Sep 10 2007

FDA Considering Traffic Light System for Healthy Foods

The FDA is meeting this week to consider a red, yellow, green system for labeling foods according to their degree of healthfulness. Here’s what the New York Times has to say about this. This is, of course, would be much like the Hannaford supermarket “follow the stars” program, about which several of you have strong feelings (see comments under entries for Supermarkets and Labels). In the early 1990s, Center for Science in the Public Interest did a fold-out pyramid designed to be put on school cafeteria tabletops. This listed foods on green (anytime), yellow (once in awhile), and red (seldom) sides of the pyramid. As is always the case with these kinds of approaches, the line between categories is a thin one and subject to much argument and manipulation. The FDA proposed something much simpler about five years ago: to put the entire number of calories on the front of packaged foods. What a good idea! It still hasn’t happened. Don’t hold your breath for this one either.

Comments

I would love to see the FDA take a stronger role in nutrition! Why not just allow them to take over for the USDA?
It would be great to have this on the foods and it would be great to have this idea of setting foods apart even more so then the hierarchy of the older Food Guide Pyramid. The traffic lights could match up with a new type a Food Guide, like one in which foods are set up like a target with the whole food in the middle.
For example: a slice of whole grain bread would be in the center, a blended bread or 12-grain type would be farther away from the center and saltine type crackers would be a miss.
I’ve seen it before but don’t have a picture or a link to it.

I’m just not sure how they would judge the foods degree of healthfullness. If this system of selecting was cautious and based on health, I would love to see it in place. I can see how it would be a challenge and could easily be confusing for people if care was not put into this selection.

  • Marion
  • September 10, 2007
  • 10:09 pm

Your idea is exactly what the PR firm that designed the new USDA Pyramid first suggested. Its idea was to have those rainbow-colored streamers indicate hierarchy. The designer put whole wheat bread at the bottom of the grain band, pasta in the middle, and cinnamon buns on top. When the USDA issued the new pyramid, it not only dropped the hierarchy, it dropped the food!

  • Jessica
  • September 10, 2007
  • 10:53 pm

I agree with Daniel and as I wrote on one of your other posts (the one about Kellogg’s (http://whattoeatbook.com/2007/09/06/kelloggs-nutrition-at-a-glance/)), the UK is working on it (as mentioned in the New York Times article you linked to) as well and while there are absolutely huge challenges (such as the touchiness of which foods are “healthy”), I do see it as a positive on the whole, as long as it is well done. I haven’t seen any data on the efficacy of the UK program but, even as an dietetics student (who will be an RD in a little over a year), I used it almost daily while living in England this past summer. And, as a Canadian, I hope our government starts thinking about this as well. It’s not dumbing down nutrition, it’s just making it simpler. This is especially important for populations with lower education, where obesity tends to be highest.

  • Anna
  • September 11, 2007
  • 1:20 am

But it already is so simple to choose healthy food. Do people really need to be on autopilot?

Eat local foods, in season, direct from the producer if and when possible. Eat foods from your great-great grandparents era (no, that doesn’t restrict to their geography, but it will keep your options minimally processed). It’s hard to go wrong with those guidelines, no matter what the food is. Yes, the initial learning curve is a bit steep for some people, but then it is so easy because of all the decisions one *doesn’t have to make*. It’s much easier to stick to a food budget if one sources foods from alternatives to grocery stores, too, even if those foods seemingly cost more.

There’s a great narrativeone couple’s adventure eating locally at http://www.100milediet.org No one says we all have to do it their way, but it’s worth a try for at least some foods.

For those who are addicted to supermarket convenience (and admittedly, I do frequent my local natural foods store and Trader Joe’s for some items), stick to the perimeter of the store where the highest concentration of the least processed and freshest foods are located. Choose foods with short ingredient lists. Make few trips into the center aisles, perhaps for olive oil, natural peanut butter, etc. Keep blinders on to avoid even thinking about the processed stuff.

A friend of mine sums it up well with a shopping mantra “eat food that spoils before it spoils”. In other words, stay away from things that have been processed and packaged to have artificially long shelf lives.

  • Jane
  • September 11, 2007
  • 1:33 pm

Amen, Anna!

I’ve studied nutrition and health for around 7 years now, and I’m only recently coming to a simple conclusion I should have known all along:

Eat naturally raised food based on your appetite. If you avoid all industrial/processed foods, you do not need to worry about how much of this, how much of that, etc. Just eat and enjoy it. Then stop when you’re satisfied. Get off the couch. Spend time outdoors every day. Avoid man-made chemicals. Be happy and treat others well. Good health will almost undoubtedly follow.

Leave a comment