Mon Feb 18, 2013, 12:18 PM
alp227 (28,686 posts)
Food retailers underestimating calorie content of some foods, scientists say
Source: The Guardian
The calorie content of some types of food has been systematically underestimated by retailers using a system for assessing food energy that is out of date and has not kept up to date with new scientific findings, according to researchers who have investigated the accuracy of calorie labelling.
Dieters who eat high-fibre foods such as vegetables and muesli are consuming more calories than they think, for example, because the current food labels do not take into account the calories in fibre. The scientists also said that consumers could reduce their calorie intake by eating raw rather than cooked foods. They argue that the way calories are assigned to foods by retailers needs a significant overhaul.
"There is a lot of misinformation around calories, and it is crucial for the consumer, whether they are on a diet or not, to have the correct information about what they eat," said Prof Richard Wrangham, a primatologist at Harvard University. He said the public was being given "erroneous information about the energy value of many foods".
He added: "We believe that it is time for a high-level panel to consider how best to improve the quality of information provided to the public about the real energy value of their foods."
Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2013/feb/18/food-retailers-underestimating-calorie-content
3 replies, 1465 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Food retailers underestimating calorie content of some foods, scientists say (Original post)
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Mon Feb 18, 2013, 01:22 PM
TheBlackAdder (1,332 posts)
1. This is OLD News
If I remember correctly...
Years back, there was a challenge to Healthy Choice's calorie information by several of its competitors. Many products showed HC selections with 2/3rds or 1/2 of the calories of Lean Cuisine or others. I used to buy HC just because it provided substantially more food than anyone else.
The competitors claimed that the HC products were severely underrating their calories. This would lead to more sales as shoppers would compare quantity of food to the calorie content and pick the HC offerings.
The Federal Government, in probably some contribution-related manner, ruled that the HC offerings were underreporting their dietary numbers but that it was OK because it still was considered a low-calorie offering. This means that the product information on the backs of the food items are up to the discretion of the manufacturer.
After this verdict... I've never purchased another HC product.
Response to msongs (Reply #2)
Mon Feb 18, 2013, 01:52 PM
bitchkitty (7,341 posts)
3. Speaking of pasta, ever try kelp noodles?
They are very interesting - high in minerals and very low calorie. Negative calorie, I remember reading, if there even is such a thing.