FDA Proposes Revision to Nutritional Facts Label

I only really had to care more recently when I had to go on a no-fat diet, and current labels worked just fine that way.

Clearly you've never lived in a basement if you're so carefree about mold.

When rightyforge realizes the consequences of that fact, they'll kill themselves for their lack of ever having had anything useful to say.

People got fatter because less and less people do their own cooking at home. Fast food is loaded with salts and oils and God knows what else, and Ff joins were only required to have nutritional charts out in within the past five years.

But I digress. The ones who care already know this stuff, and the ones for whom this is aimed towards don't give a rat's ass if high frutose corn syrup can't be processed by the body in large amounts.

Since labels are already required, why do we think this is going to make things more expensive?

I'm neither a chemist nor a chef. Therefore, I do not know nor do I care what maltopseudodiethylamidocontraparatriethylamineoracicular protomorphyricaldichlorophasial entereopolymorphirase endoscleraphyliachormorphyryal transmolaerophlarptapooptybam is, as long as I can eat it, it doesn't taste like shit and it doesn't make me fuckin' puke later.

Other than that, fuck you and your labels -- shove the fucking things up your bloated, bleeding ass. Nobody is paying me to read that shit as if I'm some fucked up boot licking cross between a guinea pig and a V.C. mother fuck you god damned R.

Because there's going to be more shit on the labels. Therefore bigger labels. Therefore more paper. Also, major if not ground up COMPLETE retooling of the label printers.

The fact is, labels aren't required except by law.

And you know what law exists for 85 percent of the time? To strangle the living FUCK out of American business.

Immigration law and a very few other laws fall into the 15% of the time when the government isn't trying to actively DESTROY American labor. But since it refuses to enforce immigration law, same fuckin' thing.

None of that is stated in the article - only that the way the information will be presented will be different.

Yes. And?

Hyperbole. Law exists for many reasons, and often has drastic and profound unintended consequences. But believe it or not no one gains by destroying American businesses - indeed, most politicians bend over backward for business interests as they are the largest lobbying group by far and therefore spread around the most cash.

Labor interests and business interests are often diametrically opposed.

The labels do need an overhaul to have their desired effect, and I agree with most of the changes listed. We need pie charts showing the item's proportion of your day’s calories. It should reflect the entire package, not some ridiculous contrived amount (two fifths of a soda can, as they said). There should also be pie charts showing the proportions of macro-nutrients and food groups to help people aiming for specific diets (ie, low carb, high protein).

If they've been poisoning us for so long, how come everyone's living into their 80s?

What, the food industry's effectiveness at poisoning us is less than the medical tech, drug, and device industry's ability to cure us or something? Or maybe the the food producers' poisoning is still too new, it's only recently that we've been eating the poison? This ain't trolling, I'm a bit curious where you're coming from: do you indict all GMOs? All pesticides? All additives?

You want to get Americans less fat?

Take away the labels.

Make the fuckers scared of eating that which they do not know.

Define "everyone".

Simply put, more people than our social security system can handle (which was based on now-long-outdated life expectancy estimates).


Or anecdotally: my two parents (80 and 86) and their four parents (3 died in their mid-80s, 1 in nineties). None of them ate all-naturally, and, sure, nature may be main determinant over nurture/environment, but if that's your argument you may as well just concede that toxins aren't really that important).

So, just the alive ones.

You. You are in your 80s. Nobody ever told you that before because they knew it could give you a heart attack.

But I don't care. You're actually 87 years old. There. Now you know. Have a steak and a potatuh.

How many medications were they on, and at what age (50s, even 40s) did they start taking them?

Another important question is, How active were they? I doubt all of them sat in cubicles eating fast food every day.

The thing most Americans never think about is quality of life. "Oh, yeah, if I eat too much and my heart goes or my knees go, doc'll just gimme a pill."

Living to 90 isn't much fun if you're taking seven different pills 3x a day and it's too much effort to get out of a chair.

Meh. I work with a lady that loves to lecture us on what we eat, but she didn't realize until I showed her that her regular lunch actually contained 3.3 servings of food as listed on the label.

The portion size thing really does need to change.

Pie charts!?

Really!?

Like pie is an objective measurement. Some pies are clearly more fattening than others.