When Serving Sizes Are Wrong

   I have shared that a low energy diet is endorsed by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and is the cornerstone to Volumetrics and  Weight Watchers.  Energy density of a food or meal is determined by dividing the total calories by the weight of the food(s) in grams.
   Sometimes the serving size of a food is provided in ounces not grams.  This is usually not a problem as ounces are easily converted to grams.  If you are choosing between two products and they are both given in ounces, you can just divide calories by ounces to see which is the least caloric.  Sometimes the serving size is given in ounces AND grams.  But be careful....
   I was choosing ice cream today - ice cream always gets me.  When it is a tub of ice cream the serving size is 1/2 cup - which is not useful for two reasons.  First it is unrealistic.  We tend to eat more than one half.  And Second, it isn't calories per half of cup that we need to be aware of but calories by weight - in grams.  I have pointed out before that the 1/2 c serving sizes have unequal weights across products and flavors (the grams are always provided so you can do your own math).
   When buying ice cream bars, (I choose from Weight Watchers and Skinny Cow).  I read the grams per bar to know which one is REALLY the lower calorie option. The front of the box might say that they are 100 calorie bars, but that does not mean that you get the same amount of ice cream.  I always want more ice cream for my calorie - more bang for my buck.  Usually Skinny Cow wins the calories per gram contest.  The Weight Watchers Fudge Bar is the exception.
   But today something caught my eye in the small print on the front of the package.  This led me to check those grams again.  On all the packages (excluding the fudge), all flavors of both brands said 6- 2.65 fl ounce bars per package.  How can they all be the same fluid ounces if they are NOT the same weight in grams?    The 2.65 ounce bar in the Weight Watcher group weighs about 52 grams and the Skinny Cow ones weigh  63 or slightly more grams.  
   But wait... fluid ounces?  Ice cream is not a liquid.
Either way the ounce to gram conversion doesn't equal what the product says.  When using fluid ounces the conversion from 2.65 = 78g, when using the more appropriate ounce to gram conversion the 2.65 ounces = 75 grams.  None of the conversions were true to the label grams.  
   When in doubt, ALWAYS refer to the grams..Actually, doubt or no doubt - its calories/gram so use the grams.
Now - time for some ice cream. 

Package Labels (the back tells)

   I came upon a bulletin board yesterday,while walking the halls during a class break.  I ended up in the Nutrition area.  The bulletin board was very informative.  I believe its purpose was to offer education or advice on using the nutrition information provided on food packages.  Of course, one of the problems with the information on packages is that it takes a great deal of nutrition knowledge and time to fully process.  These are two things that the general public is short on (time and nutrition knowledge). 

   The part of the bulletin board that caught my attention had to do with one of the front of pack systems used voluntarily by a manufacturer.  It was shown on a product that I love and have shared on the blog;  Blue Bunny sugar free ice cream.  The caption, referring to the FOP information was “the front sells, the back tells.”  On the back of the package is the Nutrition Facts Panel and the ingredients list. These are two things that the Institute of Medicine has determined to be hard for consumers to understand and process (read, put together, use).  I agree.  It is also why a front of pack system could be more useful that the back of the pack.  
   The point that the nutrition students were making on the bulletin board is a very good one (which I will explain in a moment). 

   We need the easier to use Front of Pack system, but we need it with the interpretive and guiding criteria as put forth by the IOM.  You might have forgotten what that was.  I will quickly remind you.  All front of packs (under the standards proposed) must have the calorie information boldly highlighted.  The items that the Dietary Guidelines suggest we limit, i.e., saturated (trans) fats, added sugar and sodium are the criteria on which a product is judged.  A product that is low in any of the three areas will get a star  - for a possible total of 3 stars.

   So the Blue Bunny issue from the nutrition students bulletin board was two fold.  The first was that the serving size highlighted on the package was a ½ cup.  I, too, have said that is unrealistic.  The students calculated the calories, sugar, etc for a 1 cup serving size.  The second problem they highlighted was the “no added sugar” claim.  In fact, they said, it is no added table sugar – sucralose.  

    On the back of the package the students had highlighted words that indicate sugar and sugar alcohol.  I might be able to pick some of them out – I believe “tol” and “ose” are word endings that give  clues.      
   But as the IOM states and I strongly support - YOU (we, the consumer) should not have to figure that out – hence the need for standardized FOP systems.
   YUP – we are still waiting for them!