In Lee Ann Fisher Baron’s “Junk Science,” she claims that the “food industry with the help of federal regulators” sometimes use “[a science that] bypasses [the] system of peer review. Presented directly to the public by…‘experts’ or ‘activists,’ often with little or no supporting evidence, this ‘junk science’ undermines the ability…[for] everyday consumers to make rational decisions” (921). Yet Americans still have a lot of faith in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). According to a 2013 Pew Research study, 65% of Americans are “very favorable” or “mostly favorable” of the FDA. When it comes to what people put in their bodies, the FDA has a moral obligation to be truthful and transparent. The bottom line of the FDA’s myriad of responsibilities is to help protect the health of Americans. Deciding what to eat is a critical part of living healthily, and consumers must be able to trust that this massive government agency is informing them properly of the contents of food. While the FDA does an excellent job in many areas, it has flaws in other areas. One of its flaws is allowing the food industry to print food labels that are deceptive, unclear, or simply not true (known as misbranding). This is quite the hot topic because a Google search for “Should I trust food labels” returns well over 20 million results, many of which are blog posts from online writers begging their readers not to trust food labels. HowStuffWorks, a division of Discovery Communications, published an online article whose author claims that “[the food industry] will put what they want on labels. They know the game….” While the food industry is partially at blame for misbranding, the FDA is allowing it to happen. If a mother tells her children that it is oka... ... middle of paper ... ...“Proposed Changes to the Nutrition Facts Label.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 7 Mar. 2014. Web. 21 Apr. 2014. “Pew Research Center for the People & the Press Political Survey” (Q.44CF1). Pew Research Center. The Pew Charitable Trusts, Oct. 2013. Web. 21 Apr. 2014. Pomeranz, Jennifer L. "A Comprehensive Strategy To Overhaul FDA Authority For Misleading Food Labels." American Journal Of Law & Medicine 39.4 (2013): 617-647. Academic Search Complete. Web. 4 Apr. 2014. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. “CFR -- Code of Federal Regulations Title 21” (21CFR101.9). U.S. Food and Drug Administration. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 1 Apr. 2013. Web. 21 Mar. 2014. Vastag, Brian. "FDA Reviews Expanded Claims On Health Benefits Of Certain Foods." JNCI: Journal Of The National Cancer Institute 96.16 (2004): 1198-1199.
This is an increasingly concerning factor in the growing national epidemic of obesity. Adverts often mask foods that are unhealthy by emphasising their positive nutritional features – such as dietary fibre and protein. While at the same time ignoring its negative features – including the high amounts of saturated fat and sugar content. In some cases, even products that mention any alleged health benefits are usually outweighed by the health risks associated with consuming the product, that they just fail to mention. In summary, big businesses are using recurring and manipulative persuasive techniques on vulnerable consumers to try to convey the false message of health and nutrition in products when they are in fact more harmful than helpful.
Society seems to be divided between the idea if science is more harmful than helpful. We live in a world where humans depend on science and technology to improve important aspects of society, such as medical machinery, which supports the fact that science is more of a friend than a foe. Science is advancing every day. The United States has come a long way with its ongoing developments, giving individuals a chance to improve society as a whole. Not only does the United States benefit from such growth, but every modernized country does so as well. Through science and technology, individuals learn from past endeavors and apply it to present and future projects, paving the way for new discoveries and efficient enhancements
Everybody eats McDonald 's...right. Do not lie; you have cheated on your diet before. The guilt of knowing that one burger will change your weight. No that is not it, you just feel guilty because you constantly hear "calorie balance, calorie intake". So what is the point of all this? Well in zinczenko 's article "Don 't Blame the Eater" he talks about whether we should take the blame for obesity or blame the company. They each play their parts, though I concede that zinczenko is right: the fast food industry should label their food. I still insist that people should make their own researches to see what they are eating instead of suing the fast food industry. It is not personal...it 's just business.
In her book Marion Nestle examines many aspects of the food industry that call for regulation and closer examination. Nestle was a member of the Food Advisory Committee to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the 1990’s and therefore helps deem herself as a credible source of information to the audience. (Nestle 2003). Yet, with her wealth of knowledge and experience she narrates from a very candid and logical perspective, but her delivery of this knowled...
In addition, the USDA is exposed for promoting products such as cheese, milk, and high fructose corn syrup in a fictional way. They provided no information that they were unhealthy in the
While conducting my research, I found it pretty alarming that allergy labeling on products wasn’t mandated by the government until ten years ago. If allergens were not required to be clearly labeled on the products we consume, people with nut or gluten allergies for example, would have extreme difficulty in purchasing food products. Studies show that around 30,000 people require emergency room care in the United States due to allergy related incidents and around 150 deaths occur as a result of allergic reactions to food, in addition, approximately 2% of adults in the US and 5% of children have food allergies. Judging by these allergy demographics, it’s safe to assume that if allergen labeling was not mandated for consumer products, we’d see a tremendous amount of hospital treatment and deaths in the US and all over the world.
A non-GMO label doesn’t necessarily mean “healthy”. White sugar, flour, and processed ingredients if not genetically modified are considered non GMO. Recently Cheerios made their ingredients GMO free. This label made Cheerios seems as a “healthy conscience choice” when in fact they are not healthy at all. The truth is that this breakfast cereal is highly processed and is best to be avoided despite the “healthy halo” of being approved by the National Heart Association and GMO free. The truth appears on the nutrition label and the ingredients (Wartman). “If you can’t pronounce it, don’t buy it” The voluntary labeling places a burden on the consumer. The average Americans are forced to navigate confusing and cluttered food landscape” (Wartman). A mandatory labeling law is vital to give clear and concise information to citizens.
reality normally consists of two parts: a) A set of local laws that are obeyed
The sole purpose of a company is to offer goods and services while making a profit. If people have a liking for food products with so many unhealthy items and are willing to buy them, the companies have no obligation to reduce the amount of added ingredients. The companies aren’t the ones forcing the public to overeat. However, these companies shouldn’t market their products to people who they can easily exploit, like children and those who are penurious. Michael Moss, author of the article “The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food” interviews several people who worked for certain big brand companies and gives us an abundant amount of information on how the food companies make and market their food to “get us hooked”.
More and More people are becoming concerned about what they eat, especially if they consume food products that are manufactured in food industries. However, it is hard to know what exactly you are consuming if food industries provide false nutrition content and mislead consumers by placing false advertisements on the packaging. When a company produces a product that contains misleading label, consumers are not receiving complete information about the food they are eating which could lead to health issues including allergies and problems with diabetes.
Food claims seemed to be marketing for a manufacturer, but now it is a warning to a consumer's health. Some examples of claims are "low-fat", "lite", "light", "reduced", "%fat free" and "No added". The food industry is very keen to make health claims on food labels, and the ANZFA has considered lifting the ban that stops them from doing so. Many disagreeable claims are made regarding the ability of nutrients to prevent certain diseases. Food manufacturers are now only allowed to make the following well-established claims concerning relationships between diet and disease:
We live in a fast track society, and the goal of the typical consumer is simple: get the best product for the least amount of money in the shortest amount of time. When at the supermarket, it is easy to quickly scan boxes and cans for signs that assure us of a quality product. Among these familiar signs are the stamps of approval from the American Heart Association and the Smart Choices program. In many cases, however, these assurances of quality and nutrition are not what they seem to be. The use of deceptive health marketing by corporations on food products is unethical. Many of the names consumers trust to guide them in a better lifestyle are actually paid large sums of money by corporations for the privilege of putting a logo on their product.
Many food companies refrain from labeling because consumers have expressed distaste for GM products and state that they would not buy such products, even if they are already buying them now, unlabeled (ABC News). This opinion puts producers in a bind because by giving the consumer what they want, the company could lose profit. This is not a valid reason to forgo labeling; instead companies should make the buyer feel safe buying a GM product that IS labeled. Also, scientists along with the FDA publicize that labeling is not necessary because there is no evidence of genetic engineering changing food’s quality, safety, “or any other attribute.” (ABC News) Yet cigarettes and other tobacco products have been identified as containing tobacco even before any research had been done on the health
Consumer’s believe they have the right to know what they are putting into their body’s and that the label on the product will inform them of that information. When they find out the truth about food label misconceptions it breaks their trust for those manufactures. view of
The FDA has decided to release a new Nutrition Facts label that holds multiple improvements and updates. The FDA believes that our society needs this new Nutrition Facts label because they feel that the new label will: be a refreshing change in the overall layout of the label, help consumers make smarter food choices, more clearly correlate food choices with chronic diseases, and demonstrate the significant scientific improvements made in nutrition. The FDA has changed parts of the design of the food label, bolding and increasing the font size of the “calories” and “serving size” sections. These changes are thought to clearly highlight to consumers the most important sections of the food label and therefore lead the consumers to make