The government is up in arms against junk food. The Food and Drugs Administration is trying everything it can think of, redoing serving sizes, relocating nutrition labels to the front of every package and putting warning signs on them, you name it. But is this really the way to go about alerting people about their choice of food? Who really, is going to be buying a bag of chips, and squinting at the list of ingredients, nutrients and calories? And that is if the FDA actually manages to push its agenda through. Those new rules would have to make it past all the high-priced lobbyists who work for the food corporations. When a child enters the supermarket with her mother, and finds herself in a wonderland of glinting plastic bottles and shiny cardboard boxes full of temptingly done-up junk, how would it be possible for her to be influenced by the little small print that's been moved to the front of the box? As long as the food makers get to advertise their wares with cartoon characters and bop-along music, what on earth could a nutrition label ever do?
Perhaps, we need to take a look at the labeling standards that England uses, that even India plans to use. In England, for example, there is a traffic light warning system; if it is red, it contains unhealthy ingredients, and if it is green, it is mostly okay. Junk food makers over there are banned from making confusing claims like "extra fiber" or "contains antioxidants". And one of the worst offenders in confusing nutritional labeling in this country is the serving size fiasco. Every kind of food comes with its own arbitrary serving size definition, and no one really knows what that is. In England for example, all nutritional labeling, is done per hundred grams of product. It becomes very easy to compare one product against another.
Meanwhile in America, some of the serving sizes on junk food can make it very difficult to believe that someone isn't trying to take advantage of people's credulity. You buy a can of Coke, and the serving size printed on it, seems to believe that it contains two servings. This is unrealistic of course; no one shares a can of Coke. The same goes for the way little treats like muffins and cupcakes are measured - little muffins are supposed to be half a serving too. And with a bag of chips, the serving size is usually 10 chips. You have to wonder, if the FDA really wants to help. McDonald's still gets away with not displaying its nutritional information anywhere near the ordering area. There is that famous scene in the award-winning documentary Supersize Me where they go to a McDonald's outlet to find its nutritional information banner, and find it hidden behind some advertising board.
Meanwhile, junk food is trying to look healthy now, to make things a bit more murky. They sell candy that's embellished with nuts and "real fruit"; soda pop has the vitamins and minerals; fried chips come with Omega 3. Actually, these tricks will work only with people who've forgotten long since what food really looks or tastes like. That's the mantra these days goes, if what you're eating wouldn't have been called food by your grandfather, then it is junk food and probably shouldn't be on the food aisle at the supermarket.