|
Government wants to choose your lifestyle
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Jayx1 |
Shouldn't they be letting us decide even if it is scientifically proven or not? We are adults, NOT KIDS. This type of thing pisses me off big time about the government here. Let them call the damn thing "Carbwise" and let me choose not to buy the stuff since I think Carb diets are a waste of time anyways ;)
| quote: | Sep. 22, 2004. 06:33 AM
Low-carb claim hard to swallow
Health Canada serves up new rules for product labelling
'No reason ... to be concerned with amount of carbs we eat'
BRUCE CHEADLE
CANADIAN PRESS
OTTAWA - The federal government is putting Canadian food producers on a strict carbohydrate labelling diet that could knock a number of new product lines off grocery store shelves next year.
Health Canada says there's no scientific evidence to support low-carb diets, such as the ubiquitous Atkins diet, and the absence is reflected in new rules on labelling that come into effect in December, 2005.
"There was — and still is — no reason from a nutrient point of view to be concerned with the amount of carbs that we eat," Carole Saindon, a spokeswoman for Health Canada, said in an interview.
So when Health Canada published its new regulations last year, carbohydrate claims were ruled off limits for future food and drink labels.
"Low fat is one of them. Low sodium is one of them. But low carb is not," Saindon said.
The restrictions, which come into effect next year for large companies and in 2007 for producers with revenues below $1 million, don't stop there.
A Health Canada information letter has informed the industry that "express or implied representations" are prohibited.
"This means that other statements about the presence or absence of carbohydrates, including the use of brand names and trademarks, are subject to these regulations," says the letter.
The rule change comes as literally thousands of new low-carb products are being introduced in the United States, many of them spilling over into Canada.
In April, Unilever Canada launched a 22-product Carb Options line, following a January launch in the U.S. It was one of 1,863 products or packages with low-carb claims introduced this year, according to one U.S. market research firm.
Products range from beer and cola to salad dressing and cereal.
Kraft has a line called CarbWell and General Mills has Carb Monitor, although a General Mills spokeswoman said their line has not been launched in Canada.
None of the major low-carb products may be sold here as such after Dec. 12, 2005, said a spokeswoman for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, which enforces labelling rules.
Trademarks such as Carb Options and CarbWell are "implying there's something about carbohydrate in the food — either that there's a low level or some level or no level or that there's something better about theirs," said the agency's Charmaine Kuran.
"Most of those types of trademarks that you'll see on the market we will not be accepting once they move over to the new labelling regulations."
Unilever Canada disputes the interpretation. Nutritionist Lucia Weiler said the company is well aware of the new regulations but does not agree the Carb Options name contravenes them.
"As we understand the (Health Canada) letter and the current laws, our products are compliant and will be compliant," said Weiler. "We stand behind our product, that they're fully compliant and they're out there to meet a consumer need."
Kuran speculated that food producers are simply using the old rules, still in effect, for short-term market gain, "probably trying to take advantage of the trend right now to sell carbohydrate-reduced products — or products that even mention how much carbohydrate they have in them."
Continuing consumer demand has recently come into question, however, with some industry leaders suggesting there's a glut of low-carb products in a shrinking market.
"While we are clearly seeing that the low-carb trend, or fad, has peaked and it looks like it is taking a bit of a dive in the supermarkets, we have yet to see the recovery of those (other food) categories that were impacted by low-carb," Kellogg CEO Carlos Gutierrez told investors in a July conference call.
These divergent trends are compelling to food producers and regulators alike.
While diets such as Atkins arguably are waning, carb-conscious consumers abound.
"The phenomenon is huge, but it's all in how you ask it," said market researcher Glenys Babof Ipsos-Reid in Toronto.
Summer surveys in 2003 and 2004 found that, while the number of Canadians who say they're on the Atkins diet is roughly 4 per cent, some 63 per cent of respondents agreed they are trying to limit carbohydrate consumption. A third strongly agreed.
Ipsos-Reid also found that 81 per cent of respondents wanted federal regulation of low-carb claims on food and beverage labels. And 86 per cent wanted provincial health ministries to do more to inform people about the risks or benefits of low-carb diets.
Among the new labelling rules is a revised Nutrifacts table which includes carbohydrate content among the 13 nutrients that must be measured.
"Consumers can still choose to eat more or less on their own," said Health Canada's Saindon.
. |
^^^^^^ sure we can choose for ourself Mr Saindan. Quite patronizing us already. |
|
|
| Floorwhore |
 |
|
|
| arek |
 |
|
|
| d!abolic |
| That's ing gay. There's so much evidence to support low-card diets that it's sickening. How the hell can these people make such claims and get away with it?! |
|
|
| Special K |
| quote: | Originally posted by arek
|
lmao
:D |
|
|
| Form&Funktion |
You just don't get it do you Jay. They are not saying they are banning low carb food.:rolleyes:
They are simply regulating and controlling the unfettered labelling of products by companies loosely hitching on to the carb craze to sell products when the carb value of said product is questionable at best. I promise you, you can still eat low carb food if you choose. THe big bad government is not trying CONTROL YOUR LIFE.
My room-mate is an executive for National Grociers of Canada and they've been asking for this for a while as companies are launching carb focused food lines across the board without much in the way of proof or nutritional information to support their claim. All they are doing is making the food companies responsible and not allowing them to advertise based on unproven nutritional grounds. You will still be able to find carb info on the label...they just can't advertise it as a point-of-purchase insentive.
FYI - The same thing occured at the start of the "organic" craze as companies were abusing the definition of the term and the feds correctly had to redefine the rules allowing one to claim organic products.
Your whole life seems to be one big complaint box these days. I think someone needs a hug. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
I don't think is a slight against the consumers as much as the manufacturers.
Manufacturers have been jumping in the Low Carb bandwagon whichever way they can.
"Low Carb" could simply mean they cut their portions from what it used to be.
Then they confuse the issue with labelling like, "Net Carb", "All Natural" and "Organic".
Then again, correct labeling of foods isn't a new battle but one that comes up every time something new comes along.
The problem comes up when manufacturers' marketers try to stay on the shopping lists by relabelling their old products or making a slight change to the packaging to appear to be with the times.
Being packaging police is not a job I'd want... :confused: |
|
|
| Chinaman |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
Shouldn't they be letting us decide even if it is scientifically proven or not? We are adults, NOT KIDS. This type of thing pisses me off big time about the government here. Let them call the damn thing "Carbwise" and let me choose not to buy the stuff since I think Carb diets are a waste of time anyways ;)
|
Dude,
I think you totally missed the point of this whole thing... Chill out and smoke a fatty, mon.
 |
|
|
| djshan |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
We are adults, NOT KIDS. |
i didnt read the entire first post. yes we are adults, but there are some adults who still act like kids. theres tons in my school who are 25-29 and they still act like high school kids.:whip: |
|
|
| Orko |
| quote: | Originally posted by Form&Funktion
You just don't get it do you Jay. They are not saying they are banning low carb food.:rolleyes:
They are simply regulating and controlling the unfettered labelling of products by companies loosely hitching on to the carb craze to sell products when the carb value of said product is questionable at best. I promise you, you can still eat low carb food if you choose. THe big bad government is not trying CONTROL YOUR LIFE.
My room-mate is an executive for National Grociers of Canada and they've been asking for this for a while as companies are launching carb focused food lines across the board without much in the way of proof or nutritional information to support their claim. All they are doing is making the food companies responsible and not allowing them to advertise based on unproven nutritional grounds. You will still be able to find carb info on the label...they just can't advertise it as a point-of-purchase insentive.
FYI - The same thing occured at the start of the "organic" craze as companies were abusing the definition of the term and the feds correctly had to redefine the rules allowing one to claim organic products.
Your whole life seems to be one big complaint box these days. I think someone needs a hug. |
well said. Im glad they are doing somethign like this. Because lets face it, it can be difficult to keep up with all the new news and info about all the products we have today. There are way too many to chose from.
I think they(the gov) is trying to help out the average person, who 1) doesnt have a bio degree and doesnt know the importance of everything that goes into their body
2) may want to sue the gov later by saying "why didnt you inforce a law which doesnt allow companies to get away with this"
so the government is just tyring to cover its bases.
Why is the government always made out to be a faceless corporation out to harm people? Instead of being viewed as the best arrangement possible between people in a country,(any country) to try and solve the social/economic problems which crop up in life? |
|
|
|
|
