Food nutrition lables... Wth are they based on?

[fiction agent]

I was looking over this and...

On a 2,000 calorie diet, according to the US nutrition label you see on foods...

You should have roughly...

65 g - Fat (600) [20 g saturated]
300 g - Carbs (1200)
50 g - Protein (200)

Which is about 2000 calories.

Am I missing something?

% of F/C/P = 30/60/10 ???

Is this based on any science?

 

[devcon]

I was looking over this and...

On a 2,000 calorie diet, according to the US nutrition label you see on foods...

You should have roughly...

65 g - Fat (600) [20 g saturated]
300 g - Carbs (1200)
50 g - Protein (200)

Which is about 2000 calories.

Am I missing something?

% of F/C/P = 30/60/10 ???

Is this based on any science?

Even though the Government Dietary Guidelines for Americans is published every 5 years by the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Agriculture (USDA) and provides eating guidelines for everyone ages 2 and older, it is based on a model from the 80's for the average everyday American. The science behind it is based from a preventative aspect from diseases stemming from poor diets which results in - cardiovascular disease, hypertension, dyslipidemia, type 2 diabetes, overweight and obesity, osteoporosis, constipation, diverticular disease, iron deficiency anemia, oral disease, malnutrition, and some cancers.

There are actually more specific USDA standards based on your daily caloric intake that fluctuate higher or lower depending on it. The fat requirement is 20-35% from poly and mono with 10% or less coming from saturated of you daily total. The protein requirement is lower because higher protein intake leads to calcium depletion in non active individuals or not supplementing. Any high impact or weight bearing activity will keep calcium levels at bay if you're intake is adequate. The carb requirement is highest because they want you to choose a wide variety of fruits, veges, fiber-rich, nutrient-rich and nutrient-dense foods. Check the USDA website and 2005 Dietary Guidelines for more info.

I looked at this guide last year and I think it's close to 100 pages(didn't read it all), but the majority of it, you probably know already. The average american needs all the help they can get when it comes to eating right so they print those on all food items. Hope it helps them cuz it ain't pretty out there...

 

[*Bunny*]

I was looking over this and...

On a 2,000 calorie diet, according to the US nutrition label you see on foods...

You should have roughly...

65 g - Fat (600) [20 g saturated]
300 g - Carbs (1200)
50 g - Protein (200)

Which is about 2000 calories.

Am I missing something?

% of F/C/P = 30/60/10 ???

Is this based on any science?

Not sure what your actual question is ...

Missing something as in the labels showing a generalized recommendation about daily 'average' intake, without taking into account individual factors?

Basically everything when it comes to body, fitness & nutrition is going to be like this, based on 'studies', 'research' and all other test cases plastered all over this board to support/refute a statement.

Missing something as In why is the rec. amounts Carb #1, Fat #2, Protein #3 ?

There is some good reading here ... click through the links ... http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/pyramids.html

*Rebuilding the food pyramid*

^^^ From this last article ...sorry if it is a bit outdated... "...uncertainties still cloud our understanding of the relation between diet and health. More research is needed to examine the role of dairy products, the health effects of specific fruits and vegetables, the risks and benefits of vitamin supplements, and the long-term effects of diet during childhood and early adult life. The interaction of dietary factors with genetic predisposition should also be investigated, although its importance remains to be determined.

Another challenge will be to ensure that the information about nutrition given to the public is based strictly on scientific evidence. The USDA may not be the best government agency to develop objective nutritional guidelines, because it may be too closely linked to the agricultural industry. The food pyramid should be rebuilt in a setting that is well insulated from political and economic interests"

 

[Lifterforlife]

I believe it has to do with the food pyramid. This is the type diet they recommend.

 

[Gymgurl]

Right....but they admit that they need to revise it again....to many carbs for the average person

 

[Lifterforlife]

Another challenge will be to ensure that the information about nutrition given to the public is based strictly on scientific evidence. The USDA may not be the best government agency to develop objective nutritional guidelines, because it may be too closely linked to the agricultural industry. The food pyramid should be rebuilt in a setting that is well insulated from political and economic interests"

Missed this in Bunny's post. Should have known she would not have neglected that. Nicely put by whomever.

 

[*Bunny*]

Missed this in Bunny's post. Should have known she would not have neglected that. Nicely put by whomever.

Rebuilding the Food Pyramid
WALTER C WILLETT & MEIR J STAMPFER / Scientific American ... sounded too good to rephrase

Thanks lifter

 

[Island Son]

http://news.com.com/Voting+with+a+fork+The+politics+of+food/2100-11395_3-6066597.html?tag=st.num

Obesity is, by far, America's biggest problem in food politics, Nestle said. Curbing the amount of food people eat is an uphill battle because the food industry constantly pushes consumers to eat more, not less, she said.

"The deep dark secret of American agriculture (revealed only by agricultural economists behind closed doors)," Nestle writes, "is that there is far too much food available--3,900 calories per day for every man, woman and child in the country, whereas the average adult needs only a bit more than half that amount, and children much less."

As a result, the food industry--worth almost a trillion dollars annually--makes food more convenient (already washed, prepackaged spinach, for example), served in larger portions, easier to access and cheaper so that people will eat and buy more. In this regard, the food industry's goal of making profits can be diametrically opposed to a consumer's goal of being healthy, according to Nestle.

 

[Island Son]

To get a certified organic seal, a food producer must follow a phonebook-thick set of rules set by the Department of Agriculture, Nestle said. Among those rules, the food cannot be grown with chemical pesticides, antibiotics, hormones or chemical fertilizers. After interviewing a range of inspectors, food producers and suppliers, she said certified organic producers largely follow the letter of the rules, with few breaking them purposely.

Yet the certified organic rules are under constant attack by Congress and big organics--the companies that entered the organic business because they can charge more for the foods, she said. Those parties want to weaken the rules by adding chemicals to organic food but keep the same label, Nestle said.

 

[Island Son]

Yet many people can't afford the higher price that comes with certified organic foods. Milk, for example, is a staple food, but can cost double the price if it's certified organic. (She also says that grocery store marketers put milk in the back of the store so that people buy things they see in the aisles.)Conventional milk, however, can contain cow growth hormones such as bovine somatotropin (bST), which is genetically engineered, as well as antibiotics injected to protect overcrowded cows from getting sick.

Nestle said that if a consumer can afford no other organic products, organic milk should be the priority.