New food labeling rule under ObamaCare

[Spoonman]

Then why are the nanny-stater's always trying to ban thing they deem detrimental to our health?

Sorry, you're either naive or intentionally being dishonest.

I can't tell what you're disputing. Labels are decision-making tools. They embody the assumption that decision-making responsibility lies in the hands of the individual consumer at the point of purchase. That's the exact opposite philosophy of "They need a nanny state to make these decisions for them."

exactly, i don't want someone telling me what to do, I want ot be able to make an informed choice

 

[Katzndogz]

I don't think it is the cost of implementing the labeling that concerns these grocers. It is the cost of lost sales that will result when people find out what crap they're putting out there.

Diabetes is a national epidemic. Poor nutrition has become as American as red, white, and blue. Everyone should at least have the tools and information they need to make informed decisions.

Yeah, that's it.

Has all this nutritional labeling caused one less Big Mac or Whopper to be sold? What has happened is that once the government gets labeling, now they can regulate for the public good. They call it FOOD PORN. Offering high calorie food is in the same category as offering pornography - to children.

Cheesecake Factory pasta on list of caloric food porn | Reuters

The Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer-focused nonprofit group that promotes healthier eating, compiles an annual list of "food porn" to alert consumers to menu items with eye-popping levels of calories, saturated fat, sugar and/or sodium.

"You'd think that the size of their profits depended on their increasing the size of your pants," CSPI Executive Director Michael Jacobson said of the industry's Xtreme Eating winners. The list was released on Wednesday.

Notice how they get a bit of class warfare in there. Companies that sell food make a profit and we all know how evil that is.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Then why are the nanny-stater's always trying to ban thing they deem detrimental to our health?

Sorry, you're either naive or intentionally being dishonest.

I can't tell what you're disputing. Labels are decision-making tools. They embody the assumption that decision-making responsibility lies in the hands of the individual consumer at the point of purchase. That's the exact opposite philosophy of "They need a nanny state to make these decisions for them."

I tend to agree, they are good tools, but I've been around long enough to know this is always how it begins... a so-called, well-intentioned effort to educate you and then they say, well, we tried, but you just don't get it so now we're taking over.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I don't think it is the cost of implementing the labeling that concerns these grocers. It is the cost of lost sales that will result when people find out what crap they're putting out there.

Diabetes is a national epidemic. Poor nutrition has become as American as red, white, and blue. Everyone should at least have the tools and information they need to make informed decisions.

Yeah, that's it.

Has all this nutritional labeling caused one less Big Mac or Whopper to be sold? What has happened is that once the government gets labeling, now they can regulate for the public good. They call it FOOD PORN. Offering high calorie food is in the same category as offering pornography - to children.

Cheesecake Factory pasta on list of caloric food porn | Reuters

The Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer-focused nonprofit group that promotes healthier eating, compiles an annual list of "food porn" to alert consumers to menu items with eye-popping levels of calories, saturated fat, sugar and/or sodium.

"You'd think that the size of their profits depended on their increasing the size of your pants," CSPI Executive Director Michael Jacobson said of the industry's Xtreme Eating winners. The list was released on Wednesday.

Notice how they get a bit of class warfare in there. Companies that sell food make a profit and we all know how evil that is.

McDonalds in itself isn't bad for you... but no doubt McDonalds five days a week certainly is. Anybody knows this, some people just don't give a shit.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Has all this nutritional labeling caused one less Big Mac or Whopper to be sold? What has happened is that once the government gets labeling, now they can regulate for the public good.

Has enforcing nutritional information rules resulted in fewer Big Mac or Whoppers to be sold?

Good question. Do you have answer?

If the answer is no then it tends to support the idea that labeling is not regulating.

And I almost always disagree with the old "slippery slope" arument that says, "we can't do THIS because THAT will come next."

If THIS is good - do it. If THAT is bad, don't do it.

It's really not that hard.

 

[Greenbeard]

Offering high calorie food is in the same category as offering pornography - to children.

Lower-Calorie Foods: It’s Just Good Business

The study concluded that quick-service and sit-down restaurant chains that grew their lower-calorie servings delivered better business results. In short, sound strategic planning with*a commitment to growing lower-calorie items is just good business.

The findings of this study clearly demonstrate that between 2006 and 2011 lower-calorie foods and beverages were the key growth engine for the restaurants studied. Restaurant chains growing their servings of lower-calorie foods and beverages demonstrated superior:

• Same-store sales (SSS) growth
• Increases in restaurant customer traffic
• Gains in overall restaurant servings

Increasing lower-calorie menu portfolios can help quick-service and sit-down restaurant chains improve the key performance metrics demanded by their shareholders and Wall Street, while at the same time providing lower-calorie foods and beverages for families and children.

 

[nodoginnafight]

a so-called, well-intentioned effort to educate you and then they say, well, we tried, but you just don't get it so now we're taking over.

Can you give me an example?

 

[Sarah G]

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

Grow your own vegetables, slaughter your own cows and chickens.. Do you people ever stop complaining?

 

[Two Thumbs]

If you need labeling at a damn salad bar

well

shit

I lack the vocabulary to point out just how utterly fucked you are.

 

[Katzndogz]

Then why are the nanny-stater's always trying to ban thing they deem detrimental to our health?

Sorry, you're either naive or intentionally being dishonest.

I can't tell what you're disputing. Labels are decision-making tools. They embody the assumption that decision-making responsibility lies in the hands of the individual consumer at the point of purchase. That's the exact opposite philosophy of "They need a nanny state to make these decisions for them."

I tend to agree, they are good tools, but I've been around long enough to know this is always how it begins... a so-called, well-intentioned effort to educate you and then they say, well, we tried, but you just don't get it so now we're taking over.

Isn't that what happened in New York? The government could just not stop people from drinking all that soda.

 

[nodoginnafight]

If you need labeling at a damn salad bar

well

shit

I lack the vocabulary to point out just how utterly fucked you are.

Your limited vocabulary is duly noted.

Been to a salad bar lately? Are you under the impression that they are still just offering lettuce ansd tomatos?

Maybe you should get out more often. Might learn a few new words while you're out there too?

win-win

 

[Two Thumbs]

If you need labeling at a damn salad bar

well

shit

I lack the vocabulary to point out just how utterly fucked you are.

Your limited vocabulary is duly noted.

Been to a salad bar lately? Are you under the impression that they are still just offering lettuce ansd tomatos?

Maybe you should get out more often. Might learn a few new words while you're out there too?

win-win

Since it seems I still managed to speak over your head, I'll be more clear.

If you need a break down of what's in lettuce and tomatoes, you're utterly fucked and can't be helped.

If you are worried about how it was grown, grow your own, b/c that's the only way to be sure

 

[Ava]

Then why are the nanny-stater's always trying to ban thing they deem detrimental to our health?

Sorry, you're either naive or intentionally being dishonest.

I can't tell what you're disputing. Labels are decision-making tools. They embody the assumption that decision-making responsibility lies in the hands of the individual consumer at the point of purchase. That's the exact opposite philosophy of "They need a nanny state to make these decisions for them."

exactly, i don't want someone telling me what to do, I want ot be able to make an informed choice

And responsible people already read labels. I have since they were made mandatory. Customers who feel responsible for their own health do that. People who don't care about their health or longevity will never read them. Waste of the taxpayer's money. The more it costs a business to stay in business the fewer employees it can afford to keep.

 

[jasonnfree]

I case you have not noticed, all this shit is slowly breaking down America financially and Obama is the the reason ,wake-up fools, bread lines are coming .You should be mad as hell !

I'm mad as Hell and I'm not going to take this anymore - YouTube

Maybe we need to bring Bush back to bring the economy back to where it was when Obama was elected?

 

[Katzndogz]

Offering high calorie food is in the same category as offering pornography - to children.

Lower-Calorie Foods: It’s Just Good Business

The study concluded that quick-service and sit-down restaurant chains that grew their lower-calorie servings delivered better business results. In short, sound strategic planning with*a commitment to growing lower-calorie items is just good business.

The findings of this study clearly demonstrate that between 2006 and 2011 lower-calorie foods and beverages were the key growth engine for the restaurants studied. Restaurant chains growing their servings of lower-calorie foods and beverages demonstrated superior:

• Same-store sales (SSS) growth
• Increases in restaurant customer traffic
• Gains in overall restaurant servings

Increasing lower-calorie menu portfolios can help quick-service and sit-down restaurant chains improve the key performance metrics demanded by their shareholders and Wall Street, while at the same time providing lower-calorie foods and beverages for families and children.

Another study that proves what the study set out to prove is not convincing.

The brighter side of low calorie offerings is that restaurants charge the same as for high calorie alternatives, but the lower calorie foods cost the restaurant far less so the profit margin on that item is more. Islands sells a turkey burger for the same prices as a regular burger, but turkey doesn't cost as much as beef. Instant increase in profit for every turkey burger sold.

Where you find the biggest increase in low calorie alternatives are those places under complete control where there are no other offerings. Like schools or other institutions. Then there is always the "healthy" alternative on the menu which is nothing more than the same high calorie meal, but in much smaller portions, but the same price! The customer is being cheated, but if the government is happy, the restaurant is happy and they make more money too since they charge the same as for a full portion.

People are just too damn ignorant!

 

[KissMy]

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?

You genetically altered wackos make me laugh. Thousands of years of seed selection, hybridizing, cross pollination, splicing, etc has genetically altered all the food you eat today. Man created the orange by cross breading other fruit. It never existed a thousand years ago. Current genetic alterations just speed up the changes to food to make it better. It does not make it harmful unless they want it to be harmful.

 

[nodoginnafight]

If you need labeling at a damn salad bar

well

shit

I lack the vocabulary to point out just how utterly fucked you are.

Your limited vocabulary is duly noted.

Been to a salad bar lately? Are you under the impression that they are still just offering lettuce and tomatos?

Maybe you should get out more often. Might learn a few new words while you're out there too?

win-win

Since it seems I still managed to speak over your head, I'll be more clear.

If you need a break down of what's in lettuce and tomatoes, you're utterly fucked and can't be helped.

If you are worried about how it was grown, grow your own, b/c that's the only way to be sure

Yet, I understood YOUR post - you seemed to have whiffed on mine.

Been to a salad bar lately? Are you under the impression that they are still just offering lettuce and tomatos?

Thanks for confirming my point, but seriously - get out of the house every now and then. It will do you good.

 

[uscitizen]

Business does not need any informed consumers.
We will tell them what is good for us err them.

 

[nodoginnafight]

I can't tell what you're disputing. Labels are decision-making tools. They embody the assumption that decision-making responsibility lies in the hands of the individual consumer at the point of purchase. That's the exact opposite philosophy of "They need a nanny state to make these decisions for them."

exactly, i don't want someone telling me what to do, I want ot be able to make an informed choice

And responsible people already read labels. I have since they were made mandatory. Customers who feel responsible for their own health do that. People who don't care about their health or longevity will never read them. Waste of the taxpayer's money. The more it costs a business to stay in business the fewer employees it can afford to keep.

So you don't want to know what you're eating - fine. Don't read the labels.
But why impose YOUR apathy on everyone else?

 

[Zoom-boing]

I shop at Giant food store and occasionally get a salad from their salad bar. I particularly like their 'krab' salad (not crab but Alaskan pollock). Curious as to how many calories were in a serving I looked around and what do you know? Giant had provided the calorie count and nutritional info for what was being offered right on the glass that was above the salad bar! They offered me information so I could make an informed choice. What's wrong with that?

No one was telling me I couldn't purchase such and such and banning something because 'they' know what's best for me .... that's where it falls apart and nannyism takes over. No 32oz big gulp for you! No cheesecake for you! No salt for you! No transfats for you! Information is good, choice is good. Nannyism? Not so much.