New food labeling rule under ObamaCare

[BlueGin]

Supermarkets cry foul as FDA proposes new food labeling rule under ObamaCare



If the Food and Drug Administration gets its way, your trip to the grocery store could get a tad pricier.

Supermarket owners argue a pending federal food-labeling rule that stems from the new health care law would overburden thousands of grocers and convenience store owners -- to the tune of $1 billion in the first year alone.

Store owner Tom Heinen said the industry's profit margins already are razor thin. "When you incur a significant cost, there is no way that that doesn't get passed on to the customer in some form," he said.

The rule stems from an ObamaCare mandate that restaurants provide nutrition information on menus. Most in the restaurant industry were supportive of the idea, but when the FDA decided to extend the provision to also affect thousands of supermarkets and convenience stores, the backlash was swift.

The proposed regulation would require store owners to label prepared, unpackaged foods found in salad bars and food bars, soups and bakery items. Erik Lieberman, regulatory counsel at the Food Marketing Institute, said testing foods for nutritional data will require either expensive software or even more costly off-site laboratory assessments.

Lieberman said failure to get it right comes with stiff penalties: "If you get it wrong, it's a federal crime, and you could face jail time and thousands of dollars worth of fines."


Read more: Supermarkets cry foul as FDA proposes new food labeling rule under ObamaCare | Fox News

 

[RoadVirus]

Great. More regulations/requirements from Big Gov that will cost businesses alot of money

 

[BlueGin]

Great. More regulations/requirements from Big Gov that will cost businesses alot of money

Guess we can count of the cost of food going up........again.

 

[BreezeWood]

"If you get it wrong, it's a federal crime, and you could face jail time and thousands of dollars worth of fines."

it's about time - Burger King now includes the calorie count for their burgers, they advertise the ones below 550 which are all the juniors ....

 

[Annie]

Great. More regulations/requirements from Big Gov that will cost businesses alot of money

Guess we can count of the cost of food going up........again.

It's for your own good, you ijit. (that's not me, that's the gov't speaking).

 

[BlueGin]

Great. More regulations/requirements from Big Gov that will cost businesses alot of money

Guess we can count of the cost of food going up........again.

It's for your own good, you ijit. (that's not me, that's the gov't speaking).

Well of course, cuz we were all obviously dying off due to unregulated birthday cakes and stuff.

 

[OKTexas]

No more custom cakes or other baked good because everything has to be evaluated, you can't do that and economically do custom orders. This will not only kill baked goods done on site in grocery stores but will also kill the neighborhood bakery and doughnut shops. Thank you commiecrats.

 

[Oldguy]

I don't care about the calorie count as I'll eat it anyhow if I want to. I wanna know where IT COMES FROM and whether or not it includes genetically altered materials.

Europe requires that. Why don't we?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Great. More regulations/requirements from Big Gov that will cost businesses alot of money

Somehow liberals think that burdening businesses with more regulation costs, will somehow lead to more job hires Yet we wonder why the economy has been acting so sluggish and weak, without signs of any substantial strong improvement since Obama took office

 

[OriginalShroom]

All I know about Red Velvet Cake is that I love it and that is the reason I stay away from the bakery section of the stores..

Ever since they started making Red Velvet Cup Cakes.... Well.. I just stay away from them.

 

[Annie]

I don't care about the calorie count as I'll eat it anyhow if I want to. I wanna know where IT COMES FROM and whether or not it includes genetically altered materials.

Europe requires that. Why don't we?

Yea, that's the problem:

Mark Lynas, environmentalist who opposed GMOs, admits he was wrong.

Leading Environmental Activist’s Blunt Confession: I Was Completely Wrong To Oppose GMOs

By Torie Bosch Posted Thursday, Jan. 3, 2013, at 2:27 PM ET

If you fear genetically modified food, you may have Mark Lynas to thank. By his own reckoning, British environmentalist helped spur the anti-GMO movement in the mid-‘90s, arguing as recently at 2008 that big corporations’ selfish greed would threaten the health of both people and the Earth. Thanks to the efforts of Lynas and people like him, governments around the world—especially in Western Europe, Asia, and Africa—have hobbled GM research, and NGOs like Greenpeace have spurned donations of genetically modified foods.

But Lynas has changed his mind—and he’s not being quiet about it. On Thursday at the Oxford Farming Conference, Lynas delivered a blunt address: He got GMOs wrong. According to the version of his remarks posted online (as yet, there’s no video or transcript of the actual delivery), he opened with a bang:

I want to start with some apologies. For the record, here and upfront, I apologise for having spent several years ripping up GM crops. I am also sorry that I helped to start the anti-GM movement back in the mid 1990s, and that I thereby assisted in demonising an important technological option which can be used to benefit the environment.

As an environmentalist, and someone who believes that everyone in this world has a right to a healthy and nutritious diet of their choosing, I could not have chosen a more counter-productive path. I now regret it completely.

So I guess you’ll be wondering—what happened between 1995 and now that made me not only change my mind but come here and admit it? Well, the answer is fairly simple: I discovered science, and in the process I hope I became a better environmentalist.

His honest assessment of his heretofore poor understanding of the issue continues for almost 5,000 words—and it’s a must-read for anyone who has ever hesitated over conventional produce. To vilify GMOs is to be as anti-science as climate-change deniers, he says. To feed a growing world population (with an exploding middle class demanding more and better-quality food), we must take advantage of all the technology available to us, including GMOs. To insist on “natural” agriculture and livestock is to doom people to starvation, and there’s no logical reason to prefer the old ways, either. Moreover, the reason why big companies dominate the industry is that anti-GMO activists and policymakers have made it too difficult for small startups to enter the field.

“In the history of #environmentalism, has there ever been a bigger mea culpa than that given here?” Discover blogger Keith Kloor tweeted. (Kloor recently called GMO foes “the climate skeptics of the left” in Slate.)

I can’t think of another environmentalist. But it does call to mind another turnabout. In 2002, medical writer Arthur Allen penned a New York Times Magazine story titled “The Not-So-Crackpot Autism Theory.” The piece suggested there might indeed be a link between autism and vaccination, and its publication in an outlet so mainstream as the New York Times gave the previously fringe theory more credibility. But soon after the article’s publication, more and more published research effectively confirmed that there is no link. Allen took that research seriously. A 2009 Times article about the book Autism’s False Prophets said of Allen: “He later changed his mind and now ‘feels bad’ about the [magazine] article, he said, ‘because it helped get these people into the field who did a lot of damage.’ ”

...

I'll leave it there, the whole anti-vaccine garbage and the resulting problems we're not facing.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Food fraud alert! Pomegranate juice, olive oil, seafood and spices are among the foods that aren?t always what they seem: report* - NY Daily News
Faux pas! Food fraud on the rise ? Eatocracy - CNN.com Blogs
New records of fraudulent food products added to USP Food Fraud Database

Google

 

[Two Thumbs]

Supermarkets cry foul as FDA proposes new food labeling rule under ObamaCare



If the Food and Drug Administration gets its way, your trip to the grocery store could get a tad pricier.

Supermarket owners argue a pending federal food-labeling rule that stems from the new health care law would overburden thousands of grocers and convenience store owners -- to the tune of $1 billion in the first year alone.

Store owner Tom Heinen said the industry's profit margins already are razor thin. "When you incur a significant cost, there is no way that that doesn't get passed on to the customer in some form," he said.

The rule stems from an ObamaCare mandate that restaurants provide nutrition information on menus. Most in the restaurant industry were supportive of the idea, but when the FDA decided to extend the provision to also affect thousands of supermarkets and convenience stores, the backlash was swift.

The proposed regulation would require store owners to label prepared, unpackaged foods found in salad bars and food bars, soups and bakery items. Erik Lieberman, regulatory counsel at the Food Marketing Institute, said testing foods for nutritional data will require either expensive software or even more costly off-site laboratory assessments.

Lieberman said failure to get it right comes with stiff penalties: "If you get it wrong, it's a federal crime, and you could face jail time and thousands of dollars worth of fines."


Read more: Supermarkets cry foul as FDA proposes new food labeling rule under ObamaCare | Fox News

Liberals, killing Americans by the death of a thousand cuts.

 

[Two Thumbs]

XXXXX

^ is happy mom and pop stores will have to shut down
Is elated that more Americans will be forced onto welfare due to rising costs of food
Is happy that people on SS will suffer

 

[syrenn]

Great. More regulations/requirements from Big Gov that will cost businesses alot of money

and you dont think that cost is not going to be passed on to you?

 

[Mad Scientist]

There's a real easy way to find out what's in your restaurant food: Tell the waiter you are diabetic and you need to know what has sugar in it.

Sometimes the Manager His/Herself will come out and let me know!

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Supermarkets cry foul as FDA proposes new food labeling rule under ObamaCare



If the Food and Drug Administration gets its way, your trip to the grocery store could get a tad pricier.

Supermarket owners argue a pending federal food-labeling rule that stems from the new health care law would overburden thousands of grocers and convenience store owners -- to the tune of $1 billion in the first year alone.

Wow. 1 BILLION? That means on average each of us will pay an entire extra NICKEL per week on groceries. That's going to kill us all!

My grocer could make up that difference easily by simply putting more than 2 things in a damn bag.

 

[Clementine]

Ever wonder how it's possible that we have people who are over 100 years old? They never had all these government regulations and had to figure things out on their own.

They figured out that too many sweets and greasy foods made them fat. They knew which foods elevated their cholesterol levels. Yet, they grew up with real butter, real sugar and, by some incredible miracle, not all the senior citizens are fat and unhealthy. Perhaps they knew not to overeat all the time.

Now the government forces these labels on packaged foods, which a small percent of people actually read. We all know it's best to buy fresh, but if you want convenience food then you deal with preservatives and what not.

Forcing labels on buffet food and salad bars is going too far. Gee, what if we took our chances, like we've been doing forever, when we choose between the lettuce and the mashed potatoes with gravy. Unless the stores are putting some strange ingredients in their food, I'm not worried. Of course, some will rush to accuse the private sector of being evil and they will only be fair and honest if the government is breathing down their back. The government makes rules, but I don't think they follow up and enforce them well enough, so in the long run, these new rules won't matter. It'll hurt the businesses and I think once that happens, the real mission is complete.

This seems to be another hit on the middle class people who run small businesses. I'm beginning to think Obama would like to get rid of us. I trust the private sector far more than government.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Supermarkets cry foul as FDA proposes new food labeling rule under ObamaCare



If the Food and Drug Administration gets its way, your trip to the grocery store could get a tad pricier.

Supermarket owners argue a pending federal food-labeling rule that stems from the new health care law would overburden thousands of grocers and convenience store owners -- to the tune of $1 billion in the first year alone.

Wow. 1 BILLION? That means on average each of us will pay an entire extra NICKEL per week on groceries. That's going to kill us all!

My grocer could make up that difference easily by simply putting more than 2 things in a damn bag.

The death of one thousand cuts.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Supermarkets cry foul as FDA proposes new food labeling rule under ObamaCare



If the Food and Drug Administration gets its way, your trip to the grocery store could get a tad pricier.

Supermarket owners argue a pending federal food-labeling rule that stems from the new health care law would overburden thousands of grocers and convenience store owners -- to the tune of $1 billion in the first year alone.

Wow. 1 BILLION? That means on average each of us will pay an entire extra NICKEL per week on groceries. That's going to kill us all!

My grocer could make up that difference easily by simply putting more than 2 things in a damn bag.

And we wonder why America is getting so fucked up........