Labels and Supplements Flashcards
Purpose of food labels?
to help consumer choose healthy foods
What are we looking at on a nutrition label? (4)
- facts
- nutrient content claims (front of package usually)
- diet related health claims (‘helps lower cholesterol’)
- nutrient function claims
Some common claims about benefits of some nutrients? (12) *Table 2.1
- calcium and osteoporosis
- sodium and high bp
- saturated/trans fat and CHD
- fruits/vegetables and cancer
- foods low in starch/fermentable sugars and dental caries (cavities)
- plant sterols and cholesterol
- found flaxseed and blood cholesterol lowering
- sugar free gum and cavities
- barley products and blood cholesterol lowering
- unsaturated fats and blood cholesterol lowering
- psyllium and blood chol lowering
- oat products and blood chol lowering
Nutrient facts within a label: 13 required items?
serving size calories fats (saturated and trans: WANT LOW cholesterol (WANT LOW) sodium (WANT LOW) carbohydrates fibre sugars (added) protein vitamin A vitamin C calcium iron
want to make sure enough fibre, vit A and C, calcium and iron
Recent label changes? (5)
- calories up front, underlined, bigger font
- serving size bigger font
- CHO has fibre and added sugars underneath, and % dv
- vit A, C removed since not normally low on these, POTASSIUM added
- ingredients listed with sugars first and they have ( ) to breakdown what sugars entails. Each ingredient is sep by • in a bigger font
Why is potassium added onto labels?
helps to lower bp since it works opposite of sodium
Nutrient content claims keywords and what they mean? (7)
– low; “food has very small amnt of FAT” i.e. ≤ 3g/serving
– low; “food has very small amnt of SAT FAT” i.e. ≤2g and ≤15% kcal from sat and trans fats combined
– free; “food has so small amnt of TRANS FAT it won’t affect body” i.e. ≤0.2g trans and ≤2g sat and trans combined
– source; “significant amnt of FIBRE” i.e. ≥2g/serving
– high source; “at least 4g of FIBRE”
– very high source; “very large amnt of FIBRE” i.e. 6g/serving
– light; “food is modified to have ≥25% less of FAT/KCAL than original product”
5 allowed diet-related health claims?
- K, Na and dec risk of high bp
- Ca, vit D, reg activity and dec risk of osteoporosis
- sat/trans fats and dec risk of CHD
- veg/fruit and dec risk of some cancers
- plant sterols and lowering chol (analog of chol, takes its spot)
Are supplements government regulated?
NO - “caveat emptor” i.e. buyer beware
-if supplement has DIN, NHP, USP it is not contaminated and actually contains product
Breast Cancer supplement experiment in 2003?
some ppl posed as breast cancer survivors and went into 34 supplement stores, received 33 different supplements and NONE were supported/tested for efficacy, and cost 58-600 $/month
Natural Health Products (NHP) 3 products that have been reviewed and disproved?
EPHEDRA - inc heart rate to inc metabolism; caused over 100 deaths in US, is now illegal
ST. JOHN’S WORT - ineffectively treated depression, 50% of bottles received did not contain the ingredients described
ECHINACEA - for upper resp tract infections, no efficacy
_____ are most powerful way to sell these types of supplements.
Testimonials – “it worked for me and here’s my sob story”
How to identify fraudulent products? (7)
– words: “secret cure” “breakthrough” “miracle” “doctors don’t want you to know about this”
– pseudoscientific/medical (yargon) e.g. fish oils, EPA, eicosanoids .. “energize” “stimulate” “purify”
– Panacea “cure all”
– only benefits, no side effects: natural, organic ≠ safe at any dose
– “scientifically proven” w no /untraceable references
– anti-est accusations towards docs, big pharma
– anecdotes, cultural beliefs (personal experience - testimonials)
Key Q to ask about a supplement (4)
- who stands to benefit: seller or public?
- what is the intent: sale of product or public health?
- good science (type of study): placebo, double blind, animal tests etc
- credentials of seller: ‘nutritionist’ and ‘masters in nutrition’ not real thing - anyone can be that.
