The Food And Drug Administration

Increasing the options of fast food restaurants in America gave society different choices of where they can choose to go eat. Some restaurants may be cheaper than others, but what society didn’t realize was the cheaper the restaurant the more calories the food contains. The consumers didn’t seem to realize or have a problem with these cheaper companies until some consumers sued the company for getting them fat. This caused children to sue Mcdonald's the company for making the consumers get fat. For this reason, according to the author David Zinczenko it is a problem that people are not informed on how many calories the food they're eating contains. He has the credibility to be trusted by his audience

In Zinczenko’s article he said, "that there are a lack of alternate food options and there are no calorie information charts on fast food packaging, the way there are on grocery items (Zinczenko 394).” This information Zinczenko states may have been true back in 2002 but now of days, government is stepping in. According to the New York Times, President Obama signed off in 2011 that any American patron that enters into a McDonalds, Starbucks, Burger king, or any major restaurant chain, will be required to put calorie information on their menus and drive-through signs. This legislation also requires labels on food items in vending machines. In addition, anyone can find any

Zinczencko complains that unlike many other hazardous items, fast food does not come with warnings on how terrible the food is for one’s health and its future effects. He emphasizes that even if the customers were able to obtain the nutritional facts, they are not palpable, but rather obscure. He points out that the fast-food companies make the nutrition labels vague and misleading; they calculate the calories for every separate part of the meal, and they make it so the consumer must pay attention to serving size as well. He observes that the fast-food industry can get away with confusing labels because there are not any Food and Drug Administration labeling requisites (Word Smart, p. 220) covering fast food. Zinczenko complains that there is not any sort of nutritional labeling on the menus at fast-food restaurants. Now, nine years later, there are some changes, but his point is still valid. McDonald’s menu now states the calories of each meal, but as Zinczenko points out, it is very difficult to

Research shows that when such information is given, customers use it to limit the way they eat. This can consume an average loss of calories than they typically did before labeling. This trend poses increased risk, not just in terms of calories, but in terms of unhealthful ingredients such as fat and sodium. According to the passage, "the U.S. government agrees that restaurant meals should be labeled. It is part of the Affordable Care Act of 2010, which requires that standard menu items include information on nutrition 1". This poses that fast food places and restaurants should in fact label information, not only for ones own health but it is required.

Millions of restaurants would waste money and time year round if they had to incorporate labels to their menu. The employees would have to encounter every ingredient in the dish. Then they would need to add all of the calories together just to see how much is in the whole entire dish. What if they wanted to add an ingredient? Then that would be twice the trouble of adding them up a second time. According to the passage, "We Don't Need Labels'', "Foods for home consumption have been labeled for decades; but according to consumer research, that information has had a minimal effect on sales." This gives an explanation on how wasting money on labels does not effect the sales of that item or dish.

First of all, if restaurants had food labels, people would be eating a lot healthier. In one study stated by the passage "Label the Meals", it showed that the one fourth of people who use this information when it is available use it to limit what they eat, and they eat, on average, 400 fewer calories than people who do not use the label. While the passage "We Don't Need Labels" states that people who said they ate a healthier meal knowing this really didn't, they already knew what they were eating, therefore, they knew they could afford to eat there. Another thing is that, if your trying to stay fit and healthy, while exercise is important, food is the most important thing to worry about. Food is what powers you up for the day,

(2)Right now it is up to 10 years in the making and the proposed labels will also overhaul on the serving sizes. I think by the time the new labels are done being created there will be more people reading the labels and will now need to figure out how to read the new labels. I think instead of changing the labels we should spend more money in trying to educate people on how to read the labels now. The new labels could raise costs of food up to $10 per package.

If restaurants did not have these nutritional facts people on diets would not know what they are eating. They will assume that it is healthy when it is not. Some pregnant women have to eat a certain type of foods for their baby. Some pregnant women need to eat less or more calories, carbs, vitamins, and fats. At Walmart you are able to see what some items are like they will use the words “ Lite, Lowfat, or Heart Smart.” If restaurants had something similar or, just have the information we would have healthy babies and healthy citizens. In the passage “Label the Meals,” it states that “only 18 percent of people started to go out to eat in the 1977 30 years later the percentage almost doubled.” If resturants did not have these facts posted a

Lowering this rate is a major focus of the ACA, by insuring better access to healthy foods in places like schools, work places and stores. To do this the ACA will put in place requirements about food nutrition labeling of foods served both at restaurants and sold in stores, which will help consumers make healthier food choices [3].

There are some major requirements that the food establishments will have to follow in order to comply with these new regulations. The first rule clearly says that all the items listed on the menu must have a visible calorie count. Another rule requires that all establishments serving food to print a statement on the menus and menu boards announcing that the average daily intake for an adult is 2,000 calories. It is also important to note that the FDA is also requiring restaurants to announce the recommended amount of daily calorie intake for children above the age of four.

Personally, I think if menus clearly showed customers how healthy or non-healthy their food is a percentage would likely choose a healthier option. Although some would still choose unhealthy food, it would be worth the small price to pay for humans caring for their bodies. In the passage "Label The Meals" the author states that in less than thirty years the percent of calories consumed away from home has nearly doubled. If this trend continues

First, I can agree most of half of the world don't look at the food labeling on the back when they order food, but that doesn't mean we just need to take food labeling off of food and menus completely. Positive things that the food labeling can provent is diabetes and heart problems. So by taking the food labeling off it can bring back many of theses problems for many people.Proven facts from the story labin the meals can support my facts too one sentence from the text that supports this is “The average purchase contained about 100 percent fewer calories when the information was provided. The U.S. government agrees that restaurant meals should be labeled. It is part of the Affordable Care Act of 2010, which requires that standard menu items include information on nutrition.

Every year, more than 100,000 people die due to health problems such as diabetes, strokes, and/or heart disease caused by leftover calories that have been transmuted into fat. If people were aware of the number of calories that were in their food, I’m sure they would reconsider their options. I strongly recommend placing labels on serving meals at restaurants. Once in a while, my family and I would drive out to eat at a fancy restaurant; specifically Westin. It provided us with time to bond, laugh, and enjoy each other’s company. Over time, it became a Saturday thing for us. During this period, I started gaining weight dramatically, which was undesirable. This was very unjustifiable for an individual. Due to this event, I started to cut back on breakfast and unhealthy snacks. When that didn’t work, I stopped going to family dinners. It was only then, my weight began to diminish. If only I knew what exactly was in my T-Bone then, I would have eaten something much healthier. Calorie labeling on

In February 27,2014 the Food and Drug Administration announces proposed changes to nutrition labels. The new label would emphasize calories and sugars. The Food and Drug Administration is proposing several changes to the nutrition labels you see on packaged foods and beverages. If approved, the new labels would place a bigger emphasis on total calories, added sugars and certain nutrients, such as Vitamin D and potassium .The FDA is also proposing changes to serving size requirements in an effort to be more reflect on what people usually eat or drink. For

With half of all U.S. food dollars spent on eating outside the home, the Food and Drug Administration has developed a new regulation. It requires calorie labeling at all restaurants with more than 20 locations. Some argue that the new law will not provide accurate information, will place a costly new burden on restaurants, or that customers just won’t use the information. The truth is that calorie labeling informs people about what they’re eating, thus helping them make better, more well-informed choices when eating out. In fact, it has already resulted in beneficial menu changes at many restaurant chains.