February 8, 2010 8:23 PM
- Text
FDA's Fight Against Portion Size Trickery: It's About Time
(MoneyWatch) The FDA's newfound enthusiasm for realistic portion sizes on packaged food is a long overdue acknowledgment of what Americans have known for years -- nobody eats only six tortilla chips.
The FDA said it wants to readjust the outdated serving sizes food companies have been using on their packaging since the early 1990s, when current nutrition labels were introduced. For nearly two decades, lax oversight has allowed soda companies, for instance, to claim with a straight face that there are 2.5 servings in a 20-ounce bottle. I'm guessing that the last time anyone drank eight ounces of soda was in the 50's when Coke came in those cute little glass bottles, in the dark and thirsty days before there was a 64-ounce Big Gulp.
The problem with puny portion sizes is that it's a form of calorie deception. Beverage companies can proudly declare that there are only 100 calories in their product when that 20 ounce bottle really contains 250. Similarly, breakfast cereal at a serving size of 3/4 of a cup looks a lot less fattening than the one and a half cups anyone over the age of 6 is likely to consume, making that milkless bowl of "whole grain guaranteed" Reese's Puffs 240 calories, not 120.
Of course, shoppers can carry around their measuring cups and do number crunching to come up with actual calorie totals, but clearly they shouldn't they have to. As researchers like Brian Wansink, a professor of marketing at Cornell University, have pointed out, our perception of the size of the food we are eating plays a huge part in how much we choose to eat. Put the same amount of food in both a big bowl and a small bowl and the people with the big bowl will eat more. The same is true of calories. Once people see that 150 calories on the label, it's a license to eat. Even if you sincerely intend to stop at six chips.
The FDA's move is part of a broader effort to clamp down on dubious food labeling and the preponderance of claims that suggest your breakfast cereal will cure heart disease or orange juice will help you get into an Ivy League college. Reforming labels is not going to solve America's obesity problem, but it's a step in the right direction.
Photo by Russell Bernice, Wikimedia Commons
The FDA said it wants to readjust the outdated serving sizes food companies have been using on their packaging since the early 1990s, when current nutrition labels were introduced. For nearly two decades, lax oversight has allowed soda companies, for instance, to claim with a straight face that there are 2.5 servings in a 20-ounce bottle. I'm guessing that the last time anyone drank eight ounces of soda was in the 50's when Coke came in those cute little glass bottles, in the dark and thirsty days before there was a 64-ounce Big Gulp.The problem with puny portion sizes is that it's a form of calorie deception. Beverage companies can proudly declare that there are only 100 calories in their product when that 20 ounce bottle really contains 250. Similarly, breakfast cereal at a serving size of 3/4 of a cup looks a lot less fattening than the one and a half cups anyone over the age of 6 is likely to consume, making that milkless bowl of "whole grain guaranteed" Reese's Puffs 240 calories, not 120.
Of course, shoppers can carry around their measuring cups and do number crunching to come up with actual calorie totals, but clearly they shouldn't they have to. As researchers like Brian Wansink, a professor of marketing at Cornell University, have pointed out, our perception of the size of the food we are eating plays a huge part in how much we choose to eat. Put the same amount of food in both a big bowl and a small bowl and the people with the big bowl will eat more. The same is true of calories. Once people see that 150 calories on the label, it's a license to eat. Even if you sincerely intend to stop at six chips.
The FDA's move is part of a broader effort to clamp down on dubious food labeling and the preponderance of claims that suggest your breakfast cereal will cure heart disease or orange juice will help you get into an Ivy League college. Reforming labels is not going to solve America's obesity problem, but it's a step in the right direction.
Photo by Russell Bernice, Wikimedia Commons
Latest Now in MoneyWatch
- Ohio unemployment hits 3-year-low
- Jill on Money: Retirement investing, allocation, long term care
- Could "web-lining" be dangerous?
- Insurers respond cautiously to contraceptive plan
- Judge: Legally, breastfeeding not related to pregnancy
- Budget deficit drops to $27 billion in January
- Why the Powerball Jackpot is part of my investment strategy
- Is the new VW Beetle diesel worth the money?
- Consumer sentiment highlights risks to recovery
- Valentine blues? 10 best cities to be single
- December trade deficit widens to $48.8 billion
- Alcatel-Lucent returns to profit in 2011
- 6 things never to say in a performance review
- $26B mortgage deal: Who gets the money?
- Friendly's CEO steps down
- Quarterly loss hits $3.3B at Postal Service
- Greeks rail against cuts as EU demands more
Latest CBS News Headlines
on Facebook
on CBS News
- Whitney Houston's voice will never be forgotten
- Turkmenistan votes in presidential election
- Was filmmaker's diary a screenplay for murder?
- Umberger's 2 goals give Jackets 3-1 win vs. Wild
on Facebook
- Adele sings a cappella for Anderson Cooper
- Occupy protestors kicked out of CPAC
- CPAC: Will Sarah Palin spring a surprise?
- Beyonce and Jay-Z post first photos of Blue Ivy Carter
on CBS News






