> I'd hate to mandate that everyone pay more for labeling that, at
>present, concerns only a minority.
We already pay for a lot of labelling that concerns only a minority.
Look at the 'Nutrition Facts' on virtually any food sold in the States.
Please tell me, who cares about the protein content of mineral water?
More useful on the tequila with the worm in it ! Those nutrient content
tests you have to buy from Covance (or their competitors) don't come
cheap.
More disturbing is to hear the government saying (on the one hand) 'We
shouldn't label for GMOs because it would confuse consumers.' yet on
the other hand to remember that the government had to be pressured to
include 'calories from fat' on those same Nutrition Fact labels. The
same FDA folks suggesting that consumers aren't sophisticated enough to
understand a GMO label felt that those same consumers were
sophisticated enough to know that fat contains 9 Calories per gram, and
to multiply the number of grams of fat times 9 and divide the result by
the total number of Calories. They flat out refused to do the logical
thing, which is to have a straightforward listing of the percentage of
Calories from fat.
The simple fact of the matter is that the food industry vetoed it. So
now the US has the most complete, most complicated nutrition labelling
in the world, for our 'unsophisticated' consumers. Best labels, but we
are the most obese, most poorly nourished nation in the world.
Obviously only a few of us pay attention to those labels.
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail