As has been well communicated through the press and blogosphere over these past several days, the Institute of Medicine Committee on the Examination of Front-of-Package Nutrition Rating Systems and Symbols recommended a new “points” system for the front of food packages, focused on the calories, saturated and trans fat, sodium and added sugars in the product.  Dr. David Katz provided his views in the Huffington Post, Marion Nestle on her Food Politics blog, and the Grocery Manufacturers Association’s responses has been showcased in several places.

The purpose of my blog today is not to provide a recap of the report or my views on the report, but to talk about what happens now.  With all the media coverage, it’s difficult to understand that the report is simply a recommendation.  The recommendation was made to the two food regulatory agencies in our country – the U.S. Department of Agriculture (which regulates foods that contain meat and poultry) and the Food & Drug Administration (which regulates all other foods).  The IOM Committee’s work is now done.  It is up to the regulatory agencies to decide if any action is taken based on the report.

If is definitely the key word here.  While there has been pressure from the White House for the regulatory agencies to do something to help consumers make more nutritious food choices that will idealistically lead to better health outcomes and lower health care costs that are crippling our country, the IOM recommendations are far from a slam dunk and they’re far from inexpensive.  The IOM report recommends significant research and modeling to actually finalize the criteria to be used in the system, as well as budget for education and promotion of the new system.  In reading the report, it appears that budget for staffing would be needed, too.  Then there’s the point that right now, food safety issues seem to be higher on the priority list than nutrition issues.

All that said, if the FDA and USDA decided the “points” system would be beneficial to consumers, there’s an entire process that must be followed to create new regulation.  First, the FDA would have to propose regulations.  This is then typically followed by 60-90 days of an open comment period, during which time, any individual, company or entity can submit comments and feedback on the proposed regulation.  Then the agencies have to review all those comments, respond in some fashion, and create final regulation.  Then there’s a gap to allow time for implementation.

So despite all the media hype right now, it could be years before this system actually shows up on food packages, if it ever does.

Visit www.nuval.com to see a tool that each and every day is helping consumers make more nutritious food choices.

It’s that time of year when candy dishes filled with mini-candy bars and candy corn start appearing on your co-workers desks.  Then on November 1^st, they’ll be piled with all the Halloween candy their kids don’t like.  Then we transition into cookie season before long. 

At this time of year, the temptations as you weave your way to your desk can be daunting.  Most people like to then talk about “will power,” and using it to hold up against the constant temptation of all these treats.   But in reality, I don’t think it has anything to do with will power.

Consider this. . .

“Every time we see the candy jar we have to decide whether we want a Hershey’s Kiss or whether we don’t.  Every time we see it, we have to say no to something that is tasty and tempting.  If we see that temptress of a candy jar every five minutes, it means needing to say no 12 times the first hour, 12 times the second hour, and so on.  Eventually some of those no’s turn into yes’s.  . .. Out of sight, out of mind.  In sight, in mind.”

This is an excerpt from Brian Wansick’s book Mindless Eating.  The book focuses on how visual cues can impact the amount of food we eat in most situations throughout the day and how changing your environment can help you establish and maintain healthier eating habits.  Leaving chicken wing bones on your plate during a Super Bowl party can help you eat less of them.  Stocking your kitchen with smaller cups, glasses and bowls can help you manage portions at mealtime.

But back to your daily strolls through the streets of Candy Land.  The answer, according to Wansick, is to find a new route to walk.  Are there pathways to and from your desk that are candy free?  Or buy your coworker a candy dish this is colored and covered (out of sight, out of mind).  The trick is to change your environment so that you don’t have to say no all those times each and every day for the next two months. 

Visit www.nuval.com to see scores on sweet treats and other foods.

As a dietitian, I have a blind side.  When there appears to be much buzz about a hot new ingredient or food trend, I sometimes quickly discount it knowing inherently there isn’t science behind it.  But then I take a step back, and realize that the crux of my profession is to educate consumers on nutrition, to investigate and understand the science, and to translate the science into practice.

Agave nectar has been one of these food “blind sides” for me.   Everywhere you turn right now, there is concern about sugar consumption (and rightly so in light of the calories it contributes to daily eating habits) and consumers are looking for alternative.  This ingredient has reached high levels of notoriety because it is believed to be a natural sugar with less health impacts.  So I’m moving beyond my blind side today, to share science-based information on agave and other sweeteners it is often used in place of.

The three main sugars talked about today are table sugar, high fructose corn syrup and agave syrup.

Table sugaris the common, powdered white stuff.  Structurally, it is called a disaccharide, a double sugar.  In the body, it is broken down to 50% glucose and 50% fructose.

High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) has been more vilified than any other food ingredient and without solid reasoning.  This sweetener is processed from corn, and is about 45-55% glucose and 45-55% fructose.  While it has been suggested that HFCS has contributed to obesity, science does not support this claim.

Agave nectar typically comes from a blue agave plant, grown in the Southern part of the US, Mexico and northern South America.  The starchy part of the plant is made into a slurry and then processed so the starch is converted to fructose and glucose.  Agave nectar can range from 55-90% fructose with the remaining being glucose.  It has been given a “health halo” as it’s perceived to be a natural sweetener.

The one redeeming quality about agave nectar is that it appears to sweeter than other forms of sweetener, suggesting that you can use less of it.  But as for the rest?  As the description of each sugar shows, there isn’t much difference structurally between the various sweeteners.  Agave nectar is even processed somewhat similarly to HFCS.  The bottom line is there isn’t much difference between all the sweeteners, and the real goal is to use less of all of them – those added to foods and those already added to food.

Visit www.nuval.com where all these sweeteners lower the score of a food.

A colleague recently updated me on a consumer study.  Ten years ago, 29% of consumers believed their weight has impacting their health.  Today, ten years later, 29% of consumers believe body weight is impacting health.  Despite escalating rates of obesity in our country, the same number of us believe weight is a health issue.

While at a conference over the summer months, I heard an expert on consumer trends report that the average person has 11 health conditions before they perceive themselves to have health issues.  Not one, not two, but 11. 

It makes me wonder if we are all in a state of denial.  Kubler-Ross has defined the five stages of grief after the loss of a loved one, but perhaps we are moving through these stages in various aspects of our life throughout our lives.  In this model, denial is defined as

“I feel fine.” “This can’t be happening, not to me.”

If we don’t recognize that our weight impacts our health, if we don’t recognize that we have health issues until they total 11, clearly we won’t act to live healthier lives.

How do we move past denial?

Visit www.nuval.com to see a system that can help us eat healthier and live better when we have moved past denial.

According to the BBC, Denmark has become the first country to implement a tax on unhealthy food.  According to the reports, all foods that have more than 2.3% saturated fat will get taxed.  The tax rate varies; higher saturated fat means a higher tax rate on the food.   Burgers, for example, will carry an increased price by $0.15 and butter by about $0.40 per package.  Parliament passed the tax as they believe it will increase life expectancy of Danes by three years over the next ten years.  The interesting piece in all of this is that Denmark has one of the lowest rates of obesity in the world – running about 10% compared to more than 30% in the United States.  Their life expectancy is just below 79 years of age.

A fat tax, a soda tax – the idea has been bantered about in the US, but amidst the controversy no action has been taken.  The question remains as to what the right ingredients and/or nutrients are that should be taxed.  For instance, not all saturated fat is created equal.  Studies suggest that stearic acid, one type of saturated fat, does not have the same negative effect on health that other types of saturated fat do.  What about sodium?  Should sugar figure into a tax, and if so should it be done by total sugar or added sugar? If obesity is the real issue in our country, shouldn’t the tax then be against calories?  But how would we define nutrient dense calories from non-nutrient dense calories?

Adding complexity to the issue is the fact that no one knows if implementing a fat tax or any tax on unhealthy food will work.  Yes, it worked with tobacco, but as I’ve mentioned before in this blog, the difference between tobacco and food is that you can completely cut tobacco out of your life.  Not so with food.  Will the Danes, who love butter, eat less now due to this tax?

Visit www.nuval.com to use a system that puts the power to make good food choices into the hands of every consumer.