• Sumo

Via The Washington Post:

An opinion piece by the executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest further talks about opportunities for the FDA to revamp nutrition labels, something that seems to be picking up steam lately, particularly due to the changes regarding the food pyramid that was replaced in 2011. That meat and poultry are not subject to nutrition facts being printed on them is fine for vegetarians, but how would you feel about fruits and vegetables having nutrition labels?

Michael Jacobson argues that everything involved in the 1990 Nutrition Labeling and Education Act should evolve as science and public health ideals evolve, but the labels are showing their age now. For instance, is it preventing companies from marketing healthier foods and encouraging consumers to make smarter choices? What about the importance of calories and refined sugars, or highlighting high amounts of saturated fats, sodium, and added sugars (not natural sugars already found in foods)?

These are all changes that should be addressed, Jacobson says, along with adoption of a nutritional value system that some supermarket chains use to rate foods on a scale of 1 to 100. What do you think: Should nutrition labels be updated to represent changes in dietary science?