As we re-open society, science is beginning to return to some of its older memes, like the value of nutritional labeling and taxes. Two new studies by authors, using the same model and data, suggest that fully implementing labeling laws will improve our health and save us money. The same holds for taxing sugary beverages. But if COVID-19 has taught us nothing else, it is that we need to understand and believe the model's assumptions.
Nutrition facts labeling is changing. Coming soon to a product near you, there will be a new information line telling you how much of the total sugars content is added. But will the new labels make any sense? Angela Dowden weighs in.
Americans seem to be consuming less sugar, because we are consuming fewer calories. Can labeling that notes "added sugars" bend the curve even more?
Added sugars are the focus of the latest nutrition culture wars, with articles helping us find "hidden" sugars. You know, the ones listed on the ingredients labels. The problem isn't really added sugar — it's over-consumption.
New research shows that when it comes to packaged foods and beverages sold in Canada, two of every three items contain added sugar of some kind. That jarring news comes from a report by Public Health Ontario and the University of Waterloo, a joint venture that included studying labels of more than 40,000 supermarket products.
Former New York Times columnist Mark Bittman enthusiastically endorses a tax on soda and other sweetened beverages that's now being considered in Philadelphia. While this may seem appealing to people who believe that sugar is a major contributor to America's health problems, when you really examine the logic of such a tax, there isn't much there.
That is, the body metabolizes sugar from colas the same way it does sugar from orange juice (yes, even organic orange juice). So why add a line to the Nutrition Facts label that specifically cites the amount of added sugars?
We talk about stupid stuff all the time. There is never a shortage. But, even with the inexhaustible supply of this commodity, once in a while we run into something that is off the chart on the right side of the Stupidity Bell Curve. This is no small feat.
In today s don t believe what you read entry, we have a real doozy. It s all over the news. Girls who drink more sugar sweetened soda have their first period a few months earlier than those who don t.
The California Senate just passed a bill requiring soft drinks to be labeled with a warning linking the drinks to obesity, diabetes and tooth decay. The exact wording is Drinking beverages with added sugar
When prescription drug can potentially have dangerous side effects or interactions with other drugs, the FDA will prescribe a so-called black box warning on the label. The point is to alert both prescribers and consumers to the possibility of negative effects on health. Now, a California lawmaker wants to extend such warnings to, would you believe it, sugary drinks.
As momma used to say, Too much of anything is no good for you. This has been confirmed again, in a new study just published in JAMA Internal Medicine.