Current Events > White House wants to put food labels on food. Do you agree with this?

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://apple.news/AAONHxvUNTzO-4emah3uf5Q

The Biden administration is proposing that nutrition labels go on the front of food packages rather than the back. It's part of a strategy to end hunger and diet-related diseases in America in eight years some 40 pages of ideas to try to make the nation healthier.

The White House unveiled the plan ahead of a conference on hunger, nutrition and health being held in Washington on Wednesday the first of its kind since 1969, when a similar effort sparked programs like food stamps.

The strategy includes expanding nutrition assistance programs and launching more programs to cover medically tailored meals. But it's unclear how quickly most of the ideas could become reality, since many recommendations hinge on support from a divided Congress and changes to regulations.

The administration wants to expand existing food security programs to more people. This includes ideas like:

Expanding school meals to all students
Making it easier for more kids to get food during the summer months, when school is out
Allowing people who were formerly incarcerated or in college to receive food stamps.

These ideas would require legislation to pass Congress.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/4/6/0/AAaB-xAADuJk.jpg

I understand their logic that fat people are too lazy to flip the fucking thing over and read the back

I mean... okay, but I don't see what's so hard about turning a thing around.

And if you're too lazy to do that, you're probably too lazy to read a nutritional label on the front, too.

K181 posted...

I mean... okay, but I don't see what's so hard about turning a thing around.

Youd be surprised at how lazy some people are.

The Calories and stuff should be clearly.

i appreciate the effort to make nutritional health more accessible to the public
but this is still putting a band-aid on the symptoms

we have to teach nutrition better in schools, all through life
as a small government guy, this is something i feel is exactly within the scope of the government to do

Irony posted...

I understand their logic that fat people are too lazy to flip the fucking thing over and read the back

K181 posted...

I mean... okay, but I don't see what's so hard about turning a thing around.

And if you're too lazy to do that, you're probably too lazy to read a nutritional label on the front, too.

It's the out-of-sight-out-of-mind idea. There's a reason the food companies put the label on the back.

I would NOT eat the food pictured there. That's for damn sure.

Because it's a year and a half expired >_>

K181 posted...

I mean... okay, but I don't see what's so hard about turning a thing around.

And if you're too lazy to do that, you're probably too lazy to read a nutritional label on the front, too.

This but I dont think its about laziness, I think people just dont care

Damn_Underscore posted...

This but I dont think its about laziness, I think people just dont care

I mean that is laziness

Irony posted...

I understand their logic that fat people are too lazy to flip the fucking thing over and read the back

Perhaps if there were some incentive to flip it over. They should put free food on the back.

Damn_Underscore posted...

This but I dont think its about laziness, I think people just dont care

they don't KNOW to care

ZannoL posted...

Expanding school meals to all students
Making it easier for more kids to get food during the summer months, when school is out
Allowing people who were formerly incarcerated or in college to receive food stamps.

Seems weird that these ideas wouldn't be the main headline

Seems unlikely to help obesity, most obese people know that they are over eating.

It's not bad, but the wording "good for:" and "low fiber" and "no red meat" is kind of inconsistent and slightly confusing at first.

Maybe its less about accommodating the lazy and more about trying to force it in front of people who dont care or wouldnt look in the first place? Maybe not, idk, but either way its fine. Will make shopping easier to not have to pick shit up and flip it over, so I say go for it.

ZannoL posted...

Youd be surprised at how lazy some people are.

If they're too lazy to flip the package what makes you think they'll read nutrition labels at all?

They should make it so you can see the serving size and nutritional information for a whole container of food instead of just whatever arbitrary serving size the manufacturer chooses. A serving size of doritos isn't 10 fucking chips, it's the whole damn bag!

If you want to combat diet related diseases from poor nutrition, make healthy food cheaper to purchase, and give people enough fucking time to cook the stuff. The placement of the nutrition label isn't going to do shit.

They should put nutrition facts on booze

1984

Smashingpmkns posted...

They should put nutrition facts on booze

They do

Irony posted...

They do

Since when

Irony posted...

They do

They should put it on the cap or the lid, cause that's all anyone is actually looking at anyways.

Alucard188 posted...

If you want to combat diet related diseases from poor nutrition, make healthy food cheaper to purchase, and give people enough fucking time to cook the stuff. The placement of the nutrition label isn't going to do shit.

This is pretty much the most important stuff, right here. It's also about having the energy, physical and emotional, to even think about cooking at the end of the day. In other words, put a poor obese person in the lifestyle of a wealthy person, and the likelihood of them adopting a healthier relationship with food is much higher.

They can do it. I dont think it will actually help, though

Damn_Underscore posted...

This but I dont think its about laziness, I think people just dont care

It's that it just doesn't even cross people's minds most of the time. Putting them on the front would make people take a second to think about it.

EmbraceOfDeath posted...

It's that it just doesn't even cross people's minds most of the time. Putting them on the front would make people take a second to think about it.

I highly doubt it would make much of a difference. It's not like the back or side of the packaging is unaccessible and barely looked at.

People who arent looking at the back arent going to care if its on the front lmao

Etna posted...

1984

how so?

Tbh I'm not really sure where this misconception that healthy food is more expensive than junk food comes from.

Produce, at least at my market, is extremely cheap compared to junk food. I could get more greens than I could actually eat in a week for the price of a bag of chips. Salmon is like $14 for 2.5 lbs, which can be up to 6 or 7 (if not more) meals. If anything I've saved way more money by avoiding junk food all together.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Would never happen because republicans will make sure that never happens

Not a bad idea but everything on the nutritional facts should have a percentage espesh sugar

I don't see a reason against this

Lordgold666 posted...

Not a bad idea but everything on the nutritional facts should have a percentage espesh sugar

They do

Sugar doesnt

ZannoL posted...

The Biden administration is proposing that nutrition labels go on the front of food packages rather than the back. It's part of a strategy to end hunger and diet-related diseases in America in eight years some 40 pages of ideas to try to make the nation healthier.

Something completely harmless and will probably help.... but I guarantee the right will lose their absolute fucking shit over it and make up some hilariously obvious lie about it.

I generally don't have a problem with this, but if they start requiring it out in the sticks, that's where I'll take issue with it. I'd say less than half of the food I buy is pre-packaged. I don't shop at many big box stores for things like fruits, vegetables, or meat products. We have a butcher and farms around that sell everything from apples, corn, and strawberries, etc.

pegusus123456 posted...

It's the out-of-sight-out-of-mind idea. There's a reason the food companies put the label on the back.

I was/am(depending on my mood) one if those people. I used to eat a pint of Ben and Jerry's until I realized it's like 900 calories on the low end and 12-1300 on average.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

This at least. Pretty sure soda is cheaper than milk at this point. And real juice.

I don't think it's a needed change, but then again I would probably like seeing how many calories something is at just a glance. I could go along with this.

Edit: I didn't even pay attention to the rest of the plan, lol. Yeah, I have nothing against this and it sounds like a good idea.

Master_Bass posted...

I don't think it's a needed change, but then again I would probably like seeing how many calories something is at just a glance. I could go along with this.

Edit: I didn't even pay attention to the rest of the plan, lol. Yeah, I have nothing against this and it sounds like a good idea.

Yeah. As I said above, it's weird that the best plans are NOT the ones that the topic is highlighting!!

• Expanding school meals to all students
• Making it easier for more kids to get food during the summer months, when school is out
• Allowing people who were formerly incarcerated or in college to receive food stamps.

Lordgold666 posted...

Sugar doesnt

You should generally avoid eating bags of sugar.

A_Good_Boy posted...

You should generally avoid eating bags of sugar.

i cant kick that habit unfortunately. did lessen my sugar intake several months ago.
probably saving about 30 grams of sugar per day by switching to hawaiian punch (stuff is just as good).

inb4diabeetus.

What I really want is bigger print on the ingredients.

I generally dont look at the nutrition. I always look at ingredients though. If I dont know what an ingredient is, then I dont buy (I dont buy a lot of processed food).

The laws regarding clear labels on food are laughably bad.

I have no problem with this whatsoever.