FDA Sizing Up Serving Sizes

With obesity on the rise, the FDA Is thinking up ways to scare people away from unhealthy foods.

The first idea? Encourage manufacturers to post the food's calorie information on the front of the box or bag, as the FDA is doing, according to the New York Times. That will make reaching for a handful of chips a more alarming experience.

The problem with that, however, is that most serving sizes marked on packaging don't correspond to people's actual eating habits. And the calorie count listed on the packaging is determined by the serving size, so the FDA is considering changing that too.

When a two-cup can of soup marks a serving size as one cup or a single muffin actually contains two servings, people are often eating many times the number of calories and other elements than they think they are. It takes more than a quick glance at the label to discern the difference, and it is far from intuitive to think that the muffin's label is only accounting for half of the whole.

What we need, nutrition professor Barry Popkin told the Times, is "meaningful portion sizes." Not only do serving sizes determine calories, but all other items listed on the nutrition label, some of which, like sodium and saturated fat, people should be keeping an eye on.

While these changes are apt to help the situation, I'd say the next step in this process of getting people eating more healthfully is to make the muffin and the can of soup smaller in the first place.

But for goodness sakes, don't make the smaller things cost way more, as Coke has done with it's new 7.5 ounce cans, which Marion Nestle reports are priced to make the soda cost an astonishing $8.50 per gallon, several times the price of gasoline.

When she asked some retail execs why the smaller containers cost so much, she got an answer that explains in a few amazing words why we have an obesity problem in this country: “If customers want smaller portions they ought to be willing to pay for them.”

Photo: juliaeatssweaters via Flickr