ChangeDaChannel November 17, 2010
S.510 - http://www.foodpolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/S.-510.pdf
Federal Food, Drug,and Cosmetic Act - http://www.nicfa.com/HR2749.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/14/health/policy/14fda.html?scp=1&sq=Food%20Safety%20Czar%20Michael%20R.%20Taylor&st=cse
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/senate-to-take-up-food-safety-bill/?scp=1&sq=%27Food%20Safety%20Bill%27&st=cse
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-510&tab=summary
http://www.theworldsprophecy.com/senate-bill-s510-makes-it-illegal-to-grow-share-trade-or-sell-homegrown-food
http://www.seattleglobaljustice.org/2010/08/for-immediate-release-gates-foundation-invests-in-monsanto
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_R._Taylor
How they voted so far
Here’s how the senators voted on the motion to send S.510 to a full floor vote: (this is a procedural vote to move the bill forward so that it can be voted on for final passage)
Who voted in FAVOR of moving S.510 forward
Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Brown (R-MA)
Burr (R-NC)
Burris (D-IL)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coons (D-DE)
Corker (R-TN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
LeMieux (R-FL)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (D-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Thune (R-SD)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)
Who OPPOSED S.510
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Graham (R-SC)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Nelson (D-NE)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Wicker (R-MS)
All of you who live in states where senators voted in favor of this need to call your U.S. Senate offices today — right now — and urge them to oppose this nefarious bill.
Call the Capitol Switchboard and ask to be directly connected to your Senator’s office: 202-224-3121.
We are about to lose our food freedoms over the bill, because unless more pressure is brought to bear, it looks like this bill will soon pass — and we will be thrust into a new era of FDA tyranny over the food supply.
Showing posts with label Froot-Loops. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Froot-Loops. Show all posts
Friday, November 19, 2010
Friday, October 16, 2009
Red Bull Drink = Slow Death?
From Helmi
10-12-9
France & Denmark have banned it from the country...
RED BULL - slow death ...
Do NOT drink this drink anymore!
Pay attention... read everything .
As a public health safety, please pass on this email to all the contacts in your address book especially those with teenage children.
This drink is SOLD in all the supermarkets IN OUR country and our children ARE CONSUMING IT ON A TRIAL BASIS. IT can be FATAL.
RED BULL was created to stimulate the brains in people who are subjected to great physical force and in stress coma and never to be consumed like an innocent drink or soda pop.
RED BULL IS the energizer DRINK that is commercialized world-wide with its slogan: "It increases endurance, awakens the concentration capacity and the speed of reaction, offers more energy and improves the mood. All this can be found in a can of RED BULL, the power drink of the millennium."
RED BULL has managed to arrive in almost 100 countries worldwide. The RED BULL logo is targeted at young people and sportsmen, two attractive segments that have been captivated by the stimulus that the drink provides.
It was created by Dietrich Mateschitz, an industrialist of Austrian origin who discovered the drink by chance. It happened during a business trip to Hong Kong , when he was working at a factory that manufactured toothbrushes.
The liquid, based on a formula that contained caffeine and taurine, caused a rage in that country. Imagine the grand success of this drink in Europe where the product still did not exist, besides it was a superb opportunity to become an entrepreneur.
BUT THE TRUTH ABOUT THIS DRINK IS ANOTHER THING
FRANCE and DENMARK have just prohibited it as a cocktail of death, due to its vitamin components mixed with GLUCURONOLACTONE ' - a highly-dangerous chemical, which was developed by the United States Department of Defense during the sixties to stimulate the moral of the troops based in VIETNAM, which acted like a hallucinogenic drug that calmed the stress of the war.
But their effects in the organism were so devastating, that it was discontinued, because of the high index of cases of migraines, cerebral tumors and diseases of the liver that was evident in the soldiers who consumed it.
And in spite of it, in the can of RED BULL you can still find as one of its components: GLUCURONOLACTONE, categorized medically as a stimulant. But what it does not say on the can of RED BULL are the consequences of its consumption, and that has forced a series of WARNINGS...
1. It is dangerous to take it if you do not engage in physical exercise afterwards, since its energizing function accelerates the heart rate and can cause a sudden attack.
2. You run the risk of undergoing a cerebral hemorrhage, because RED BULL contains components that dilute the blood so that the heart utilizes less energy to pump the blood, and thus be able to deliver physical force with less effort being exerted.
3. It is prohibited to mix RED BULL with alcohol, because the mixture turns the drink into a " Deadly Bomb " that attacks the liver directly, causing the affected area never to regenerate anymore.
4. One of the main components of RED BULL is the B12 vitamin, used in medicine to recover patients who are in a coma ; from here the hypertension and the state of excitement which is experienced after taking it, as if you were in a drunken state.
5. The regular consumption of RED BULL triggers off symptoms in the form of a series of irreversible nervous and neuronal diseases.
CONCLUSION: It is a drink that should be prohibited in the entire world as when it is mixed with alcohol it creates a TIME BOMB for the human body, mainly between innocent adolescents and adults with little experience. Forward this mail to Everyone and Let them know about this
Helmi@Coolfishermann
http://www.rense.com/general88/bull.htm
10-12-9
France & Denmark have banned it from the country...
RED BULL - slow death ...
Do NOT drink this drink anymore!
Pay attention... read everything .
As a public health safety, please pass on this email to all the contacts in your address book especially those with teenage children.
This drink is SOLD in all the supermarkets IN OUR country and our children ARE CONSUMING IT ON A TRIAL BASIS. IT can be FATAL.
RED BULL was created to stimulate the brains in people who are subjected to great physical force and in stress coma and never to be consumed like an innocent drink or soda pop.
RED BULL IS the energizer DRINK that is commercialized world-wide with its slogan: "It increases endurance, awakens the concentration capacity and the speed of reaction, offers more energy and improves the mood. All this can be found in a can of RED BULL, the power drink of the millennium."
RED BULL has managed to arrive in almost 100 countries worldwide. The RED BULL logo is targeted at young people and sportsmen, two attractive segments that have been captivated by the stimulus that the drink provides.
It was created by Dietrich Mateschitz, an industrialist of Austrian origin who discovered the drink by chance. It happened during a business trip to Hong Kong , when he was working at a factory that manufactured toothbrushes.
The liquid, based on a formula that contained caffeine and taurine, caused a rage in that country. Imagine the grand success of this drink in Europe where the product still did not exist, besides it was a superb opportunity to become an entrepreneur.
BUT THE TRUTH ABOUT THIS DRINK IS ANOTHER THING
FRANCE and DENMARK have just prohibited it as a cocktail of death, due to its vitamin components mixed with GLUCURONOLACTONE ' - a highly-dangerous chemical, which was developed by the United States Department of Defense during the sixties to stimulate the moral of the troops based in VIETNAM, which acted like a hallucinogenic drug that calmed the stress of the war.
But their effects in the organism were so devastating, that it was discontinued, because of the high index of cases of migraines, cerebral tumors and diseases of the liver that was evident in the soldiers who consumed it.
And in spite of it, in the can of RED BULL you can still find as one of its components: GLUCURONOLACTONE, categorized medically as a stimulant. But what it does not say on the can of RED BULL are the consequences of its consumption, and that has forced a series of WARNINGS...
1. It is dangerous to take it if you do not engage in physical exercise afterwards, since its energizing function accelerates the heart rate and can cause a sudden attack.
2. You run the risk of undergoing a cerebral hemorrhage, because RED BULL contains components that dilute the blood so that the heart utilizes less energy to pump the blood, and thus be able to deliver physical force with less effort being exerted.
3. It is prohibited to mix RED BULL with alcohol, because the mixture turns the drink into a " Deadly Bomb " that attacks the liver directly, causing the affected area never to regenerate anymore.
4. One of the main components of RED BULL is the B12 vitamin, used in medicine to recover patients who are in a coma ; from here the hypertension and the state of excitement which is experienced after taking it, as if you were in a drunken state.
5. The regular consumption of RED BULL triggers off symptoms in the form of a series of irreversible nervous and neuronal diseases.
CONCLUSION: It is a drink that should be prohibited in the entire world as when it is mixed with alcohol it creates a TIME BOMB for the human body, mainly between innocent adolescents and adults with little experience. Forward this mail to Everyone and Let them know about this
Helmi@Coolfishermann
http://www.rense.com/general88/bull.htm
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
For Your Health, Froot Loops
By WILLIAM NEUMAN
Published: September 4, 2009
For Your Health, Froot Loops
A new food-labeling campaign called Smart Choices, backed by most of the nation’s largest food manufacturers, is “designed to help shoppers easily identify smarter food and beverage choices.”
The green checkmark label that is starting to show up on store shelves will appear on hundreds of packages, including — to the surprise of many nutritionists — sugar-laden cereals like Cocoa Krispies and Froot Loops.
“These are horrible choices,” said Walter C. Willett, chairman of the nutrition department of the Harvard School of Public Health.
He said the criteria used by the Smart Choices Program were seriously flawed, allowing less healthy products, like sweet cereals and heavily salted packaged meals, to win its seal of approval. “It’s a blatant failure of this system and it makes it, I’m afraid, not credible,” Mr. Willett said.
The Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Agriculture have also weighed in, sending the program’s managers a letter on Aug. 19 saying they intended to monitor its effect on the food choices of consumers.
The letter said the agencies would be concerned if the Smart Choices label “had the effect of encouraging consumers to choose highly processed foods and refined grains instead of fruits, vegetables and whole grains.”
The government is interested in improving nutrition labeling on packages in part because of the nation’s obesity epidemic, which experts say is tied to a diet heavy in processed foods loaded with calories, fats and sugar.
The prominently displayed label debuts as many in the food industry and government are debating how to provide information on the front of packages that includes important elements from the familiar nutrition facts box that usually appears on the back of products.
Eileen T. Kennedy, president of the Smart Choices board and the dean of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University, said the program’s criteria were based on government dietary guidelines and widely accepted nutritional standards.
She said the program was also influenced by research into consumer behavior. That research showed that, while shoppers wanted more information, they did not want to hear negative messages or feel their choices were being dictated to them.
“The checkmark means the food item is a ‘better for you’ product, as opposed to having an x on it saying ‘Don’t eat this,’ ” Dr. Kennedy said. “Consumers are smart enough to deduce that if it doesn’t have the checkmark, by implication it’s not a ‘better for you’ product. They want to have a choice. They don’t want to be told ‘You must do this.’ ”
Dr. Kennedy, who is not paid for her work on the program, defended the products endorsed by the program, including sweet cereals. She said Froot Loops was better than other things parents could choose for their children.
“You’re rushing around, you’re trying to think about healthy eating for your kids and you have a choice between a doughnut and a cereal,” Dr. Kennedy said, evoking a hypothetical parent in the supermarket. “So Froot Loops is a better choice.”
Froot Loops qualifies for the label because it meets standards set by the Smart Choices Program for fiber and Vitamins A and C, and because it does not exceed limits on fat, sodium and sugar. It contains the maximum amount of sugar allowed under the program for cereals, 12 grams per serving, which in the case of Froot Loops is 41 percent of the product, measured by weight. That is more sugar than in many popular brands of cookies.
“Froot Loops is an excellent source of many essential vitamins and minerals and it is also a good source of fiber with only 12 grams of sugar,” said Celeste A. Clark, senior vice president of global nutrition for Kellogg’s, which makes Froot Loops. “You cannot judge the nutritional merits of a food product based on one ingredient.”
Dr. Clark, who is a member of the Smart Choices board, said that the program’s standard for sugar in cereals was consistent with federal dietary guidelines that say that “small amounts of sugar” added to nutrient-dense foods like breakfast cereals can make them taste better. That, in theory, will encourage people to eat more of them, which would increase the nutrients in their diet.
Ten companies have signed up for the Smart Choices program so far, including Kellogg’s, Kraft Foods, ConAgra Foods, Unilever, General Mills, PepsiCo and Tyson Foods. Companies that participate pay up to $100,000 a year to the program, with the fee based on total sales of its products that bear the seal.
The Smart Choices checkmark is meant to take the place of similar nutritional labels that individual manufacturers began plastering on their packages several years ago, like PepsiCo’s Smart Choices Made Easy and Sensible Solution from Kraft.
In joining Smart Choices, the companies agreed to discontinue their own labeling systems, Ms. Kennedy said.
Michael R. Taylor, a senior F.D.A. adviser, said the agency was concerned that sugar-laden cereals and high-fat foods would bear a label that tells consumers they were nutritionally superior.
“What we don’t want to do is have front-of-package information that in any way is based on cherry-picking the good and not disclosing adequately the components of a product that may be less good,” Mr. Taylor said.
He said the agency would consider the possibility of creating a standardized nutrition label for the front of packages.
“We’re taking a hard look at these programs and we want to independently look at what would be the sound criteria and the best way to present this information,” Mr. Taylor said.
Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, an advocacy group, was part of a panel that helped devise the Smart Choices nutritional criteria, until he quit last September. He said the panel was dominated by members of the food industry, which skewed its decisions.
“It was paid for by industry and when industry put down its foot and said this is what we’re doing, that was it, end of story,” he said. Dr. Kennedy and Dr. Clark, who were both on the panel, said industry members had not controlled the results.
Mr. Jacobson objected to some of the panel’s nutritional decisions. The criteria allow foods to carry the Smart Choices seal if they contain added nutrients, which he said could mask shortcomings in the food.
Despite federal guidelines favoring whole grains, the criteria allow breads made with no whole grains to get the seal if they have added nutrients.
“You could start out with some sawdust, add calcium or Vitamin A and meet the criteria,” Mr. Jacobson said.
Nutritionists questioned other foods given the Smart Choices label. The program gives the seal to both regular and light mayonnaise, which could lead consumers to think they are both equally healthy. It also allows frozen meals and packaged sandwiches to have up to 600 milligrams of sodium, a quarter of the recommended daily maximum intake.
“The object of this is to make highly processed foods appear as healthful as unprocessed foods, which they are not,” said Marion Nestle, a nutrition professor at New York University.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/05/business/05smart.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1&em
Published: September 4, 2009
For Your Health, Froot Loops
A new food-labeling campaign called Smart Choices, backed by most of the nation’s largest food manufacturers, is “designed to help shoppers easily identify smarter food and beverage choices.”
The green checkmark label that is starting to show up on store shelves will appear on hundreds of packages, including — to the surprise of many nutritionists — sugar-laden cereals like Cocoa Krispies and Froot Loops.
“These are horrible choices,” said Walter C. Willett, chairman of the nutrition department of the Harvard School of Public Health.
He said the criteria used by the Smart Choices Program were seriously flawed, allowing less healthy products, like sweet cereals and heavily salted packaged meals, to win its seal of approval. “It’s a blatant failure of this system and it makes it, I’m afraid, not credible,” Mr. Willett said.
The Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Agriculture have also weighed in, sending the program’s managers a letter on Aug. 19 saying they intended to monitor its effect on the food choices of consumers.
The letter said the agencies would be concerned if the Smart Choices label “had the effect of encouraging consumers to choose highly processed foods and refined grains instead of fruits, vegetables and whole grains.”
The government is interested in improving nutrition labeling on packages in part because of the nation’s obesity epidemic, which experts say is tied to a diet heavy in processed foods loaded with calories, fats and sugar.
The prominently displayed label debuts as many in the food industry and government are debating how to provide information on the front of packages that includes important elements from the familiar nutrition facts box that usually appears on the back of products.
Eileen T. Kennedy, president of the Smart Choices board and the dean of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University, said the program’s criteria were based on government dietary guidelines and widely accepted nutritional standards.
She said the program was also influenced by research into consumer behavior. That research showed that, while shoppers wanted more information, they did not want to hear negative messages or feel their choices were being dictated to them.
“The checkmark means the food item is a ‘better for you’ product, as opposed to having an x on it saying ‘Don’t eat this,’ ” Dr. Kennedy said. “Consumers are smart enough to deduce that if it doesn’t have the checkmark, by implication it’s not a ‘better for you’ product. They want to have a choice. They don’t want to be told ‘You must do this.’ ”
Dr. Kennedy, who is not paid for her work on the program, defended the products endorsed by the program, including sweet cereals. She said Froot Loops was better than other things parents could choose for their children.
“You’re rushing around, you’re trying to think about healthy eating for your kids and you have a choice between a doughnut and a cereal,” Dr. Kennedy said, evoking a hypothetical parent in the supermarket. “So Froot Loops is a better choice.”
Froot Loops qualifies for the label because it meets standards set by the Smart Choices Program for fiber and Vitamins A and C, and because it does not exceed limits on fat, sodium and sugar. It contains the maximum amount of sugar allowed under the program for cereals, 12 grams per serving, which in the case of Froot Loops is 41 percent of the product, measured by weight. That is more sugar than in many popular brands of cookies.
“Froot Loops is an excellent source of many essential vitamins and minerals and it is also a good source of fiber with only 12 grams of sugar,” said Celeste A. Clark, senior vice president of global nutrition for Kellogg’s, which makes Froot Loops. “You cannot judge the nutritional merits of a food product based on one ingredient.”
Dr. Clark, who is a member of the Smart Choices board, said that the program’s standard for sugar in cereals was consistent with federal dietary guidelines that say that “small amounts of sugar” added to nutrient-dense foods like breakfast cereals can make them taste better. That, in theory, will encourage people to eat more of them, which would increase the nutrients in their diet.
Ten companies have signed up for the Smart Choices program so far, including Kellogg’s, Kraft Foods, ConAgra Foods, Unilever, General Mills, PepsiCo and Tyson Foods. Companies that participate pay up to $100,000 a year to the program, with the fee based on total sales of its products that bear the seal.
The Smart Choices checkmark is meant to take the place of similar nutritional labels that individual manufacturers began plastering on their packages several years ago, like PepsiCo’s Smart Choices Made Easy and Sensible Solution from Kraft.
In joining Smart Choices, the companies agreed to discontinue their own labeling systems, Ms. Kennedy said.
Michael R. Taylor, a senior F.D.A. adviser, said the agency was concerned that sugar-laden cereals and high-fat foods would bear a label that tells consumers they were nutritionally superior.
“What we don’t want to do is have front-of-package information that in any way is based on cherry-picking the good and not disclosing adequately the components of a product that may be less good,” Mr. Taylor said.
He said the agency would consider the possibility of creating a standardized nutrition label for the front of packages.
“We’re taking a hard look at these programs and we want to independently look at what would be the sound criteria and the best way to present this information,” Mr. Taylor said.
Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, an advocacy group, was part of a panel that helped devise the Smart Choices nutritional criteria, until he quit last September. He said the panel was dominated by members of the food industry, which skewed its decisions.
“It was paid for by industry and when industry put down its foot and said this is what we’re doing, that was it, end of story,” he said. Dr. Kennedy and Dr. Clark, who were both on the panel, said industry members had not controlled the results.
Mr. Jacobson objected to some of the panel’s nutritional decisions. The criteria allow foods to carry the Smart Choices seal if they contain added nutrients, which he said could mask shortcomings in the food.
Despite federal guidelines favoring whole grains, the criteria allow breads made with no whole grains to get the seal if they have added nutrients.
“You could start out with some sawdust, add calcium or Vitamin A and meet the criteria,” Mr. Jacobson said.
Nutritionists questioned other foods given the Smart Choices label. The program gives the seal to both regular and light mayonnaise, which could lead consumers to think they are both equally healthy. It also allows frozen meals and packaged sandwiches to have up to 600 milligrams of sodium, a quarter of the recommended daily maximum intake.
“The object of this is to make highly processed foods appear as healthful as unprocessed foods, which they are not,” said Marion Nestle, a nutrition professor at New York University.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/05/business/05smart.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1&em
Experts Say Industry Food Labels Deceptive
By Randall Pinkston
NEW YORK, Sept. 6, 2009
Experts Say Industry Food Labels Deceptive
Manufacturers Add "Smart Choices" Labels to Packages, Mimicking Government Nutrition Labels; Bid to Push Processed Foods?
(CBS) It's a controversy that's as close as your local supermarket shelf - those familiar government nutrition labels. Now some big food manufacturers are adding labels of their own, as CBS News correspondent Randall Pinkston reports.
Since the mid 1990s, if Americans wanted to know what was in their food, they had to look at government-approved nutrition facts on the side of the box.
Now, some packaged foods are getting new front-of-the-box labels.
"The purpose is to help people make choices about healthier food and to make different selections than they are making now," said Mike Hughes, chairman of the Smart Choices program.
Smart choices is a system designed by and paid for by the nation's major food manufacturers and managed by the American Society of Nutrition.
But critics say the program has a very different objective.
"The point of the program is to make processed foods look healthy when you really want people eating foods that have been as minimally processed as possible," said Dr. Marian Nestle, a professor of nutritional studies at New York University.
Nestle was astounded by some of the products that rate the Smart Choice designation.
"This is the first product that I've seen with this logo on it," she said, holding a box of Fruit Loops cereal. "And I was kind of amazed because this is a sugary cereal."
Food manufacturers say just because a product contains sugar doesn't make it bad.
"We believe that the smart choices program, taken in its totality, will encourage people to eat in line with U.S. dietary guidelines for Americans," Hughes said.
So far, 10 large food manufacturers, like Kellogg's and Kraft, are part of the Smart Choices program. With approximately 500 products, including Fruit Loops, Kid Cuisine cheeseburgers, Teddy Grahams and Kraft Macaroni and Cheese, carrying the Smart Choices label.
The green mark does not mean government approval, but critics say there's a danger some consumers won't know that.
Shopper Laurie Adams told us that she believed the green check mark meant that the product was a healthy choice.
The Food and Drug Administration, which regulates food labeling, is keeping close watch on the Smart Choices program. The major concern is that the labels may mislead consumers and encourage them to buy highly processed foods instead of fruits and vegetables.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/06/eveningnews/main5291352.shtml
NEW YORK, Sept. 6, 2009
Experts Say Industry Food Labels Deceptive
Manufacturers Add "Smart Choices" Labels to Packages, Mimicking Government Nutrition Labels; Bid to Push Processed Foods?
(CBS) It's a controversy that's as close as your local supermarket shelf - those familiar government nutrition labels. Now some big food manufacturers are adding labels of their own, as CBS News correspondent Randall Pinkston reports.
Since the mid 1990s, if Americans wanted to know what was in their food, they had to look at government-approved nutrition facts on the side of the box.
Now, some packaged foods are getting new front-of-the-box labels.
"The purpose is to help people make choices about healthier food and to make different selections than they are making now," said Mike Hughes, chairman of the Smart Choices program.
Smart choices is a system designed by and paid for by the nation's major food manufacturers and managed by the American Society of Nutrition.
But critics say the program has a very different objective.
"The point of the program is to make processed foods look healthy when you really want people eating foods that have been as minimally processed as possible," said Dr. Marian Nestle, a professor of nutritional studies at New York University.
Nestle was astounded by some of the products that rate the Smart Choice designation.
"This is the first product that I've seen with this logo on it," she said, holding a box of Fruit Loops cereal. "And I was kind of amazed because this is a sugary cereal."
Food manufacturers say just because a product contains sugar doesn't make it bad.
"We believe that the smart choices program, taken in its totality, will encourage people to eat in line with U.S. dietary guidelines for Americans," Hughes said.
So far, 10 large food manufacturers, like Kellogg's and Kraft, are part of the Smart Choices program. With approximately 500 products, including Fruit Loops, Kid Cuisine cheeseburgers, Teddy Grahams and Kraft Macaroni and Cheese, carrying the Smart Choices label.
The green mark does not mean government approval, but critics say there's a danger some consumers won't know that.
Shopper Laurie Adams told us that she believed the green check mark meant that the product was a healthy choice.
The Food and Drug Administration, which regulates food labeling, is keeping close watch on the Smart Choices program. The major concern is that the labels may mislead consumers and encourage them to buy highly processed foods instead of fruits and vegetables.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/06/eveningnews/main5291352.shtml
Kellogg's® Froot Loops® cereal
Kellogg's® Froot Loops® cereal
Sweetened multi-grain cereal. Now provides fiber.
Sizes
11 oz, 15 oz, 3/4 oz bowl, 1.5 oz cup, 43.6 oz dual pkg, 15 oz, 3/4 oz bowl, 22 oz, 25 oz, 19.7 oz, 11 oz, 25 oz, 0.95 oz indv, 0.95 oz indv, 8.7 oz, 12.2 oz, 17 oz, 21.7 oz, 8.7 oz, 12.2 oz, 17 oz, 21.7 oz, 8.7 oz, 12.2 oz, 21.7 oz savings, 17 oz, 0.95 oz indv
Ingredients
SUGAR; WHOLE GRAIN CORN FLOUR; WHEAT FLOUR; WHOLE GRAIN OAT FLOUR; OAT FIBER; SOLUBLE CORN FIBER; PARTIALLY HYDROGENATED VEGETABLE OIL (ONE OR MORE OF: COCONUT, SOYBEAN AND/OR COTTONSEED OILS)†; SALT; SODIUM ASCORBATE AND ASCORBIC ACID (VITAMIN C); NIACINAMIDE; REDUCED IRON; NATURAL ORANGE, LEMON, CHERRY, RASPBERRY, BLUEBERRY, LIME AND OTHER NATURAL FLAVORS; RED #40; BLUE #2; TURMERIC COLOR; YELLOW #6; ZINC OXIDE; ANNATTO COLOR; BLUE #1; PYRIDOXINE HYDROCHLORIDE (VITAMIN B6); RIBOFLAVIN (VITAMIN B2); THIAMIN HYDROCHLORIDE (VITAMIN B1); VITAMIN A PALMITATE; BHT (PRESERVATIVE); FOLIC ACID; VITAMIN D; VITAMIN B12.† LESS THAN 0.5g TRANS FAT PER SERVING.
Allergen Information
CONTAINS WHEAT INGREDIENTS. CORN USED IN THIS PRODUCT CONTAINS TRACES OF SOYBEANS.
Dietary Exchange Per Serving
1 1/2 Carbohydrates
Kosher Status
Kosher/Parve
Country of Origin
Distributed in USAhttp://www2.kelloggs.com/Product/ProductDetail.aspx?product=566
Smart Choices" food label is marketing fraud
by Mike Adams
September 22 2009
Smart Choices" food label is marketing fraud; Tufts University involvement questioned (opinion)
NaturalNews) The big food companies have dreamed up yet another clever con to sell processed junk foods to parents and children: A "Smart Choices" label that implies the food product is a smart choice for health and nutrition. The problem is that the standards for qualifying for this designation were set by the food companies themselves, and processed junk foods like Froot Loops (a sugary breakfast cereal) qualify.
Froot Loops is 41 percent processed white sugar. It also contains processed flour and partially-hydrogenated vegetable oil. But that's not all you'll find in the box: Froot Loops is also made with synthetic coloring chemicals, including Red #40, Blue #2, Yellow #6 and Blue #1. The No. 1 ingredient of Froot Loops is sugar, and each serving contains 12 grams of sugar.
So how, exactly, did Froot Loops qualify for the "Smart Choices" label?
I'll tell you how: Because the Smart Choices label is a marketing fraud. It's a manipulative, dishonest food package labeling system that is intentionally designed by the processed food companies to mislead and misinform consumers into buying processed food products, in my view.
You'd have to be deeply misinformed about nutritional basics to think that a processed breakfast cereal made of 41% sugar, partially-hydrogenated oils and artificial coloring chemicals is a "smart choice" for any child. A more appropriate label might be "Diabetes Choices" or "Obesity Choices", but certainly not "Smart Choices."
In my opinion, this marketing fraud is little more than a marketing gimmick. It makes you wonder who, exactly, came up with it.
Did Tufts University sell out to the food giants?
The president of the Smart Choices board is Eileen T. Kennedy, dean of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University. (http://nutrition.tufts.edu/1174562918741/Nutrition-Page-nl2w_1177941613339.html )
Eileen Kennedy and other Tufts University faculty members have established ties with the Kellogg's company, having participated in a "Children's Health" forum that was co-sponsored by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
That event, held in June of this year, was entitled: 'Children's Health: The Future of Food & Nutrition Policy'. It claimed to offer in-depth discussions on topics like "childhood obesity, nutrition standards, global child nutrition and school food."
(http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS211273+27-May-2009+PRN20090527 )
(Did their discussions ever mention that perhaps children shouldn't eat breakfast cereals made with 41% processed sugar?)
In promoting the event, Eileen Kennedy was quoted in a joint press release, admitting how closely her university works with food companies:
"Working with our colleagues across academia, the food and nutrition industry, government agencies and nonprofit organizations, we will influence and change the
nutritional landscape for our children."
She certainly accomplished that. Now, products made with 41% refined white sugar are fraudulently marketed as "Smart Choices."
Guess who else was invited to speak at the event? Dr. Cathy Woteki from Mars, Inc., makers of candy bars and other sugar processed foods that are aggressively marketed to children.
Tufts University: Sugar for kids?
It all makes you wonder: With all these corporate junk food giants being so heavily involved in this event presented by Tufts University, what exactly does this university really stand for in regards to healthy food for children? Does Tufts University itself stand behind the promotion of sugary junk foods for children? Does it endorse products like Froot Loops being labeled as "Smart Choices" for kids?
Here are the ingredients of Froot Loops:
SUGAR; WHOLE GRAIN CORN FLOUR; WHEAT FLOUR; WHOLE GRAIN OAT FLOUR; OAT FIBER; SOLUBLE CORN FIBER; PARTIALLY HYDROGENATED VEGETABLE OIL (ONE OR MORE OF: COCONUT, SOYBEAN AND/OR COTTONSEED OILS)†; SALT; SODIUM ASCORBATE AND ASCORBIC ACID (VITAMIN C); NIACINAMIDE; REDUCED IRON; NATURAL ORANGE, LEMON, CHERRY, RASPBERRY, BLUEBERRY, LIME AND OTHER NATURAL FLAVORS; RED #40; BLUE #2; TURMERIC COLOR; YELLOW #6; ZINC OXIDE; ANNATTO COLOR; BLUE #1; PYRIDOXINE HYDROCHLORIDE (VITAMIN B6); RIBOFLAVIN (VITAMIN B2); THIAMIN HYDROCHLORIDE (VITAMIN B1); VITAMIN A PALMITATE; BHT (PRESERVATIVE); FOLIC ACID; VITAMIN D; VITAMIN B12.
Is Eileen T. Kennedy, dean of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University, really going to tell us -- with a straight face -- that this cereal is good for kids?
Really?
Aiming low
She might answer, of course, that "it meets U.S. government nutritional guidelines." Those are the same guidelines that have already made the United States of America a nation grappling with a pandemic of obese children and adults.
Clearly, U.S. government nutritional guidelines are a public health disaster. If we hope to improve the health of our children, it only stands to reason that we must improve the nutritional guidelines being followed to feed our kids. And you can't improve nutritional guidelines if you're in bed with the very same corporate food giants who are making and peddling their sugary, chemically-enriched breakfast cereals that promote diabetes and obesity in the first place.
You also can't improve kids' health if you're nutritionally ill-informed and yet you've somehow found your way into a position of influence over nutritional policy... as seems to be the case with Dr. Eileen Kennedy. Here's her gosh-darned explanation of why Froot Loops deserves the "Smart Choices" label, in her own words: "You're rushing around, you're trying to think about healthy eating for your kids and you have a choice between a doughnut and a cereal. So Froot Loops is a better choice."
Better than a donut?
Huh? Is she serious? Froot Loops gets a Smart Choices label because it's better than a donut? Is this the limit of the nutritional awareness of the dean of a nationally-recognized school that's part of the Tufts University system?
This all really reminds me of the movie Idiocracy, where the whole nation is run by complete idiots and water fountains have been replaced with sugary sports drinks because everybody knows that "water is only for toilets."
In terms of really idiotic thinking, check out this quote published in the New York Times: "Dr. Clark, who is a member of the Smart Choices board, said that the program's standard for sugar in cereals was consistent with federal dietary guidelines that say that 'small amounts of sugar' added to nutrient-dense foods like breakfast cereals can make them taste better. That, in theory, will encourage people to eat more of them, which would increase the nutrients in their diet."
Are they serious? Break down this logic for a moment: Sugar is GOOD because it encourages children to eat MORE processed breakfast cereals!
How on earth could this be a legitimate answer in a nation where kids are eating too much sugar and too much processed food in the first place?
The utter abandonment of basic common sense by the people in this program is truly awe-inspiring. It really makes me wonder how we can ever turn around the health problems of this nation when we have such nutritionally illiterate people being quoted in the New York Times as nutritional experts. (Or perhaps the NY Times was just trying to point out how nutritionally ignorant these people are, and on that point it succeeded wildly...)
Someone please educate Dr. Kennedy about nutrition
Tufts University is an outstanding academic institution. It's done a lot of good work and produced many important studies on nutrition and health. But this pro-sugary-cereals stance by its nutrition school dean is, well, just flat out embarrassing. It makes Tufts University look like the best little corporate nutrition whorehouse in Boston. They might as well just remove the word "science" from the name of the school: Gerald J. and Dorothy R. Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy.
That name should probably be replaced with this one, which is more accurate: Gerald J. and Dorothy R. Friedman School of Corporate Ass Kissers. I'm pretty sure the Friedmans wouldn't appreciate that name, but neither would they likely appreciate a deeply misinformed dean potentially compromising the reputation of their school by seemingly selling out to the very companies whose products undeniably contribute to our kids becoming obese and diabetic in the first place.
Don't let 'em get away with this sell out. Contact the School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University and tell 'em what you think about their dean endorsing Froot Loops for children (among other processed junk foods) under the "Smart Choices" label. This is inexcusable! Their contact page is right here: http://nutrition.tufts.edu/1174562918741/Nutrition-Page-nl2w_1177953853481.html
Not all top university nutritionists are hopelessly ignorant when it comes to nutrition, by the way. The chair of the nutrition department at the Harvard School of Public Health, Walter Willett, told the New York Times that many products carrying the "Smart Choices" label "are horrible choices." In fact, quite a number of influential nutrition leaders have spoken out publicly against Dr. Kennedy.
Smart Choices companies aren't so smart choices
In case you're curious, here's the list of the companies participating in this "Smart Choices" label program:
Kellogg's
Kraft Foods
ConAgra Foods
Unilever
General Mills
PepsiCo
Tyson Foods
... it reads like a who's who of processed food and junk food giants. In terms of making truly smart choices at the grocery store, by the way, the smartest choice would be to avoid any product made by any of these companies, in my view.
What integrity really means
Michael Jacobson, the public health watchdog from CSPI, participated as a panel member in the early days of the Smart Choices program, but he soon quit, explaining "It was paid for by industry and when industry put down its foot and said this is what we're doing, that was it, end of story." In other words, Jacobson rightly refused to sell out his conscience to a group of corporate junk food promoters. That's a rare display of genuine integrity in our world.
I applaud Jacobson for quitting the Smart Choices program, which is obviously just a fraudulent marketing gimmick devised by these companies to intentionally mislead consumers. It's too bad the dean of Tufts University's nutrition school couldn't find the backbone to adhere to similar principles. In a nation suffering from runaway health care costs, widespread nutritional deficiencies and an epidemic of childhood obesity, it's truly disheartening to see an influential nutrition leader from one of the nation's top universities blatantly promoting processed junk foods for children.
I'm appalled, saddened and somewhat surprised to see this in 2009. While the nutritional advice of Eileen T. Kennedy might have passed muster in the 1970's era of bleached white Wonder Bread and chemically-enhanced TV dinners, today we know a lot more about the links between the dietary intake of sugars and childhood obesity, diabetes, heart disease and behavioral disorders. We know that feeding a nation of children sugared-up breakfast cereals and soft drinks is a sure recipe for raising a generation of obese, diabetic children and teens.
As the dean of the school of nutrition at Tufts University, how is it possible that Mrs. Kennedy could have missed this? Has she been in an aspartame-induced coma since 1975? ... and now she suddenly awakens from her decades-long slumber to slap on a pair of polyester pants and champion Froot Loops for children as a prominent dean at Tufts University?
Is this some bizarre rejected screenplay from a "B" movie script? Will her head now spin around as she spouts devilish verse from a demonic spirit that has occupied her body and filled her head with thoughts of sugary cereals?
The whole thing just defies reason. It's difficult to believe this is happening today, in America, in a top-rated university. So read the sources below. Check it out for yourself as you confirm the truth of what I'm reporting here through articles in the NY Times, CBS News and Reuters. See for yourself just how corrupt and / or ignorant the top nutrition leaders in our nation's universities can be on this crucial issue of the diet of children. And when you see this clearly, you'll finally understand why America has more fat, diabetic children than any other nation in the world.
Our adults have sold out our children. It's that simple. In my opinion, corporate money has bought off key influencers who set public nutrition policy, and they have conspired to feed our kids more sugar, more processed foods, more junk and more lies about nutrition even while their selfish actions may very well bankrupt our entire nation through runaway health care costs.
One final truth comes out in all this: The USA's national nutrition policies precisely mirror its national food supply -- they're both processed, bleached, adulterated and wholly devoid of any useful substance.
Sources for this story include:
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/05/business/05smart.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1&em
LA Times
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/booster_shots/2009/09/smart-choices-sugary-cereal.html
CBS News
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/06/eveningnews/main5291352.shtml
Froot Loops ingredients:
http://www2.kelloggs.com/Product/ProductDetail.aspx?product=566
Tufts University School of Nutrition Science and Policy:
http://nutrition.tufts.edu/
http://www.naturalnews.com/027077_nutrition_food_Tufts_University.html
September 22 2009
Smart Choices" food label is marketing fraud; Tufts University involvement questioned (opinion)
NaturalNews) The big food companies have dreamed up yet another clever con to sell processed junk foods to parents and children: A "Smart Choices" label that implies the food product is a smart choice for health and nutrition. The problem is that the standards for qualifying for this designation were set by the food companies themselves, and processed junk foods like Froot Loops (a sugary breakfast cereal) qualify.
Froot Loops is 41 percent processed white sugar. It also contains processed flour and partially-hydrogenated vegetable oil. But that's not all you'll find in the box: Froot Loops is also made with synthetic coloring chemicals, including Red #40, Blue #2, Yellow #6 and Blue #1. The No. 1 ingredient of Froot Loops is sugar, and each serving contains 12 grams of sugar.
So how, exactly, did Froot Loops qualify for the "Smart Choices" label?
I'll tell you how: Because the Smart Choices label is a marketing fraud. It's a manipulative, dishonest food package labeling system that is intentionally designed by the processed food companies to mislead and misinform consumers into buying processed food products, in my view.
You'd have to be deeply misinformed about nutritional basics to think that a processed breakfast cereal made of 41% sugar, partially-hydrogenated oils and artificial coloring chemicals is a "smart choice" for any child. A more appropriate label might be "Diabetes Choices" or "Obesity Choices", but certainly not "Smart Choices."
In my opinion, this marketing fraud is little more than a marketing gimmick. It makes you wonder who, exactly, came up with it.
Did Tufts University sell out to the food giants?
The president of the Smart Choices board is Eileen T. Kennedy, dean of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University. (http://nutrition.tufts.edu/1174562918741/Nutrition-Page-nl2w_1177941613339.html )
Eileen Kennedy and other Tufts University faculty members have established ties with the Kellogg's company, having participated in a "Children's Health" forum that was co-sponsored by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
That event, held in June of this year, was entitled: 'Children's Health: The Future of Food & Nutrition Policy'. It claimed to offer in-depth discussions on topics like "childhood obesity, nutrition standards, global child nutrition and school food."
(http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS211273+27-May-2009+PRN20090527 )
(Did their discussions ever mention that perhaps children shouldn't eat breakfast cereals made with 41% processed sugar?)
In promoting the event, Eileen Kennedy was quoted in a joint press release, admitting how closely her university works with food companies:
"Working with our colleagues across academia, the food and nutrition industry, government agencies and nonprofit organizations, we will influence and change the
nutritional landscape for our children."
She certainly accomplished that. Now, products made with 41% refined white sugar are fraudulently marketed as "Smart Choices."
Guess who else was invited to speak at the event? Dr. Cathy Woteki from Mars, Inc., makers of candy bars and other sugar processed foods that are aggressively marketed to children.
Tufts University: Sugar for kids?
It all makes you wonder: With all these corporate junk food giants being so heavily involved in this event presented by Tufts University, what exactly does this university really stand for in regards to healthy food for children? Does Tufts University itself stand behind the promotion of sugary junk foods for children? Does it endorse products like Froot Loops being labeled as "Smart Choices" for kids?
Here are the ingredients of Froot Loops:
SUGAR; WHOLE GRAIN CORN FLOUR; WHEAT FLOUR; WHOLE GRAIN OAT FLOUR; OAT FIBER; SOLUBLE CORN FIBER; PARTIALLY HYDROGENATED VEGETABLE OIL (ONE OR MORE OF: COCONUT, SOYBEAN AND/OR COTTONSEED OILS)†; SALT; SODIUM ASCORBATE AND ASCORBIC ACID (VITAMIN C); NIACINAMIDE; REDUCED IRON; NATURAL ORANGE, LEMON, CHERRY, RASPBERRY, BLUEBERRY, LIME AND OTHER NATURAL FLAVORS; RED #40; BLUE #2; TURMERIC COLOR; YELLOW #6; ZINC OXIDE; ANNATTO COLOR; BLUE #1; PYRIDOXINE HYDROCHLORIDE (VITAMIN B6); RIBOFLAVIN (VITAMIN B2); THIAMIN HYDROCHLORIDE (VITAMIN B1); VITAMIN A PALMITATE; BHT (PRESERVATIVE); FOLIC ACID; VITAMIN D; VITAMIN B12.
Is Eileen T. Kennedy, dean of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University, really going to tell us -- with a straight face -- that this cereal is good for kids?
Really?
Aiming low
She might answer, of course, that "it meets U.S. government nutritional guidelines." Those are the same guidelines that have already made the United States of America a nation grappling with a pandemic of obese children and adults.
Clearly, U.S. government nutritional guidelines are a public health disaster. If we hope to improve the health of our children, it only stands to reason that we must improve the nutritional guidelines being followed to feed our kids. And you can't improve nutritional guidelines if you're in bed with the very same corporate food giants who are making and peddling their sugary, chemically-enriched breakfast cereals that promote diabetes and obesity in the first place.
You also can't improve kids' health if you're nutritionally ill-informed and yet you've somehow found your way into a position of influence over nutritional policy... as seems to be the case with Dr. Eileen Kennedy. Here's her gosh-darned explanation of why Froot Loops deserves the "Smart Choices" label, in her own words: "You're rushing around, you're trying to think about healthy eating for your kids and you have a choice between a doughnut and a cereal. So Froot Loops is a better choice."
Better than a donut?
Huh? Is she serious? Froot Loops gets a Smart Choices label because it's better than a donut? Is this the limit of the nutritional awareness of the dean of a nationally-recognized school that's part of the Tufts University system?
This all really reminds me of the movie Idiocracy, where the whole nation is run by complete idiots and water fountains have been replaced with sugary sports drinks because everybody knows that "water is only for toilets."
In terms of really idiotic thinking, check out this quote published in the New York Times: "Dr. Clark, who is a member of the Smart Choices board, said that the program's standard for sugar in cereals was consistent with federal dietary guidelines that say that 'small amounts of sugar' added to nutrient-dense foods like breakfast cereals can make them taste better. That, in theory, will encourage people to eat more of them, which would increase the nutrients in their diet."
Are they serious? Break down this logic for a moment: Sugar is GOOD because it encourages children to eat MORE processed breakfast cereals!
How on earth could this be a legitimate answer in a nation where kids are eating too much sugar and too much processed food in the first place?
The utter abandonment of basic common sense by the people in this program is truly awe-inspiring. It really makes me wonder how we can ever turn around the health problems of this nation when we have such nutritionally illiterate people being quoted in the New York Times as nutritional experts. (Or perhaps the NY Times was just trying to point out how nutritionally ignorant these people are, and on that point it succeeded wildly...)
Someone please educate Dr. Kennedy about nutrition
Tufts University is an outstanding academic institution. It's done a lot of good work and produced many important studies on nutrition and health. But this pro-sugary-cereals stance by its nutrition school dean is, well, just flat out embarrassing. It makes Tufts University look like the best little corporate nutrition whorehouse in Boston. They might as well just remove the word "science" from the name of the school: Gerald J. and Dorothy R. Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy.
That name should probably be replaced with this one, which is more accurate: Gerald J. and Dorothy R. Friedman School of Corporate Ass Kissers. I'm pretty sure the Friedmans wouldn't appreciate that name, but neither would they likely appreciate a deeply misinformed dean potentially compromising the reputation of their school by seemingly selling out to the very companies whose products undeniably contribute to our kids becoming obese and diabetic in the first place.
Don't let 'em get away with this sell out. Contact the School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University and tell 'em what you think about their dean endorsing Froot Loops for children (among other processed junk foods) under the "Smart Choices" label. This is inexcusable! Their contact page is right here: http://nutrition.tufts.edu/1174562918741/Nutrition-Page-nl2w_1177953853481.html
Not all top university nutritionists are hopelessly ignorant when it comes to nutrition, by the way. The chair of the nutrition department at the Harvard School of Public Health, Walter Willett, told the New York Times that many products carrying the "Smart Choices" label "are horrible choices." In fact, quite a number of influential nutrition leaders have spoken out publicly against Dr. Kennedy.
Smart Choices companies aren't so smart choices
In case you're curious, here's the list of the companies participating in this "Smart Choices" label program:
Kellogg's
Kraft Foods
ConAgra Foods
Unilever
General Mills
PepsiCo
Tyson Foods
... it reads like a who's who of processed food and junk food giants. In terms of making truly smart choices at the grocery store, by the way, the smartest choice would be to avoid any product made by any of these companies, in my view.
What integrity really means
Michael Jacobson, the public health watchdog from CSPI, participated as a panel member in the early days of the Smart Choices program, but he soon quit, explaining "It was paid for by industry and when industry put down its foot and said this is what we're doing, that was it, end of story." In other words, Jacobson rightly refused to sell out his conscience to a group of corporate junk food promoters. That's a rare display of genuine integrity in our world.
I applaud Jacobson for quitting the Smart Choices program, which is obviously just a fraudulent marketing gimmick devised by these companies to intentionally mislead consumers. It's too bad the dean of Tufts University's nutrition school couldn't find the backbone to adhere to similar principles. In a nation suffering from runaway health care costs, widespread nutritional deficiencies and an epidemic of childhood obesity, it's truly disheartening to see an influential nutrition leader from one of the nation's top universities blatantly promoting processed junk foods for children.
I'm appalled, saddened and somewhat surprised to see this in 2009. While the nutritional advice of Eileen T. Kennedy might have passed muster in the 1970's era of bleached white Wonder Bread and chemically-enhanced TV dinners, today we know a lot more about the links between the dietary intake of sugars and childhood obesity, diabetes, heart disease and behavioral disorders. We know that feeding a nation of children sugared-up breakfast cereals and soft drinks is a sure recipe for raising a generation of obese, diabetic children and teens.
As the dean of the school of nutrition at Tufts University, how is it possible that Mrs. Kennedy could have missed this? Has she been in an aspartame-induced coma since 1975? ... and now she suddenly awakens from her decades-long slumber to slap on a pair of polyester pants and champion Froot Loops for children as a prominent dean at Tufts University?
Is this some bizarre rejected screenplay from a "B" movie script? Will her head now spin around as she spouts devilish verse from a demonic spirit that has occupied her body and filled her head with thoughts of sugary cereals?
The whole thing just defies reason. It's difficult to believe this is happening today, in America, in a top-rated university. So read the sources below. Check it out for yourself as you confirm the truth of what I'm reporting here through articles in the NY Times, CBS News and Reuters. See for yourself just how corrupt and / or ignorant the top nutrition leaders in our nation's universities can be on this crucial issue of the diet of children. And when you see this clearly, you'll finally understand why America has more fat, diabetic children than any other nation in the world.
Our adults have sold out our children. It's that simple. In my opinion, corporate money has bought off key influencers who set public nutrition policy, and they have conspired to feed our kids more sugar, more processed foods, more junk and more lies about nutrition even while their selfish actions may very well bankrupt our entire nation through runaway health care costs.
One final truth comes out in all this: The USA's national nutrition policies precisely mirror its national food supply -- they're both processed, bleached, adulterated and wholly devoid of any useful substance.
Sources for this story include:
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/05/business/05smart.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1&em
LA Times
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/booster_shots/2009/09/smart-choices-sugary-cereal.html
CBS News
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/06/eveningnews/main5291352.shtml
Froot Loops ingredients:
http://www2.kelloggs.com/Product/ProductDetail.aspx?product=566
Tufts University School of Nutrition Science and Policy:
http://nutrition.tufts.edu/
http://www.naturalnews.com/027077_nutrition_food_Tufts_University.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)