Two things about food nutrition labels

[tim-from-pa]

1) Unlike the olden days where they listed vitamins and minerals, they primarily give the percentage of "bad" stuff to stay away from instead of what is healthy to eat. This gives the impression like we've all been good boys and girls so you can have a little as a treat to eat now, but not too much.
2) The exception are fad nutrients like fiber. But other extremely important nutrients are unlisted so the labels are basically worthless in planning a healthy meal.

This brings me to two things to say:

1) The bad is not always bad. It's more of an agenda based on the philosophy "what not to eat" instead of what to eat.
2) And if we keep listening to such advice we'll be sicker than ever.

Can I have an "Amen!"?

 

[Garion]

Yeah I think that all people need to not get sick are the proper vitamin and nutrition in the correct dose.

 

[tim-from-pa]

That's right -- the balance. And the nutrition labels lack that information which was my premise. It's almost as if they are merely trying to tell us how poisonous the food is rather than how it fits in the scheme of a balanced diet.

 

[Razeontherock]

All medical research used to be based on food. Roughly the year of my birth the US government felt it necessary to confiscate all that info, which was stored in a Dr's home not too far from here in Milwaukee.
Not content with that, they decided to take his whole library, too. Two dumptrucks full.

They burned it all. Your tax dollars at work. Only after that did we get breakfasts being almost pure sugar or at least carbs, the 4 food groups, and synthetic vitamins.

Food labelling now hides something worse than HFCS, and labels it as "natural flavoring." It feeds an intestinal infection. Of course there is a very expensive Rx to take care of it.

 

[Edward]

1) Unlike the olden days where they listed vitamins and minerals, they primarily give the percentage of "bad" stuff to stay away from instead of what is healthy to eat. This gives the impression like we've all been good boys and girls so you can have a little as a treat to eat now, but not too much.
2) The exception are fad nutrients like fiber. But other extremely important nutrients are unlisted so the labels are basically worthless in planning a healthy meal.

This brings me to two things to say:

1) The bad is not always bad. It's more of an agenda based on the philosophy "what not to eat" instead of what to eat.
2) And if we keep listening to such advice we'll be sicker than ever.

Can I have an "Amen!"?

Amen, Brother! We can't trust any labels nowadays. Labeling is largely unregulated and they've developed some cliche buzzwords to push their products and steer us towards their wallets.

I watched a few videos recently where they tested some of the claims made on today's labeling...and it's literally false advertising. For example: Coconut water a (superfood!) which hydrates better than water is what the label says...well they tested it against plain water and guess what? 6 or 7 dollars for a pint of coconut water doesn't hydrate you any better than plain water. Proven.

and some other "superfood" products too, they're all lies when tested. The best superfood there is is plain fresh food. So it behooves us as consumers to do our own research in a different place than their marketing campaigns.

I recommend a book I own called, Prescription For Nutritional Healing, By Dr. Balch. In it are sections on all vitamins known to man, minerals, herbs, and what they're good for, how to use them and the breakdown of how much of what you can expect from which foods. That is the small portion of the book! The big section is symptoms of illness that people get. Like suppose I have the flu, look it up, it tells you what to eat, what not to eat, and how to heal your sickness naturally by eating right and staying away from...whatever until you get well again. Awesome awesome book!