back. I was usually way off. The calories stated on the front would always be less then what the math worked out to as calories per serving. I always wondered how they mangaged to get away with that misinformation. Now I know.

mmc88121

re: Can You Really Trust Calorie Measurements on Food Labels?

Russ Bianchi — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 21:54:10 GMT

The label sand-bagging was even worse in the early 1990's when Nutritional Facts Panels were implemented, the food and beverage industry just lowered the total grams of each serving size at will, and changed nothing in their products, to LIE about caloric improvements.

FDA had to come back about two or three years later, and defined specific serving sizes for most products, to stop this math bait and switch game.

To this day, few consumers even know what a gram is, or RDI, nor care.

Remember, the reason for the Nutritional Facts panels, was FDA's attempt to take heat off themselves, for the spiraling obesity statistics, and they decide to vilify fat(s) with the NLEA legislation.

Though fat profiling has changed since WWII, in average American intake per capita per year (more hydrogenated and manipulated), the total amounts have not changed.

Therefore, fat was a STRAW DOG, or WHIPPING BOY, to deflect from the real problem of stripped and nutrient void food ingredients in general, and diabetes, hypoglycemia, obesity, cancer, and cardio vascular disease causing refined forms of fructose, HFCS, hydrolyzed high fructose inulin, crystalline fructose, iso glucose, etc. FLOODING the super market brand shelves since the 1970's, because it's the next lowest cost ingredient in the food chain after air, water, and salt.

However, under the law of unintended consequences, consumers in the 1990's started reading ingredient labels, and many MAJOR brands vanished from the supermarket shelves (from lack of sales) because their ingredient declarations looked like, and where, chemistry sets.

A good rule of thumb is, if you cannot pronounce, or spell, the ingredient(s), in any given product or brand, let alone know what it is, or what it does to your body, AVOID IT.

Also, over 62% of all meals are consumed outside the home per day in the USA. Many such meals are completely UNLABELED.

re: Can You Really Trust Calorie Measurements on Food Labels?

labrat — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 19:25:20 GMT

The "gold standard" for measuring calories is the bomb calorimeter. It's nice for scientific exploration but I have a major problem with the "calorie in, calorie out" dogma of diet. That is: people aren't bomb calorimeters and don't use food as simple fuel to be "burned" as the popular wisdom holds.