Mon, May-28-18, 19:49
|
|
Senior Member
Posts: 1,898
|
|
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000
BF:
Progress: 50%
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grav
The teaspoon figure would go on the front of packaging oon its own, it wouldn't be part of the nutrition label itself. This way it would be harder to miss.
We already have another front-of-package system in Australia and New Zealand called the Healthy Star Rating system, where foods are graded on their overall health from 1 to 5 stars. The problem with that system is that the ratings are determined by guidelines, so cereals loaded with grains typically get up to 4 stars while cream gets 1 star because of the saturated fat.
So for us the idea of putting teaspoons on the front is particularly good, as it would replace something that's already there and considerably worse.
|
Some stores here (including where I work) use a rating system called "Guiding Stars". Food and grocery products are rated 1-3 stars, according to the typical healthy guidelines, and the rating appears on the shelf tag, not the packaging itself. Not everything is rated though, since the ratings only cover "good" (1 star), "better" (2 stars), and "best" (3 stars). Other reasons there might not be a rating is that the product is too new to have received a rating yet, has no calories (such as bottled water), baby formula, or anything with a medicinal value.
A while back, they offered a small discount to employees (we rarely get any kind of discount at all) on anything we bought that had received guiding stars. I saw the discount when co-workers bought granola bars, lower sugar cereals, whole grain breads, veggies and fruits, low fat dairy, etc - no surprise there at all.
But one day during the time we had our little discount, I did a little shopping, and was quite shocked to see on my receipt that there was a guiding star discount for the container of chicken livers, and also the whole pork loin I bought that day. I have no idea how many stars either one received, because there were no shelf tags for either. (The ratings still applied, even if we don't yet have the shelf tags designating that something was a guiding stars item) I knew that chicken livers were a nutritional powerhouse, but figured that the fat content alone would give them enough demerits to negate any nutritional value, and prevent them from even earning one star, so that was quite a surprise. The whole pork loin was almost as much of a surprise, because a whole pork loin generally has a layer of fat along the top of it. They trim it pretty close, but still - fat content!!!!
|