No surprise: nutrition labels found to give insufficient information

Posted on Oct 11th 2007 10:32AM by Brian White
Nutrition labels may have been useful 15 years ago, but researchers say now that the "recommended daily allowance" figure commonly quoted on nutrition labels makes it hard for many consumers to translate that information into nutrient quantities.

For example, if a product has calcium, and perhaps contains 15 percent of the RDA of that ingredient, how much is that quality, specifically? Since many of us have custom nutrition needs, the bare-bones information on most processed foods can be somewhat meaningless, not to mention misleading.

If you're a female at risk for osteoporosis, can you determine from all the foods you eat exactly what your calcium intake is for a normal day? My guess is no. Did you know that there are many forms of calcium as well, each with a different level of bio-availability? As in, calcium carbonate or calcium citrate? The devil, as always, is in the details.
 
 
 

Add Your Comments

New Users

Current Users

Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.

When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.

 
 

Share Your Success Story

Jupiter Images

Have you lost weight and kept it off? We want to know how you did it and what keeps you inspired!

Read More