<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Kellogg&#8217;s drops health claims from cereal boxes (sort of)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 22:07:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: More misleading label claims &#171; Exhale Wellness</title>
		<link>http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/comment-page-1/#comment-39841</link>
		<dc:creator>More misleading label claims &#171; Exhale Wellness</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2010 23:28:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=3607#comment-39841</guid>
		<description>[...] http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/             Comments RSS feed [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] <a href="http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/" rel="nofollow">http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/</a>             Comments RSS feed [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/comment-page-1/#comment-39396</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2010 11:32:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=3607#comment-39396</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s face it, the vast majority of consumers will read the label and automatically think they are buying something healthy! Why doesn&#039;t the FDA survey 100 people and ask them what their first impression of the product is just by looking at it? I bet 99 of them would think it is a health product.

This is another case of a &#039;household brand&#039; deceiving consumers in order to promote their products.

The Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code over here has fairly stringent regulations when it comes to food labels and what producers put on the labels, i.e. Reduced fat, lower fat, less fat, lite, light, no added sugar and natural.

However, there are still &#039;loopholes&#039; where food manufacturers are able to deceive consumers. 

For example, when it comes to low-fat alternatives food manufacturers can simply replace the fat with sugar in order to maintain the taste and palatability of the food. Therefore, someone who is making an effort to eat less fat and less overall calories (kilojoules) and who chooses low-fat alternatives, could be actually be consuming more sugar and possibly more calories (kilojoules)! 

Hopefully, over time, governments and food regulators will make it more difficult for the food producers to deceive consumers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s face it, the vast majority of consumers will read the label and automatically think they are buying something healthy! Why doesn&#8217;t the FDA survey 100 people and ask them what their first impression of the product is just by looking at it? I bet 99 of them would think it is a health product.</p>
<p>This is another case of a &#8216;household brand&#8217; deceiving consumers in order to promote their products.</p>
<p>The Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code over here has fairly stringent regulations when it comes to food labels and what producers put on the labels, i.e. Reduced fat, lower fat, less fat, lite, light, no added sugar and natural.</p>
<p>However, there are still &#8216;loopholes&#8217; where food manufacturers are able to deceive consumers. </p>
<p>For example, when it comes to low-fat alternatives food manufacturers can simply replace the fat with sugar in order to maintain the taste and palatability of the food. Therefore, someone who is making an effort to eat less fat and less overall calories (kilojoules) and who chooses low-fat alternatives, could be actually be consuming more sugar and possibly more calories (kilojoules)! </p>
<p>Hopefully, over time, governments and food regulators will make it more difficult for the food producers to deceive consumers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Top 10 Links of the Week: 7/16/10 – 7/22/10 &#124; Health News</title>
		<link>http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/comment-page-1/#comment-39283</link>
		<dc:creator>Top 10 Links of the Week: 7/16/10 – 7/22/10 &#124; Health News</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 14:13:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=3607#comment-39283</guid>
		<description>[...] Food Politics: Kellogg’s drops health claims from cereal boxes (sort of) When is a trumped-up ingredient (40% of your daily fiber!) also an implied health claim? Marion Nestle explores. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Food Politics: Kellogg’s drops health claims from cereal boxes (sort of) When is a trumped-up ingredient (40% of your daily fiber!) also an implied health claim? Marion Nestle explores. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Max</title>
		<link>http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/comment-page-1/#comment-39275</link>
		<dc:creator>Max</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 04:48:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=3607#comment-39275</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s sad the many of buying public would think that health/nutrient content claims on these products is contributing to their well being.  The extra anti-oxdants added would be needed by the body just to handle the digestion of the highly processed, additive and sugar laden foods.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s sad the many of buying public would think that health/nutrient content claims on these products is contributing to their well being.  The extra anti-oxdants added would be needed by the body just to handle the digestion of the highly processed, additive and sugar laden foods.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Top 10 Links of the Week: 7/16/10 – 7/22/10 &#124; Nutrition Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/comment-page-1/#comment-39267</link>
		<dc:creator>Top 10 Links of the Week: 7/16/10 – 7/22/10 &#124; Nutrition Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 23:44:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=3607#comment-39267</guid>
		<description>[...] Food Politics: Kellogg’s drops health claims from cereal boxes (sort of) When is a trumped-up ingredient (40% of your daily fiber!) also an implied health claim? Marion Nestle explores. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Food Politics: Kellogg’s drops health claims from cereal boxes (sort of) When is a trumped-up ingredient (40% of your daily fiber!) also an implied health claim? Marion Nestle explores. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bobby</title>
		<link>http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/comment-page-1/#comment-39251</link>
		<dc:creator>Bobby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:42:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=3607#comment-39251</guid>
		<description>They could at least have spelled fibre correctly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They could at least have spelled fibre correctly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cara</title>
		<link>http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/comment-page-1/#comment-39232</link>
		<dc:creator>Cara</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 19:17:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=3607#comment-39232</guid>
		<description>The FTC order applies to all Kellogg products, brands, trademarks, etc. For those interested, according to its SEC filing Kellogg brands and trademarks include some products you may not have been aware of: 
Kashi and GoLean for certain cereals,
nutrition bars, and mixes; TLC for granola and cereal
bars, crackers and cookies;Vector for
meal replacement products; Bear Naked for granola
cereal, bars and trail mix and Morningstar Farms,
Loma Linda, Natural Touch, Gardenburger and
Worthington for certain meat and egg alternatives.
Carr’s cracker and cookie line in the United States.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The FTC order applies to all Kellogg products, brands, trademarks, etc. For those interested, according to its SEC filing Kellogg brands and trademarks include some products you may not have been aware of:<br />
Kashi and GoLean for certain cereals,<br />
nutrition bars, and mixes; TLC for granola and cereal<br />
bars, crackers and cookies;Vector for<br />
meal replacement products; Bear Naked for granola<br />
cereal, bars and trail mix and Morningstar Farms,<br />
Loma Linda, Natural Touch, Gardenburger and<br />
Worthington for certain meat and egg alternatives.<br />
Carr’s cracker and cookie line in the United States.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cara</title>
		<link>http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/comment-page-1/#comment-39226</link>
		<dc:creator>Cara</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 17:02:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=3607#comment-39226</guid>
		<description>The expanded order against Kellogg by the FTC bars them from making &quot;any representation, in any manner, expressly or by
implication, including through the use of a trade name or endorsement, about:...any other health benefit of such product&quot; unless backed by scientific evidence. The expanded order&#039;s use of the words &quot;any other health benefit&quot; indicates that it applies to statements beyond those defined as &quot;health&quot; or &quot;nutrient claims&quot; by the FDA.  And they do make statements re health benefits of anti-oxidants on their fiber plus website (which should be covered under the FTC order as internet advertising): &quot;Antioxidants are vitamins, minerals and other compounds in food that protect body cells from unstable molecules called free radicals. Different types of antioxidants help protect against heart disease, cancer and other chronic diseases. Kellogg&#039;s FiberPlus™ bars contain antioxidants vitamin E and zinc, and Kellogg&#039;s FiberPlus™ cereals offer antioxidant vitamins C and E&quot; (http://kelloggsfiberplus.com/Nutrition.aspx). If they are once again in violation of the FTC order seems like it&#039;s time for big financial penalties.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The expanded order against Kellogg by the FTC bars them from making &#8220;any representation, in any manner, expressly or by<br />
implication, including through the use of a trade name or endorsement, about:&#8230;any other health benefit of such product&#8221; unless backed by scientific evidence. The expanded order&#8217;s use of the words &#8220;any other health benefit&#8221; indicates that it applies to statements beyond those defined as &#8220;health&#8221; or &#8220;nutrient claims&#8221; by the FDA.  And they do make statements re health benefits of anti-oxidants on their fiber plus website (which should be covered under the FTC order as internet advertising): &#8220;Antioxidants are vitamins, minerals and other compounds in food that protect body cells from unstable molecules called free radicals. Different types of antioxidants help protect against heart disease, cancer and other chronic diseases. Kellogg&#8217;s FiberPlus™ bars contain antioxidants vitamin E and zinc, and Kellogg&#8217;s FiberPlus™ cereals offer antioxidant vitamins C and E&#8221; (<a href="http://kelloggsfiberplus.com/Nutrition.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://kelloggsfiberplus.com/Nutrition.aspx</a>). If they are once again in violation of the FTC order seems like it&#8217;s time for big financial penalties.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tweets that mention Food Politics » Kellogg’s drops health claims from cereal boxes (sort of) -- Topsy.com</title>
		<link>http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/comment-page-1/#comment-39222</link>
		<dc:creator>Tweets that mention Food Politics » Kellogg’s drops health claims from cereal boxes (sort of) -- Topsy.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 12:33:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=3607#comment-39222</guid>
		<description>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by nyusteinhardt and Cold Mud, fadsandfancies.com. fadsandfancies.com said: Blogfeed: Kellogg’s drops health claims from cereal boxes (sort of): Kellogg announced yesterday that won’t put he... http://bit.ly/cowELn [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by nyusteinhardt and Cold Mud, fadsandfancies.com. fadsandfancies.com said: Blogfeed: Kellogg’s drops health claims from cereal boxes (sort of): Kellogg announced yesterday that won’t put he&#8230; <a href="http://bit.ly/cowELn" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/cowELn</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hemi Weingarten [Fooducate]</title>
		<link>http://www.foodpolitics.com/2010/07/kelloggs-drops-health-claims-from-cereal-boxes-sort-of/comment-page-1/#comment-39221</link>
		<dc:creator>Hemi Weingarten [Fooducate]</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:57:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=3607#comment-39221</guid>
		<description>The entire package is one big health claim:

Fiber. check
Antioxidant. check
Berry. 2 kinds. double check.
Yogurt. check

Who needs anything else?
Shame on Kellogg&#039;s for creating this 82 ingredient cereal monstrosity.

http://www.fooducate.com/blog/2010/07/19/omg-why-are-there-over-70-ingredients-in-kelloggs-fiber-plus-antioxidants-cereal/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The entire package is one big health claim:</p>
<p>Fiber. check<br />
Antioxidant. check<br />
Berry. 2 kinds. double check.<br />
Yogurt. check</p>
<p>Who needs anything else?<br />
Shame on Kellogg&#8217;s for creating this 82 ingredient cereal monstrosity.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.fooducate.com/blog/2010/07/19/omg-why-are-there-over-70-ingredients-in-kelloggs-fiber-plus-antioxidants-cereal/" rel="nofollow">http://www.fooducate.com/blog/2010/07/19/omg-why-are-there-over-70-ingredients-in-kelloggs-fiber-plus-antioxidants-cereal/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

