Serving size

[Tatyana]

I wanted to comment on something I have noticed while grocery shopping and reading labels in the US.

They are all given as a serving size, which can be quite useful for calculating your calories and macronutrients, but there is a downside to this.

I have been finding this incredibly frustrating, as I am used to not only the serving size, but the calories, carbs, protein, fat, etc., per 100 g.

By only listing things as serving size, you may be taking in more calories etc everyday than you realise.

For example, deli mustard is listed as having a serving size of 5 g (I know I typically use 10 g when I eat mustard for a start), and lists it as 0 kcals, 0 carbs, 0 protein, 0 fat and 40 mg of salt.

In 100 g of prepared mustard:

66 kcals
3.1 g fat
7.8 g carbs
4 g protein

So 10 g of mustard has 6.6 kcals, not zero as the serving size suggests.

While 10 g of mustard is not going to break a diet, I am using this as an example of how relying on serving size is misleading.

There is no such thing as zero calorie foods. It is an advertising ploy or some loop hole in how foods may be advertised in the US.

Similarly, sugar and fat free also does not mean no calories, even though there are a lot of foods advertised this way.

Sugar alcohols/polyols contain calories.

Just a word of caution, as all those 'zero calorie' foods can be too much of a good thing.

 

[Thandie]

I wanted to comment on something I have noticed while grocery shopping and reading labels in the US.

They are all given as a serving size, which can be quite useful for calculating your calories and macronutrients, but there is a downside to this.

I have been finding this incredibly frustrating, as I am used to not only the serving size, but the calories, carbs, protein, fat, etc., per 100 g.

By only listing things as serving size, you may be taking in more calories etc everyday than you realise.

For example, deli mustard is listed as having a serving size of 5 g (I know I typically use 10 g when I eat mustard for a start), and lists it as 0 kcals, 0 carbs, 0 protein, 0 fat and 40 mg of salt.

In 100 g of prepared mustard:

66 kcals
3.1 g fat
7.8 g carbs
4 g protein

So 10 g of mustard has 6.6 kcals, not zero as the serving size suggests.

While 10 g of mustard is not going to break a diet, I am using this as an example of how relying on serving size is misleading.

There is no such thing as zero calorie foods. It is an advertising ploy or some loop hole in how foods may be advertised in the US.

Similarly, sugar and fat free also does not mean no calories, even though there are a lot of foods advertised this way.

Sugar alcohols/polyols contain calories.

Just a word of caution, as all those 'zero calorie' foods can be too much of a good thing.

Yeap! Welcome to the USA!

People here have been educated about looking out for the 'serving size' However, most people ignore it, and that's because they don't want to follow macros.

 

[OneBreath]

I get so frustrated with misleading labels. We need some serious regulation to keep companies from advertising non healthy products in a somewhat healthy way.

For instance, Krispy Kreme donuts containers have a large label saying "100% trans fat free!". We'll yeah that's true. They are also cocaine free. But that doesn't mean they are healthy.

Then there are the kellogs whole grain labels. Big labels with 7 or something whole grains that are good for your heart. What about the 25 grams of sugar per HALF CUP serving.

I better stop before i get worked up.

 

[Tatyana]

I get so frustrated with misleading labels. We need some serious regulation to keep companies from advertising non healthy products in a somewhat healthy way.

For instance, Krispy Kreme donuts containers have a large label saying "100% trans fat free!". We'll yeah that's true. They are also cocaine free. But that doesn't mean they are healthy.

Then there are the kellogs whole grain labels. Big labels with 7 or something whole grains that are good for your heart. What about the 25 grams of sugar per HALF CUP serving.

I better stop before i get worked up.

Yes, the trans fat thing is also misleading as they occur naturally as well I believe, so quite a few foods with fat will have naturally occurring trans fats in dairy and beef.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, I think this sort of labelling applies to calories as well:

On July 11, 2003, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a regulation requiring manufacturers to list trans fat on the Nutrition Facts panel of foods and some dietary supplements.[16][17]

The new labeling rule became mandatory across the board, even for companies that petitioned for extensions, on January 1, 2008.

However, unlike in many other countries, trans fat levels of less than 0.5 grams per serving can be listed as 0 grams trans fat on the food label. Though this is a small amount, multiple servings can exceed recommended levels

And:

Products containing less than 5g of fat show amounts rounded to the nearest .5g. Amounts less than .5g are rounded to 0g. For example, if a product contains .45g of trans fat per serving, and the package contains 18 servings, the label would show 0g of trans fat, even though the product actually contains a total of 8.1g of trans fat.

I think there is something similar with 'zero calorie foods', if it is less than 5 kcals per serving then it may be called this, which is very misleading as there are no zero calorie foods.