No more hidden sugar? FDA proposes new label rule

I don't drink soda, but was still surprised to learn that one bottle contains 130% of the recommended daily intake:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/07/24/425908798/no-more-hidden-sugar-fda-proposes-new-label-rule

I love this!! I've started paying more attention to the sugar that is in everything, and trying to reduce where I can. It's amazing how prevalent it is. I was buying sliced bread at Target and literally could not find one that didn't have at least 1g per slice, and some had as many as 4!! That's 8g just on your sandwich, so forget it if you're also having dessert that day. There's one we like at Trader Joe's that has zero, fortunately.

I find it really hard to evaluate things like yogurt and granola bars because I know there is some natural sugar in there as well. It will be so helpful to have it broken out!

Why are people afraid of sugar?

I'd prefer if they labeled the artificial sweeteners.

Products advertise "no sugar", so I expect a nice savory taste. Instead - bleah - chemically oversweetened.

This new sugar labeling seems like it will only increase the use of artificial sweeteners if they don't have this loophole addressed simultaneously.

ParticleMan said:
Why are people afraid of sugar?

I'm not afraid of sugar, but I'm not a fan of sugar where it isn't needed. For example, I recently found chicken broth with sugar added. I've made broth from scratch many a time and have never needed to add sugar to it. The brand I normally use doesn't add sugar. Why is there even a need to add sugar to chicken broth?

sprout said:
I'd prefer if they labeled the artificial sweeteners.
Products advertise "no sugar", so I expect a nice savory taste. Instead - bleah - chemically oversweetened.
This new sugar labeling seems like it will only increase the use of artificial sweeteners if they don't have this loophole addressed simultaneously.

At least you can identify that in the ingredients in some way. That helps!

ParticleMan said:
Why are people afraid of sugar?

I'm not afraid of sugar, but I do think it is the single biggest factor in American obesity. Then again, maybe that is reason to be afraid of it. When I did my best to cut out as much sugar as possible from my diet a few years ago, I started to lose weight steadily. I hope to repeat that effect this year. But it's not easy, because sugar, as pointed out above, is almost literally everywhere! You have to be extremely vigilant to get rid of it.

Is Sugar Toxic? <-- worth reading!

I don't make drastic changes to my diet, because that would never work. I'm gradually eating sugar less over time. I've lost 16 pounds in about 15 months, and that's almost the only change I've made. If you've met me, you might have said I didn't have a lot of weight to lose in the first place. I still eat a lot of food overall, since I'm fairly active physically.

There is too much sugar everywhere, and it annoys me the most in the ways spontaneous mentions. They put sugar in nearly everything.

TarheelsInNj said:

sprout said:
I'd prefer if they labeled the artificial sweeteners.
Products advertise "no sugar", so I expect a nice savory taste. Instead - bleah - chemically oversweetened.
This new sugar labeling seems like it will only increase the use of artificial sweeteners if they don't have this loophole addressed simultaneously.

At least you can identify that in the ingredients in some way. That helps!

I'm confused. Sugar is on the ingredients list as well, no? (and the high fructose corn syrup, etc).

But if they do a "No sugar" or "Low in sugar" promotion on the front of a package, it should have to be accompanied by the type of sweetener it's replaced with, or it's just being deceptive.

I totally think they should break out the added from the natural sugars in the quantities breakout. But it should also be clearer if the reason the "added sugar" looks so low is because of a chemical substitute, that should be equally clear.

Sure, it's in the ingredients but it doesn't really tell you how much. If you're simply identifying the presence of sugar or sweeteners, the list is fine. But if you're comparing the relative content it's not so helpful. Like in my sliced bread example above- 2 brands will both list sugar in the list, but one will have 4g and one will have 1g. That example is a little more straightforward as bread shouldn't have much natural sugar, but something like yogurt with fruit, I have no idea.

I really do like the idea of more label transparency. The more information they give us, the better. And I say that despite the fact that I really, really hate reading labels. The print is so damn tiny I have to squint even with reading glasses. Maybe I need a magnifying lens for grocery shopping!

sugar is the root of all evil

( for those of us who have weight issues )

I agree. I can't have sorbitol, which is in practically every sugar free thing. They're pretty good at labeling that, but things like presweetening Starbucks drinks, I won't do because I don't know what's in it.

sprout said:
I'd prefer if they labeled the artificial sweeteners.
Products advertise "no sugar", so I expect a nice savory taste. Instead - bleah - chemically oversweetened.
This new sugar labeling seems like it will only increase the use of artificial sweeteners if they don't have this loophole addressed simultaneously.