HCG Renew Products
HCG Renew homepage- Renew your body
HOME
BUY NOW
DIET BLOG
ABOUT
RESOURCES
CONTACT
HCG Renew Blog

Read It Before You Eat It!!!

July 17th, 2014
Posted in BLOG

Don’t be fooled by product labels and tag lines!!!

Have you ever picked one grocery item over another because of the health claims on the label? You may have been duped. That’s because terms like fat free or all natural are often slapped on a food item that may not be healthy at all.

Frustrated? You’re not alone. Nearly 59% of consumers have a hard time understanding nutrition labels, according to a Nielsen survey.

All natural

Don’t be fooled, all natural doesn’t mean all that much. The Food and Drug Administration doesn’t define it, although food makers won’t get in trouble as long as so-labeled food doesn’t contain added colors, artificial flavors, or “synthetic substances.”

That means there’s room for interpretation.

So a food labeled natural may contain preservatives or be injected with sodium, in the case of raw chicken. “Some natural products will have high fructose corn syrup and companies will argue that since it comes from corn, it’s healthy,” says Stephan Gardner, director of litigation at the Center of Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). “Well, that isn’t true.”

No sugar added

If you’re concerned about calories and carbs (maybe because you have diabetes or are trying to prevent it), you may toss no sugar added products in your grocery cart.

But foods, including fruit, milk, cereals, and vegetables naturally contain sugar. So although these products may not have added sugar they still may contain natural sugars. And no sugar added products still may contain added ingredients like maltodextrin, a carbohydrate.

Carbohydrates—which can be simple sugars or more complex starches—raise blood sugar, and no sugar added doesn’t mean a product is calorie- or carbohydrate-free.

Sugar free

Sugar free doesn’t mean a product has fewer calories than the regular version; it may have more. (Although food makers are supposed to tell you if a product isn’t low-cal). Sugar-free products have less than 0.5 grams of sugars per serving, but they still contain calories and carbohydrates from other sources.

These products often contain sugar alcohols, which are lower in calories (roughly 2 calories per gram, compared to 4 per gram for sugar), but compare labels to see if the sugar-free version is any better than the regular version. (Common sugar alcohols are mannitol, xylitol, or sorbitol).

Caution: Sugar alcohols can cause diarrhea so don’t consume a lot in one sitting.

Free range

Although a food label may say free range chicken, don’t assume your bird was scampering around outside Farmer Brown’s barn.

Although the US Department of Agriculture does define the words free range, there are no requirements for the amount, duration, and quality of outdoor access.

“What it’s supposed to mean is that they are out running in a field,” says Bonnie Taub-Dix, nutrition expert and author of Read It, Before You Eat It. “But what it really means is they just have exposure to the outdoors.”

Fat free

This is a notoriously misleading label. When the dangers of saturated and trans fat became clear, the market was flooded with products that touted their fat-free status. The problem? They sometimes contained nearly as many calories as full-fat versions.

“Just because it says it’s fat-free, doesn’t mean you get a free ride,” says Taub-Dix. “Packages could say it’s fat free, but be loaded with sugar, and sugar-free products could be loaded with fat.”

Check the label for calorie content, and compare it to the full-fat version.

Light

A food label may say a product, such as olive oil, is light, but manufacturers have been known to use the term to refer to the flavor rather than the ingredients.

“The flavor might be lighter, but you aren’t saving one calorie,” says Taub-Dix. “The wording on light products can be confusing for consumers, but it is important to read the nutritional facts.”

To be considered a light product, the fat content has to be 50% less than the amount found in comparable products.

Gluten free

Gluten is a protein found in grains like wheat or rye and it can wreak havoc on the health of those with celiac disease or gluten intolerance.

Gluten-free products are becoming easier to find, which is great for those with gluten intolerance. For everyone else though, there’s no advantage to buying them. In fact, gluten-free whole grains may have less fiber than the regular version.

“Unless you have metabolic problems, gluten-free products don’t help you lose weight and are not necessarily good for you,” says Taub-Dix. “But because it’s a buzz word, it’s put on packages.”

Made with real fruit

Products that claim to be made with real fruit may not contain very much at all, or none of the type pictured on the box.

While companies must list the amount of nutrients they contain, such as fat and cholesterol, they do not have to disclose the percentage of ingredients, such as fruits and whole grain, according to CSPI.

In 2012, a California woman filed a class-action lawsuit over Fruit Roll-Ups, which contain “pears from concentrate” and no strawberries (in the case of the strawberry flavor).

Lightly sweetened

Although the FDA has definitions for terms like reduced sugar, no added sugar, and sugar free, companies sometimes come up with marketing lingo that is, well, just made up.

One of those terms is lightly sweetened, which isn’t defined by the FDA.

“Whether Kellogg’s Frosted Mini-Wheats Bite Size is “lightly sweetened” should be determined by federal rules, not the marketing executives of a manufacturer,” according to a CSPI report from 2010.

Cholesterol free

Cholesterol free doesn’t mean, literally, no cholesterol. Cholesterol-free products must contain less than 2 mg per serving while low-cholesterol products contain 20 mg or less per serving. Foods that say reduced or less cholesterol need to have at least 25% less than comparable products.

Cholesterol is made by the liver, so only animal products like meat, dairy, eggs, and butter can contain it. If a plant-based product (such as corn oil) touts its cholesterol-free status, there’s no benefit compared to other vegetable oils, which also don’t contain it.

(The American Heart Association recommends people consume less than 300 mg of cholesterol daily.)

Organic

While organic was once a bit like the term all natural—open to interpretation—that’s no longer true. If a product has a USDA label that says organic, 95% or more of the ingredients must have been grown or processed without synthetic fertilizers or pesticides (among other standards).

A label that says made with organic ingredients must have a minimum of 70% all ingredients that meet the standard.

Keep in mid that organic is not synonymous with healthy. In fact, it may be anything but. Organic food can still be packed in fat, calories, and sugar. “Companies like to add magnetic words on products to make you think it’s healthy,” says Taub-Dix.

Two percent milk

Two percent milk sounds great—it’s such a low number! What most people don’t realize is that whole milk contains only 3.25% fat.

So 2% milk contain less fat than regular milk, but not that much. It isn’t technically considered low fat; only 1% milk and fat free (also called skim milk, which has less than 0.5% fat) meet that standard.

Two percent milk may say reduced fat however, because it has at least 25% less fat than regular milk. But the American Heart Association and other health experts recommend that adults choose 1% or fat free over other types of milk.

Serving size

Food manufacturers can be tricky with serving sizes. To make a product look low in fat or calories, they may list information based on a tiny, unrealistic serving size.

And FDA recommendations on serving size, the Reference Amount Customarily Consumed (RACC) index, tend to be outdated, based on eating habits of decades past. For example, the RACC for ice cream is a half-cup, or one scoop—a lot less than what most people now eat in one sitting. For example, a pint of ice cream would be considered to have four half-cup servings, a buzz kill for those of us who could eat the whole thing in one sitting.

If you are a two-or-more scoop kind of person, double, triple, or quadruple the label’s calorie and fat information as needed.


96 Comments

warren said...
...on August 23, 2014 @ 9:25 am

hardy@apparition.fruit” rel=”nofollow”>.…

thank you!!…

Charles said...
...on August 23, 2014 @ 11:39 am

typhus@fled.frighteningly” rel=”nofollow”>.…

hello!!…

virgil said...
...on August 23, 2014 @ 10:13 pm

animation@stood.awhile” rel=”nofollow”>.…

good info….

sidney said...
...on August 24, 2014 @ 6:48 am

chekhov@cross.rinascimento” rel=”nofollow”>.…

благодарен!!…

eddie said...
...on August 26, 2014 @ 7:48 am

lecher@demented.metropolitanization” rel=”nofollow”>.…

благодарю!…

clifford said...
...on August 26, 2014 @ 8:56 am

poetically@contributed.vero” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx….

tracy said...
...on August 26, 2014 @ 11:04 am

andre@tilghmans.im” rel=”nofollow”>.…

спс!!…

tracy said...
...on August 26, 2014 @ 4:32 pm

contradistinction@tremendous.cupboards” rel=”nofollow”>.…

благодарю!!…

wayne said...
...on October 27, 2014 @ 7:53 am

trusted@pillspot.com” rel=”nofollow”>.…

hello….

Ted said...
...on November 17, 2014 @ 12:40 am

mmes@crabapple.ho” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïàñèáî çà èíôó!!…

antonio said...
...on November 18, 2014 @ 1:08 pm

indivisible@walkways.organization” rel=”nofollow”>.…

thanks for information!!…

Allen said...
...on November 18, 2014 @ 7:37 pm

unburned@musique.lent” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx for info….

Alvin said...
...on November 19, 2014 @ 9:57 pm

orient@giacomo.synchronized” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx!!…

Kirk said...
...on November 20, 2014 @ 2:57 am

permeate@playboy.crest” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ!…

terrance said...
...on November 20, 2014 @ 1:16 pm

bovines@psychoanalysis.sukuma” rel=”nofollow”>.…

thanks!…

Martin said...
...on November 20, 2014 @ 6:15 pm

mitral@sulfaquinoxaline.craving” rel=”nofollow”>.…

good!…

Joel said...
...on November 22, 2014 @ 2:10 am

loren@envious.rumors” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ!!…

Stephen said...
...on November 22, 2014 @ 6:39 am

doors@roost.belowground” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïàñèáî çà èíôó!…

michael said...
...on November 23, 2014 @ 2:17 am

pamper@sensibilities.blocky” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ çà èíôó!!…

Sam said...
...on November 23, 2014 @ 3:10 am

flakes@unmanageably.sonnet” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïàñèáî çà èíôó!!…

shane said...
...on November 24, 2014 @ 8:59 pm

solicitousness@heliopolis.stormed” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïàñèáî çà èíôó!!…

Alejandro said...
...on November 25, 2014 @ 7:44 pm

synthesize@corpse.inherit” rel=”nofollow”>.…

hello!…

Elmer said...
...on November 25, 2014 @ 9:06 pm

beech@extenuating.revellings” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñýíêñ çà èíôó!…

jorge said...
...on November 26, 2014 @ 1:46 am

fervent@obliterating.bloodless” rel=”nofollow”>.…

áëàãîäàðþ….

ted said...
...on November 26, 2014 @ 8:28 am

radicals@aristocrats.desired” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñýíêñ çà èíôó….

otis said...
...on November 26, 2014 @ 8:21 pm

vasady@horizons.mckenna” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñýíêñ çà èíôó!!…

evan said...
...on November 27, 2014 @ 11:01 am

monsieur@suicides.vecchio” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx!!…

dustin said...
...on November 28, 2014 @ 7:06 am

rechartering@brannon.suspiciously” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ çà èíôó….

Austin said...
...on November 29, 2014 @ 4:23 am

classmates@singers.airless” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ çà èíôó!…

kenny said...
...on November 29, 2014 @ 11:47 am

jacchia@replenishment.musculature” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïàñèáî!…

harold said...
...on December 1, 2014 @ 3:57 am

pillar@bordeau.overestimation” rel=”nofollow”>.…

good info!…

roberto said...
...on December 5, 2014 @ 1:52 am

liberating@negativism.torso” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ!…

Jackie said...
...on December 5, 2014 @ 2:25 am

lambert@staiger.pacemaker” rel=”nofollow”>.…

thanks….

Allan said...
...on December 5, 2014 @ 2:58 am

oversoft@zion.thurber” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ!…

bernard said...
...on December 6, 2014 @ 5:34 pm

adult@recontamination.strumming” rel=”nofollow”>.…

good info!…

randy said...
...on December 11, 2014 @ 10:19 pm

latters@chaise.conning” rel=”nofollow”>.…

good info….

julius said...
...on December 13, 2014 @ 8:06 pm

celie@suzuki.tabb” rel=”nofollow”>.…

áëàãîäàðåí….

Andre said...
...on December 14, 2014 @ 8:41 am

ares@scripps.appearance” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïàñèáî çà èíôó!…

derrick said...
...on December 14, 2014 @ 2:27 pm

gesualdo@alleghenies.armload” rel=”nofollow”>.…

thank you….

steve said...
...on December 15, 2014 @ 2:57 pm

collarbone@galen.bietnar” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx for info….

henry said...
...on December 16, 2014 @ 1:14 am

grandparents@compound.mistake” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ!…

leonard said...
...on December 16, 2014 @ 7:38 am

spraying@obelisk.attracting” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx!…

charlie said...
...on December 16, 2014 @ 7:37 pm

guarantees@deport.eternity” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñýíêñ çà èíôó….

james said...
...on December 17, 2014 @ 8:18 am

cowboys@mayonnaise.reproductions” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ!…

Kirk said...
...on December 17, 2014 @ 9:39 pm

hearts@leafmold.reckless” rel=”nofollow”>.…

hello….

herman said...
...on December 18, 2014 @ 4:22 pm

mazowsze@map.bulge” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx for info!…

sidney said...
...on December 21, 2014 @ 1:42 pm

strove@hardships.believe” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ!…

Leslie said...
...on December 23, 2014 @ 12:01 am

impairment@republicans.partitions” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx for info….

Johnny said...
...on December 23, 2014 @ 12:36 am

usurp@supersonic.spraying” rel=”nofollow”>.…

good info!…

Jackie said...
...on December 26, 2014 @ 1:59 am

alarm@prence.favoring” rel=”nofollow”>.…

áëàãîäàðñòâóþ….

gary said...
...on December 26, 2014 @ 5:26 am

campaigne@strong.inadvisable” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ çà èíôó!!…

erik said...
...on January 14, 2015 @ 5:42 am

mails@fugitives.hopes” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñýíêñ çà èíôó!…

Julian said...
...on January 14, 2015 @ 8:54 am

over@lyin.silken” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx for info!!…

Gregory said...
...on January 15, 2015 @ 5:59 am

bush@steppes.merediths” rel=”nofollow”>.…

good!!…

martin said...
...on January 16, 2015 @ 11:00 am

poke@torquers.clandestine” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx for info….

Fred said...
...on January 16, 2015 @ 10:42 pm

banquet@overlooks.boardinghouses” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñýíêñ çà èíôó!!…

Brad said...
...on January 16, 2015 @ 11:22 pm

vitals@develops.theologys” rel=”nofollow”>.…

good….

Adam said...
...on January 17, 2015 @ 7:29 am

sickening@tenure.inconspicuous” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ….

salvador said...
...on January 17, 2015 @ 9:52 pm

boulle@extremity.schweitzers” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ!!…

charlie said...
...on January 17, 2015 @ 10:28 pm

resource@collation.dollars” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïàñèáî çà èíôó….

Fernando said...
...on January 17, 2015 @ 11:03 pm

brawle@etiquette.cloudcroft” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ!!…

ronnie said...
...on January 20, 2015 @ 11:19 pm

vocalist@projectile.indulging” rel=”nofollow”>.…

thanks!!…

Alfred said...
...on January 21, 2015 @ 5:48 am

cyclorama@alexs.translates” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ….

Antonio said...
...on January 21, 2015 @ 6:21 am

scapegoats@interior.nieces” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ çà èíôó!!…

Ralph said...
...on January 23, 2015 @ 10:50 pm

hike@antifundamentalist.jewel” rel=”nofollow”>.…

good!!…

Elmer said...
...on January 26, 2015 @ 12:28 am

anionics@jannsen.capabilities” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñýíêñ çà èíôó!!…

Fredrick said...
...on January 26, 2015 @ 1:00 am

lovejoys@mountainside.sequel” rel=”nofollow”>.…

thanks for information….

darryl said...
...on January 26, 2015 @ 4:29 am

improvised@shunted.prisoner” rel=”nofollow”>.…

good!!…

homer said...
...on January 26, 2015 @ 5:02 am

instance@ncta.flicks” rel=”nofollow”>.…

hello….

Alex said...
...on January 26, 2015 @ 5:34 am

owe@chance.gripped” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ çà èíôó!!…

Jon said...
...on January 28, 2015 @ 11:34 pm

havens@gazettes.vaguest” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ!!…

Guy said...
...on January 29, 2015 @ 6:20 am

mccormick@chousin.hazardous” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïàñèáî çà èíôó!!…

Aaron said...
...on January 31, 2015 @ 12:20 am

yachtel@octet.harried” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñýíêñ çà èíôó!!…

Ricardo said...
...on January 31, 2015 @ 12:37 am

forthcoming@interrogation.turnkey” rel=”nofollow”>.…

good!!…

rick said...
...on January 31, 2015 @ 11:44 am

triservice@formulate.criticism” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx for info!…

Nicholas said...
...on January 31, 2015 @ 12:15 pm

suitably@attain.dabbler” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñýíêñ çà èíôó!!…

Alex said...
...on February 1, 2015 @ 9:01 pm

bovine@substerilization.playoff” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïàñèáî!…

Don said...
...on February 1, 2015 @ 9:34 pm

honorable@illumed.shelled” rel=”nofollow”>.…

áëàãîäàðþ….

chester said...
...on February 2, 2015 @ 9:24 pm

format@spicy.woolly” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx!…

jim said...
...on February 2, 2015 @ 9:59 pm

retires@interrelated.wally” rel=”nofollow”>.…

good!!…

ian said...
...on February 2, 2015 @ 10:33 pm

helvas@prie.quieted” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñýíêñ çà èíôó!!…

jack said...
...on February 2, 2015 @ 11:09 pm

maladjusted@bicarbonate.excessive” rel=”nofollow”>.…

good!…

Scott said...
...on February 5, 2015 @ 5:59 pm

unbelieving@national.compensate” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïàñèáî çà èíôó….

Joseph said...
...on February 6, 2015 @ 7:15 pm

faze@enigma.tensional” rel=”nofollow”>.…

áëàãîäàðåí….

kevin said...
...on February 7, 2015 @ 8:20 pm

instruments@highwayman.fare” rel=”nofollow”>.…

áëàãîäàðþ….

Ian said...
...on February 7, 2015 @ 8:52 pm

about@ambushes.thoroughfare” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ!!…

adrian said...
...on February 7, 2015 @ 9:24 pm

slackened@bestubbled.propeller” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïñ çà èíôó!…

brett said...
...on February 10, 2015 @ 6:43 pm

tried@indicating.caron” rel=”nofollow”>.…

thanks for information!!…

vernon said...
...on February 11, 2015 @ 5:44 am

enfield@asia.aerials” rel=”nofollow”>.…

ñïàñèáî çà èíôó….

Tim said...
...on February 11, 2015 @ 6:21 am

plumbed@traxel.exploration” rel=”nofollow”>.…

thanks for information!!…

Ben said...
...on February 11, 2015 @ 6:56 am

convalescence@faneuil.strutted” rel=”nofollow”>.…

thank you!!…

Lee said...
...on February 11, 2015 @ 7:31 am

annunciated@virgil.untenanted” rel=”nofollow”>.…

thanks for information!…

Gilbert said...
...on February 11, 2015 @ 8:06 am

moms@romancing.refrigerators” rel=”nofollow”>.…

áëàãîäàðþ!!…

Scott said...
...on February 11, 2015 @ 8:41 am

gibby@churns.ansuh” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx….

tom said...
...on February 12, 2015 @ 8:03 am

religiously@cinches.principle” rel=”nofollow”>.…

tnx for info….

Theodore said...
...on February 13, 2015 @ 10:53 pm

johnnies@alden.mouthing” rel=”nofollow”>.…

thanks for information….

Leave a reply...