New Food Labels Will Show Calories And Sugar Content--But Not GMO's!

[donnay]

By MARY CLARE JALONICK
Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Those "Nutrition Facts" labels that are plastered on nearly every food package found in grocery stores are getting a new look.

Calories would be in larger, bolder type, and consumers for the first time would know whether foods have added sugars under label changes being proposed by the Obama administration. Serving sizes would be updated to make them more realistic. A serving of ice cream, for example, would double to a full cup, closer to what people actually eat.

The proposed overhaul comes as science has shifted. While fat was the focus two decades ago when the labels first were created, nutritionists are now more concerned with how many calories we eat. And serving sizes have long been misleading, with many single-serving packages listing multiple servings, so the calorie count is lower.

Continued...

 

[angelatc]

Yay!!!!!!

 

[angelatc]

(Wow - the article doesn't even mention GMOs. That's just apparently someone's agenda.......)

 

[donnay]

Amazing how you will cheerlead for labels showing calories and sugar content but not give any information on it to inform the citizen about GMO's. The sugar may be GMO beet sugar--but you don't care, do you?

Speaking out of both sides of your mouth again. Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.

 

[angelatc]

Amazing how you will cheerlead for labels showing calories and sugar content but not give any information on it to inform the citizen about GMO's. The sugar may be GMO beet sugar--but you don't care, do you?

Speaking out of both sides of your mouth again. Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.

I was just cheerleading for the fact that the food terrorists didn't get their way on GMO labeling. I don't think any labeling should be mandatory, because unike you, I am not here touting a very liberal agenda.

And besides, there's no legitimate reason to label GMOs. You don't want to eat them - then eat organic.

 

[donnay]

I was just cheerleading for the fact that the food terrorists didn't get their way on GMO labeling. I don't think any labeling should be mandatory, because unike you, I am not here touting a very liberal agenda.

LOL! Food Terrorists? Liberal agenda? Drama Queen, indeed. My reason for this thread is to point out how well the government has covered the Biotech's and big pHARMa asses, to push their agenda. It's all a diversion, to keep people thinking they have their best interest at heart.



"The federal government lacks constitutional authority to mandate labeling of products containing genetically-modified food. Furthermore, those who do not wish to consume genetically-modified products should be leery of federally-mandated labeling because history shows that federal regulatory agencies are susceptible to 'capture,' where the regulators end up serving the interest of the business they are supposed to control. In the case of labeling, federal agencies could redefine the meaning of 'modified' to allow genetically-engineered food on the market without fully-informing consumers of the presence of genetically- engineered ingredients. Instead of federal regulation, consumers should demand that manufactures provide full information and refuse to buy those products that are not fully labeled. Once producers see there is a demand for non-genetically-engineered products they will act to fulfill that demand. Of course, makers of genetically-engineered food should be held legally responsible if they fraudulently market their products or harm anyone."
Feb. 26, 2008 Ron Paul

I have always agreed with Dr. Paul on this. Guess that makes him a liberal too.

 

[angelatc]

LOL! Food Terrorists? Liberal agenda? Drama Queen, indeed. My reason for this thread is to point out how well the government has covered the Biotech's and big pHARMa asses, to push their agenda. It's all a diversion, to keep people thinking they have their best interest at heart.



"The federal government lacks constitutional authority to mandate labeling of products containing genetically-modified food. Furthermore, those who do not wish to consume genetically-modified products should be leery of federally-mandated labeling because history shows that federal regulatory agencies are susceptible to 'capture,' where the regulators end up serving the interest of the business they are supposed to control. In the case of labeling, federal agencies could redefine the meaning of 'modified' to allow genetically-engineered food on the market without fully-informing consumers of the presence of genetically- engineered ingredients. Instead of federal regulation, consumers should demand that manufactures provide full information and refuse to buy those products that are not fully labeled. Once producers see there is a demand for non-genetically-engineered products they will act to fulfill that demand. Of course, makers of genetically-engineered food should be held legally responsible if they fraudulently market their products or harm anyone."
Feb. 26, 2008 Ron Paul

I have always agreed with Dr. Paul on this. Guess that makes him a liberal too.

He isn't here screeching that the new food labels didn't include GMO labels. You are.

 

[donnay]

He isn't here screeching that the new food labels didn't include GMO labels. You are.

I don't screech, that's your job.

 

[angelatc]

I don't screech, that's your job.

[skreech] Show IPA verb (used without object) 1. to utter or make a harsh, shrill cry or sound:

Putting the fact that the new labels don't address GMO in your title is indeed screeching.

 

[donnay]

Putting the fact that the new labels don't address GMO in your title is indeed screeching.

Then if what I posted is defined (by you) as screeching. Then you are spun-up-and-out-of-control.

Weren't you suppose to ignore me? You seem to be stalking again.

 

[angelatc]

They if what I posted is defined (by you) as screeching. Then you are spun-up-and-out-of-control.

Weren't you suppose to ignore me? You seem to be stalking again.

Just because you can't control me doesn't mean I'm out of control.

No, I wasn't supposed to ignore you. I'm not stalking you. When you post bullshit headlines, you can bet I'll pop in and point it out to everybody again and again and again.

 

[donnay]

Just because you can't control me doesn't mean I'm out of control.

No, I wasn't supposed to ignore you. I'm not stalking you. When you post bullshit headlines, you can bet I'll pop in and point it out to everybody again and again and again.

I have NO desire to control you, my dear. It's just an observation, that's all.

 

[angelatc]

I have NO desire to control you, my dear. It's just an observation, that's all.

I am not endeared to you in any way, shape or form. Why did you call me "my dear?"

And where did you observe that I was supposed to ignore you?

 

[mad cow]

"The federal government lacks constitutional authority to mandate labeling of products containing genetically-modified food." ~ Ron Paul

Were you celebrating the fact that the Federal government lacks the authority to mandate the labeling of GMO's like Ron Paul,angelatc and I do in the title of this thread?

If so,good on you.

 

[donnay]

I am not endeared to you in any way, shape or form. Why did you call me "my dear?"

And where did you observe that I was supposed to ignore you?

Out of sheer sarcasm. You said earlier today you ignore me most of the time...I only wished that were true, my dear. <---dripping with sarcasm.

 

[donnay]

Were you celebrating the fact that the Federal government lacks the authority to mandate the labeling of GMO's like Ron Paul,angelatc and I do in the title of this thread?

If so,good on you.

I was making the point on how hypocritical the government is by making sure they force companies to label calories and sugar, but continue to cover for the biotechs and Big pHARMa by not informing the people of GMO's in products.

And before you all get your panties in a bunch, I am not advocating government to force any labeling.

 

[mad cow]

Excellent.Then together we must fight to make all government mandated labeling of all foodstuffs illegal.

 

[IBleedNavyAndOrange]

"Our guiding principle here is very simple, that you as a parent and a consumer should be able to walk into your local grocery store, pick up an item off the shelf and be able to tell whether it's good for your family,"

But we don't want to give you too much information. If we did that, the corporations that control us would get upset.

 

[angelatc]

"Our guiding principle here is very simple, that you as a parent and a consumer should be able to walk into your local grocery store, pick up an item off the shelf and be able to tell whether it's good for your family,"

But we don't want to give you too much information. If we did that, the corporations that control us would get upset.

There's no evidence that GMO foods are bad for the family, so their statement is accurate.

 

[mad cow]

"Our guiding principle here is very simple, that you as a parent and a consumer should be able to walk into your local grocery store, pick up an item off the shelf and be able to tell whether it's good for your family,"

But we don't want to give you too much information. If we did that, the corporations that control us would get upset.

Are you in favor of the government mandating that a food producer must label anything at all about his product and if so,what do you think he must include on that label under penalty of law?