Low Carb Labeling Illegal? : LC Research/Media Forum : Active Low-Carber Forums

#1 ^

Sat, Mar-06-04, 17:12

BettyR

Senior Member

Posts: 148

Plan: Atkins
Stats: 200/165/140 Female 5'6

BF:
Progress: 58%

Location: Texas

Low Carb Labeling Illegal?

This artical writen by Detroit Free Press Food Writer Sylvia Rector is very informative.

Did you know that claims such as "carb free," "low carb" and "reduced carb" on food packaging is illegal because the Food and Drug Administration has not set guidelines defining them?

http://www.freep.com/features/food/carb24_20040224.htm

Sponsored Links

#2 ^

Sat, Mar-06-04, 18:01

Dodger Dodger is offline

Long-term low-carber

Posts: 8,804

Plan: Paleoish/Keto
Stats: 225/167/175 Male 71.5 inches

BF:18%
Progress: 116%

Location: Longmont, Colorado

Actually, low-carb claims are legal until the FDA regulates them. There are no rules to follow so any thing can be claimed as low-carb, or reduced carb, etc.

#3 ^

Sat, Mar-06-04, 20:09

CindySue48 CindySue48 is offline

Senior Member

Posts: 2,816

Plan: Atkins/Protein Power
Stats: 256/179/160 Female 68 inches

BF:38.9/27.2/24.3
Progress: 80%

Location: Triangle NC

Quote:

Some of the country's leading epidemiologists -- chief among them, Dr. Walter Willett of the Harvard School of Public Health -- have said they believe the emphasis on high-carb, low-fat diet has been wrong, and that 40 percent rather than 60 percent is a better amount of calories to consume daily from carbohydrates.

But if people can't have more fat...and they shouldn't eat more protein....where are they going to get the extra calories from? Or are they going to lower the RDA for calories too?

#4 ^

Sat, Mar-06-04, 22:46

cc48510

Senior Member

Posts: 2,018

Plan: Atkins
Stats: 320/220/195 Male 6'0"

BF:
Progress: 80%

Location: Pensacola, FL

Quote:

Originally Posted by CindySue48

But if people can't have more fat...and they shouldn't eat more protein....where are they going to get the extra calories from? Or are they going to lower the RDA for calories too?

According to what I've read, they're planning to increase the maximum allowable amount of Protein. It's currently 10%. They would make 20%, 25%, or something like that. I'll have to check to see exactly. I read they were also planning to allow slightly more TOTAL fat (35% vs. 30%). But, Saturated Fat recomendations will remain at the obscenely low 10% they're at now. Plus, the new proposed Guidelines would encourage Green and Yellow Vegetables over Tubers (Potatoes.) Let me see if I can dig up a link to the proposed Guidelines.

#5 ^

Sat, Mar-06-04, 23:07

cc48510

Senior Member

Posts: 2,018

Plan: Atkins
Stats: 320/220/195 Male 6'0"

BF:
Progress: 80%

Location: Pensacola, FL

http://www.usda.gov/cnpp/pyramid-up...s/TABLE%203.pdf

Current Guidelines for Adults

Code:


Protein: <10% or  50g
Carbs:   >60% or 300g
Fat:     <30% or  67g
Sugar:   NO SPECIFIC LIMIT (100% = 500g or 2.6 cups)

Proposed Guidelines for Adults

Code:


Protein: 10-35% or  50g - 175g
Carbs:   45-65% or 225g - 325g
Fat:     20-35% or  44g -  78g
Sugar:   <25%   or 125g (4 Twinkies or 8 Mars Bars)

Proposed Guidelines for Ages 1-3

Code:


Protein:  5-20%
Carbs:   45-65%
Fat:     30-40%
Sugar:   <25%

Proposed Guidelines for Ages 4-18

Code:


Protein: 10-30%
Carbs:   45-65%
Fat:     25-35%
Sugar:   <25%

Last edited by cc48510 : Sat, Mar-06-04 at 23:38.

#6 ^

Sun, Mar-07-04, 00:25

IdahoSpud

Senior Member

Posts: 1,357

Plan: Intermittent fast/Lowcarb
Stats: 251/199/180 Male 5 ft 10 inch

BF:
Progress: 73%

Location: Idaho

Isn't that nice? Recommending sugar be kept below 25% of the daily nutritional total! Also for children!

I wasn't aware that sugar had any nutritional value until now

#7 ^

Sun, Mar-07-04, 10:15

cc48510

Senior Member

Posts: 2,018

Plan: Atkins
Stats: 320/220/195 Male 6'0"

BF:
Progress: 80%

Location: Pensacola, FL

Quote:

Originally Posted by IdahoSpud

Isn't that nice? Recommending sugar be kept below 25% of the daily nutritional total! Also for children!

I wasn't aware that sugar had any nutritional value until now

Sometime back WHO (World Health Org.) wanted to make it 10%, which I still believe is too high. But, Big Sugar let lose with the lobbyists and threats. From what I've heard WHO stood their ground. But, the USDA went with the 25% Big Sugar was lobbying for.

#8 ^

Sun, Mar-07-04, 10:58

TBoneMitch TBoneMitch is offline

OOOOOOOOOH YEAH!

Posts: 692

Plan: High Fat/IF
Stats: 215/170/160 Male 5 feet 10 inches

BF:27%/12%/8%
Progress: 82%

Location: Montreal, Quebec

Yep, the Bush Administration even threatened to accuse the WHO of fraudulent science promotion!!!!
And a great point has been put up by you, namely that we could (according to these guidelines) safely eat 25% of our calories as sugar, but that we should not go above 10% Sat. Fat!!!
I don't know if I should be crying or laughing....

#9 ^

Sun, Mar-07-04, 20:56

gotbeer

Registered Member

Posts: 2,889

Plan: Atkins
Stats: 280/203/200 Male 69 inches

BF:
Progress: 96%

Location: Dallas, TX, USA

Is it becoming time to make low carb a political issue? I mean, everything else about food production has economic (and hence, political) fallout. Canada is already polarized on the issue. The US is not far behind.

I detest Bush for the deficits, his policies of outsourcing jobs overseas, his anti-gay-marriage bigotry, the Jackson-boob-backlash, and the mishandling of the anti-terror war; his low carb policies are dubious, but Kerry is a big unknown.

Any candidate who taxes sugar, promotes meat, and endorses a revamp of food recommendations based on current and ongoing research will win my vote in a heartbeat. In the meantime, I'll vote against whatever incumbent fails to adopt low-carb policies established by credible research.

However, any incumbent who hammers the ALF, PETA and PCRM will have my support forever.

Last edited by gotbeer : Sun, Mar-07-04 at 21:17.

#10 ^

Sun, Mar-07-04, 21:15

TBoneMitch TBoneMitch is offline

OOOOOOOOOH YEAH!

Posts: 692

Plan: High Fat/IF
Stats: 215/170/160 Male 5 feet 10 inches

BF:27%/12%/8%
Progress: 82%

Location: Montreal, Quebec

Amen to that, brother! Yess!