Establishing Whether the Food They Buy is Healthy is Not Made Easy for Shoppers
Copyright (c) 2010 Alison Withers
Food labelling is already confusing enough for consumers and now a group of experts on nutrition has recently called into question the basis on which many of us, particularly those concerned about their weight, choose what to buy and eat.
Calorie counting has been the main measure for assessing a food's impact on weight loss for more than 200 years.
A calorie is the energy people get from food and eating more calories than our bodies can process increases our weight.
However, some nutritionists have suggested recently that the calorie counts in the food we buy could be up to 25% inaccurate, because the food's texture, fibre content and how it is cooked all affect the amount of energy we get from it.
We also need to consider how our bodies process the food we eat, for example the body has to work harder to digest protein and fibre.
One solution that has been suggested by a company that specialises in helping people to lose weight is a system based on a daily allowance, taking into account a person's gender, age, weight and height.
But dietician Gaynor Bussell, of the British Diatetic Association, suggests that the most important thing is to eat healthily and that calculating this is not a precise science.
For some time nwo there has been disagreement about food labelling and the EU eventually earlier this year rejected the "traffic light" system that many consumers and food suppliers in the UK favour as being the easiest to understand.
Matters are now even more complicated since the UK's new coalition government has shifted some of the responsibilities formerly carried out by the Food Standards Agency to Defra (Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs). The FSA continues to be responsible for nutrition and food safety and Defra takes over responsibility for issues on labelling policy other than these two.
So how are shoppers to make decisions especially when the weekly food shop is likely to be done under some time pressure?
There is some information available on the FSA website - of particular interest is the regulation of labelling of GM (Genetically Modified) ingredients, which advises that products such as meat, milk and eggs from animals fed on GM animal feed don't need labelling, nor do products produced with GM technology.
It also warns consumers to be careful of terms like "farmhouse" and "traditional". It advises that Farmhouse, for example, should only be used where the product has been made in a house on a farm, or more specifically in the main dwelling of the farmer.
But if the main issue for shoppers is to choose healthy foods then the work of the Biopesticides Developers may in the future provide some grounds for confidence.
These organisations are developing low-chem agricultural products, including biopesticides, biofungicides and yield enhancers that leave no residue in tfood or in the land and help farmers to producs healthy food in a sustainable way.
All of which would be better for the environment, the land and for human health.
About the Author
Writer Ali Withers asks whether more widespread use of low-chem agricultural products could give consumers more confidence when the confusion over food labelling and calorie counts make it difficult for consumers to know whether the food they are buying is healthy. http://www.agraquest.com
Tell others about
this page:
Comments? Questions? Email Here