calorie_conspiracy hsg http://v.mercola.com/blogs/public_blog/Can-You-Really-Trust-Calorie-Measurements-on-Food-Labels--4847.aspx 070131 ... hsg Home    |     Q & A    |     Store    |     Rules    |     Help            Sign in | Join   Can You Really Trust Calorie Measurements on Food Labels?   POSTED BY Dr. Mercola View Dr. Mercola's Profile Add Dr. Mercola to Friends Receive Updates from Dr. Mercola By Email Receive Updates from Dr. Mercola By News Feed January 29, 2007 After reviewing this short health piece from Slate.com, you'll probably think twice about relying on labels to give you the straight scoop on the processed foods you may be endangering your life eating every day. Instead of the old-school way of determining calories via physics (calculating the energy it takes from a food to heat a gram of water multiplied by 1,000), processed food manufacturers are, instead, relying on freeze-drying samples in liquid nitrogen. Once dried, what's left is blended into a fine powder that food scientists can neatly analyze. What's more, the FDA never established a comprehensive set of standards with which to determine calorie content accurately. In fact, the agency allows food manufacturers to "guesstimate" calories based on existing published nutritional data for thousands of foods. Some suggestions to ensure you always know exactly what you're eating: Make your foods at home. Always choose organic, whole foods as often as possible. Stay away from processed or packaged foods altogether. Slate.com     ( 4 Comments )    +3 Points              BY Russ Bianchi View Russ Bianchi's Profile Add Russ Bianchi to Friends Receive Updates from Russ Bianchi By Email Receive Updates from Russ Bianchi By News Feed    January 29, 2007 The label sand-bagging was even worse in the early 1990's when Nutritional Facts Panels were implemented, the food and beverage industry just lowered the total grams of each serving size at will, and changed nothing in their products, to LIE about caloric improvements.  FDA had to come back about two or three years later, and defined specific serving sizes for most products, to stop this math bait and switch game. To this day, few consumers even know what a gram is, or RDI, nor care. Remember, the reason for the Nutritional Facts panels, was FDA's attempt to take heat off themselves, for the spiraling obesity statistics, and they decide to vilify fat(s) with the NLEA legislation.  Though fat profiling has changed since WWII, in average American intake per capita per year (more hydrogenated and manipulated), the total amounts have not changed. Therefore, fat was a STRAW DOG, or WHIPPING BOY, to deflect from the real problem of stripped and nutrient void food ingredients in general, and diabetes, hypoglycemia, obesity, cancer, and cardio vascular disease causing refined forms of fructose, HFCS, hydrolyzed high fructose inulin, crystalline fructose, iso glucose, etc. FLOODING the super market brand shelves since the 1970's, because it's the next lowest cost ingredient in the food chain after air, water, and salt. However, under the law of unintended consequences, consumers in the 1990's started reading ingredient labels, and many MAJOR brands vanished from the supermarket shelves (from lack of sales) because their ingredient declarations looked like, and where, chemistry sets. A good rule of thumb is, if you cannot pronounce, or spell, the ingredient(s), in any given product or brand, let alone know what it is, or what it does to your body, AVOID IT. Also, over 62% of all meals are consumed outside the home per day in the USA.  Many such meals are completely UNLABELED.  +1 Points              BY mmc88121 View mmc88121's Profile Add mmc88121 to Friends Receive Updates from mmc88121 By Email Receive Updates from mmc88121 By News Feed    January 29, 2007 I recall when I was in school years ago and the nutrition labels first came out, I would compare the front label information with the back.  I was usually way off.  The calories stated on the front would always be less then what the math worked out to as calories per serving.  I always wondered how they mangaged to get away with that misinformation.  Now I know. mmc88121  +1 Points              BY David R View David R's Profile Add David R to Friends Receive Updates from David R By Email Receive Updates from David R By News Feed    January 29, 2007 If you count calories, you are eating too much.                BY labrat View labrat's Profile Add labrat to Friends Receive Updates from labrat By Email Receive Updates from labrat By News Feed    January 29, 2007 The "gold standard" for measuring calories is the bomb calorimeter. It's nice for scientific exploration but I have a major problem with the "calorie in, calorie out" dogma of diet. That is: people aren't bomb calorimeters and don't use food as simple fuel to be "burned" as the popular wisdom holds.   Terms of Service Current Newsletter Contact Info ©Copyright 2006 Dr. Joseph Mercola. All Rights Reserved.  This content may be copied in full, with copyright, contact, creation and information intact, without specific permission, when used only in a not-for-profit format. If any other use is desired, permission in writing from Dr. Mercola is required. 070131 what's it to you? who go blather from