Notices
Results 1 to 14 of 14
Like Tree7Likes
  • 1 Post By adelady
  • 1 Post By Strange
  • 1 Post By MacGyver1968
  • 2 Post By scheherazade
  • 1 Post By Alec Bing
  • 1 Post By scheherazade

Thread: Food labeling not understood

  1. #1 Food labeling not understood 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Please look at the pic. Familiar enough sight, but I need help understanding something about the way the labeling works. The two columns in this case are values "as packaged", and "as prepared", which here includes addition of meat and milk. Understandably, the additions up the numbers, but in all cases of labeling, the two entries for "sugars" and "protein" are offset to one side.

    Can anyone clarify for me the meaning here, of these two? 4g of protein, for example, is that per helping as packaged, or per helping, as prepared, with the meat & milk? And, why the hell do they do it this way? Thanks! jocular







    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    "as prepared", which here includes addition of meat and milk.
    The difference is simply how the serving will turn out if you add the quantities and kinds of meat and milk exactly as per the instructions. You'd get different results for the fat numbers if you used no fat milk, lower, or light cream, higher, instead of the milk. If you chose a less fatty meat, say kangaroo instead of beef, you'd get the same protein but less fat - and if you use more or less meat than the recipe stipulates the protein and fat quantities for each serving would also differ.

    The reason for the two numbers is simply to show what the dish will contain in terms of nutrients when served in accordance with the recipe and how much of each nutrient is contributed by the contents of the package.


    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    "as prepared", which here includes addition of meat and milk.
    The difference is simply how the serving will turn out if you add the quantities and kinds of meat and milk exactly as per the instructions. You'd get different results for the fat numbers if you used no fat milk, lower, or light cream, higher, instead of the milk. If you chose a less fatty meat, say kangaroo instead of beef, you'd get the same protein but less fat - and if you use more or less meat than the recipe stipulates the protein and fat quantities for each serving would also differ.

    The reason for the two numbers is simply to show what the dish will contain in terms of nutrients when served in accordance with the recipe and how much of each nutrient is contributed by the contents of the package.
    Unfortunately, while what you say is so, it does not answer my question: Assuming the ingredients added are exactly as recommended, does ONE SERVING of AS PACKAGED food provide 4g of protein, or does ONE SERVING of AS PREPARED food (with the added ingredients) provide 4g of protein? joc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    They've hidden it in the tiny text.

    Look at the asterisked section. According to that you should finish up with 23 g protein per serve.
    jocular likes this.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    They've hidden it in the tiny text.

    Look at the asterisked section. According to that you should finish up with 23 g protein per serve.
    Thank you! I see now they single-asterisked only the "Fat" heading. Thus, the "4g protein" listing is for one serving of the as-packaged product, which would be self-evident if it were vertically a part of the "as-pkgd" column. joc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    I assume it is done that way simply because there is a legal requirement to provide "% daily value" for some ingredients but not all. Presumably the layout of that information has to follow a standard so they cannot include the protein "as prepared" info there but add it as a footnote for the benefit of anyone interested.

    Does anyone pay any attention to any of this information, I wonder...
    jocular likes this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Cooking Something Good MacGyver1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,051
    The only information on the label I'm interested in is "Proof".
    jocular likes this.
    Fixin' shit that ain't broke.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    I assume it is done that way simply because there is a legal requirement to provide "% daily value" for some ingredients but not all. Presumably the layout of that information has to follow a standard so they cannot include the protein "as prepared" info there but add it as a footnote for the benefit of anyone interested.

    Does anyone pay any attention to any of this information, I wonder...
    Actually, a lot more people than you might expect, at least where I reside. During the last hour of my shift, the store is open and so I have opportunity to observe customers and be of assistance to them. I see an increasing number of people reading the nutritional information on packages before making a choice. I also find a lot of packages on the shelf, side by side, with nutritional information facing instead of the display side. Once again, this tells me that customers have been looking at this information.

    Several people in my store are very nutrition conscious and the contents of various nutrients and sodium or calories in various products comes up regularly.

    "Have you tried the new dark chocolate coated almonds? 26 calories per almond."
    "No, I haven't, because I'd probably eat the whole bag! Who eats just one chocolate coated almond?"
    "But I'll only give you one..."
    "Then I would immediately need to go and buy a bag for myself!"
    "Understood. My bad..."
    Strange and jocular like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    who sees through things
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    UK now, US before
    Posts
    269
    I always read food labels. I want to know what I'm eating. I don't look at the Daily Requirements thing because 1)some of these are disputed and 2) they differ according to the individual.
    jocular likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Alec Bing View Post
    I always read food labels. I want to know what I'm eating. I don't look at the Daily Requirements thing because 1)some of these are disputed and 2) they differ according to the individual.
    That is pretty much my position too.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    I assume it is done that way simply because there is a legal requirement to provide "% daily value" for some ingredients but not all. Presumably the layout of that information has to follow a standard so they cannot include the protein "as prepared" info there but add it as a footnote for the benefit of anyone interested.

    Does anyone pay any attention to any of this information, I wonder...
    I do. Mainly for the protein consideration, which was why I asked how it was being presented, as that was not quite clear. I suspect many adults do not regularly consume sufficient protein, myself included, the result being the body must "make it", as I understand it, by sacrificing other sources of content within the body. Notice, I have carefully worded this with colorful bullshit, because I really don't understand it fully! I recall seeing somewhere that an average daily adult amount of protein requirement was pegged as 65 grams. Canned tunafish came in 6 oz. cans, each providing something like 28g of protein, depending on type, thus if no other protein were consumed, 2 cans of tuna daily were inadequate. Now, the manufacturers have seen fit to downsize tuna cans to 5 oz., while slightly raising the price, so ya can't live on tuna alone! jocular
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by MacGyver1968 View Post
    The only information on the label I'm interested in is "Proof".
    Yer not alone! joc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    I see an increasing number of people reading the nutritional information on packages before making a choice. I also find a lot of packages on the shelf, side by side, with nutritional information facing instead of the display side. Once again, this tells me that customers have been looking at this information.
    Schez,l I wonder if you might have noted whether a majority of these observant folks fall within a confined age group, such as older folks? I ask this, as the younger generations I see about seem primarily occupied with things not necessarily related to their well-being. joc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    I see an increasing number of people reading the nutritional information on packages before making a choice. I also find a lot of packages on the shelf, side by side, with nutritional information facing instead of the display side. Once again, this tells me that customers have been looking at this information.
    Schez,l I wonder if you might have noted whether a majority of these observant folks fall within a confined age group, such as older folks? I ask this, as the younger generations I see about seem primarily occupied with things not necessarily related to their well-being. joc
    Actually, jocular, I observe that those reading labels fall across a wide spectrum.

    Some of them are diabetics and they are watching the sugar content.
    Others have blood pressure and heart concerns and they are watching the sodium, saturated fats & cholesterol.
    Another group is doing the gluten-free thing, not because they have Celiac disease but because they don't think of most processed grain as suitable food.
    An increasing number of these label readers are men.
    A lot of them are intelligent looking young adults of both genders.
    Most athletes are quite aware of what they eat.

    Here in the Yukon we have a very diverse bunch of people, a lot of FAE and FAS as well as a huge population of artists of all genres. We produce everything from moose-hair tufting to world class music and video. We especially have an increasingly aware and demanding population of food label readers.

    Loblaws actually buys local where it can and our Yukon grown produce flies out the door! For that, I applaud them, despite my other corporate grumbles on occasion.
    jocular likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Food Labeling "Shelf Life"
    By jocular in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: June 20th, 2013, 08:26 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: April 19th, 2012, 03:08 AM
  3. BrdU Labeling
    By MimiKundera in forum Biology
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: September 29th, 2011, 11:02 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: March 25th, 2011, 01:43 AM
  5. food webs and food chain
    By crackstein in forum Biology
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 9th, 2010, 02:16 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •