• home
• consulting services
• food startup/tune-up kit
• food biz/nutrition links
• food/nutrition bloopers
• about us/contact

Food/Nutrition Bloopers from Restaurants,
Food Companies, Web sites and Print Media

The following are actual quotes or observations. The latest entries are at the top; our comments are in italics. Some of these errors have been subsequently corrected by their source and some have not.

139. The Nutrition Facts label for a frozen pizza product indicates 5.9 g total fat, 1.6 g saturated fat, 8.6 mg cholesterol and 2 g “honey.”

All Nutrition Facts labels must follow a standard format, which is set forth in the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations. Included in the regulations are rounding rules for nutrient data and the requirement for particular nutrients to be declared. A value of 5.9 g for fat is unacceptable; it should be rounded to 6 g fat. Saturated fat in this case should be rounded to 1.5 g, and cholesterol to 10 mg. Additionally, “honey” is allowed on the ingredient label, but not on the Nutrition Facts label; rather, the label should declare grams of “sugar,” defined as “the sum of all free mono- and disaccharides” (which includes honey and other caloric sweeteners).

138. The press release for a super premium ice cream with “no sugar added” describes the product as “healthy.”

This product has as much (or more) fat and saturated fat as an equal-weight portion of conventional ice cream sweetened with real sugar. In fact, it has much more than the maximums of 3 g fat and 1 g saturated fat permitted for a food to be called “healthy” or to make any health claims. Substituting fake (non- or low-caloric) sugars for real sugar does not make a food healthy. Levels of fat, saturated fat, sodium and other nutrients are the controlling factors in use of the term “healthy.”

Truly better alternatives: Haagen Dazs Vanilla Frozen Yogurt (a serving has a fraction of the fat and saturated fat, plus more than double the protein and calcium); and Starbucks Mocha Frappuccino Bar (more protein, calcium and fiber, plus it’s low in fat and saturated fat – and passes the legally “healthy” tests). Both provide better nutrition on a per calorie basis than the “no sugar added” product. Find their nutrition stats and more at www.winningfoods.com/sweets.html.

137. A tortilla manufacturer’s press release states, “our corn tortillas are gluten free and wheat free.”

All corn tortillas are gluten free and wheat free – by definition they’re made with corn instead of wheat!

136. The press release for a soy-based snack states that the American Heart Association has added soy to “its list of foods known to prevent heart disease.”

The AHA has no such list. No one food can “prevent” heart disease (too many factors are involved), although eating a diet that is rich in certain foods, such as soy, may reduce the risk of heart disease. Helping reduce risk and preventing are two very different things. The FDA does not allow claims in labeling or advertising that a food can prevent disease.

135. The protein-boosted cookies and brownies of a New York bakery are being described by various magazines and newspapers as “healthy” and by the manufacturer as “better for the body”. Fat content per serving ranges from 4.5 g to 21 g; saturated fat ranges from 2.5 g to 12 g; fiber is 1-2 g.

While these products may be higher in protein (up to 11 g total per serving) than most baked goods, they are still high in fat and saturated fat and thus are disqualified from making any direct or implied claims of “healthy” (cannot have more than 3 g fat and 1 g saturated fat per serving to qualify). Also, 1-2 g of fiber is not a significant improvement over other baked goods, which are often in that range, particularly those that contain significant amounts of chocolate, whole grains or nuts (all contain fiber). Boosting a high-fat product with protein does not make it healthy.

134. A large agribusiness company states in radio advertisements that it is a “maker of cholesterol-free vegetable oil.”

All vegetable oil is cholesterol-free! (Cholesterol exists only in animals, not plants or their seeds/nuts, from which oils are made.) A claim of “cholesterol-free” on a vegetable oil product label requires a statement 1) clarifying that all vegetable oil is cholesterol-free, and 2) disclosing the high fat content. It is likely that using the claim in a radio ad without the clarifying statements is a violation of FDA regulations.

133. A major online food newsletter describes yogurt-covered dried fruits as a “healthy alternative” to the chocolate-covered versions.

“Yogurt”-covered treats contain little yogurt, but lots of sugar and palm kernel oil, which is higher in saturated fat than typical chocolate coatings. The only thing healthy about these treats is the fruit.

132. A press release states that hazelnut oil is “a natural source of…protein.”

The nuts contain protein (about 4.5 g protein per 1 oz serving), but the oil extracted from the nuts does not. All oils are almost 100% fat.

131. In an interview with a major business magazine, a top soft drink and snack foods executive defends snack food products, saying that at least they disclose nutrition information, whereas on fast food products (hamburgers, etc.) “you don’t get that.”

Most of the big fast food chains DO provide nutrition for their menu items (usually in a brochure, available upon request), and have been doing so for five or more years. They are only required to do so for items that carry a nutrition or health claim (“low-fat,” “heart healthy,” etc.), but most provide nutrition for all permanent menu items, claim or no claim. Packaged snack food products provide a Nutrition Facts disclosure because it is required by law.

130. A major consumer magazine provides a recipe in its current issue for a “super low-cal” cake. The magazine’s calculations show the cake to have 190 calories per slice.

The maximum that a “low-calorie” food item can have (not including main dishes/entrees) is 40 calories per reference amount (standard, defined serving size – 80 g for a slice of cake). A slice of this cake could not be called “low calorie” if it were a packaged food product, and it should not be called “low calorie” in publications. Very few foods are truly low in calories. Examples are some fruits, vegetables (and other foods that contain a lot of water and fiber), and some foods with artificial sweeteners and/or artificial (i.e., indigestible) fats. Just because something is lower in calories than other similar foods does not mean it is “low calorie.”

129. A “multigrain” bread containing significant amounts of whole grains and some seeds shows 0 g fiber on its Nutrition Facts label.

The nutrition label is incorrect. This product must have at least 1 g fiber per serving, probably 2 g, and is missing out by not advertising a major asset of products containing whole grains – the fiber!

128. A food product shows 0 g carbohydrate and 6 g fiber on its Nutrition Facts label.

Fiber is a subset of (included in) carbohydrate, so if a product has 6 g fiber it has at least 6 g carbohydrate. This error is a tip-off that other data in the Nutrition Facts label may be incorrect/misstated.

127. A whole-grain bread using sprouted grains and additional ingredients commonly used in bread (grains, sweeteners, leavening agents) makes a claim of “low carb” on its package.

Even if there were a definition for “low carbohydrate” and such a claim were legal (see Blooper No. 126), it would never apply to a food product that gets a majority of its calories from carbohydrates, such as this and just about any other bread. One slice of this bread has 11 g carbohydrate (44 calories) according to its Nutrition Facts label, out of a total of 60 calories; i.e., it is 73% carbohydrate. A more acceptable/factual (and legal) statement would be “X% less carbohydrate per slice than X bread.”

126. A line of “functional” breads is advertised online with multiple nutrition and health claims: “very low in fat,” “very low in sodium,” “low in carbohydrates,” and contains an ingredient (flaxseed), which “burns excess body fat, lowers cholesterol and strengthens the immune system.”

All of the breads have 4 g fat or more per serving, so they cannot be called “low fat.” All have more than 140 mg sodium per serving, so they cannot be called “low sodium.” And there is no standard definition for “low carbohydrate,” so that claim cannot be used for any food product sold in the U.S. As for the health claims, none of these can be legally used (see FDA’s guide to Health Claims).

125. An article in a major U.S. newspaper on the benefits and dangers of eating fish states that fish are “low in calories.”

Even without any added fat, fish, shellfish, etc. contain more than the maximum 40 calories per 3 oz. cooked portion (one standard serving) allowed to qualify for “low calorie” status (21 CFR 101.60(b)(2)). Even a 3 oz portion of one of the least fatty seafood choices, lobster, has 83 calories. This is because protein, which is plentiful in seafood (up to about 87% of non-water weight), contributes 4 calories per gram and a typical 3 oz portion of lobster has about 17 g protein = about 70 calories just for the protein. Finfish can have up to 140 calories for a single portion (cooked with no sauce or added fats). We know of no 3 oz portion of cooked seafood that has 40 calories or less.

124. As reported in the online version of a city newspaper, research from a team of food scientists at a major university has been “casting doubt on just how important vitamin C is to fruits and veggies being healthy.” The scientists “found that less than 0.4% of an apple’s antioxidant activity comes from vitamin C.”

Not surprising, since apples are a lousy source of vitamin C, as has been no secret for decades. Maybe if they had tested fruits that are higher in vitamin C (citrus fruits, strawberries, mangoes, etc.), they would “discover” that the importance of vitamin C in a particular fruit or veggie depends on how much it has – and that amount varies widely among fruits and vegetables, so a generalization is useless. Basically, this was a (poorly interpreted, and/or reported) study most likely funded by a canned food processors association to show that some nutrients in canned foods are not destroyed (as most vitamin C and other water-soluble and heat-sensitive vitamins are), and may actually be enhanced in some canned foods.

123. A television news station’s Web site states that the “best source for omega-3s is any type of seafood – including salmon, lobster and shrimp.”

While salmon is a good source of omega-3 fatty acids (see Blooper No. 119 below), shrimp and lobster (especially) are not. This is a no-brainer, because both are low in total fat (1 g or less in a 3 oz serving of cooked shrimp or lobster), the portion that is polyunsaturated is less than 1/3 of that, and the omega-3s are then again a portion of that (although the majority of it). Salmon has six times more total fat and three times more omega-3s. Generally, the fattier the fish/seafood, the better the source of omega-3 fats (they are “fats,” after all).

122. A newspaper article on trans fat in foods states that “food packages that make health claims…must list poly- or monounsaturated fats along with saturated fats.”

Not true (as of Sept. 2002). However, a food product sold in the U.S. that claims “no saturated fat” must contain “less than 0.5 g saturated fat and less than 0.5 g trans fatty acid per serving” (21 CFR 101.62(c)(1)(i)). But even then, the nutrition label is only required to break down fat content into total fat and saturated fat.

121. A food e-newsletter states that bison meat is “low calorie.”

While bison may be lower in fat and therefore higher in protein than other meats (such as beef and chicken), it does not qualify as “low-calorie,” a term which is allowed only for foods that contain 40 calories or less per reference amount, which is 3 oz (about 100 g) for meats. Bison, according to the (US) National Bison Association, has 143 calories per 100 g. It is indeed lower in calories than meats that are higher in fat, simply because it must therefore have more protein (meat is mainly protein, fat and water) and protein provides fewer calories per gram (4 calories) than fat (9 calories for every gram of fat). But it is impossible for 100 g of meat to be low in calories (40 cal. or less) unless it has been pumped up with lots of water, in which case it can no longer be compared to real (unprocessed) meat.

120. Compared to its plain macadamia nuts, a company’s honey roasted macadamia nuts (same serving size) is labeled as having 6 g more saturated fat (9 g versus 3 g), 5 g more fiber (8 g versus 3), and much more vitamin A (6% of the Daily Value versus 0%) and vitamin C (8% versus 0%). The only ingredient difference is the presence of sugar and honey in the honey roasted nuts.

Honey and sugar do not contain any saturated fat, fiber, vitamin A or vitamin C. The two labels should be almost identical except for sugar content. OOPS!

119. A dietitian states on a health/fitness Web site that salmon is “high in omega-3 oils,” and one sentence later says that “salmon is…low in fat.”

It can’t be both! Yes, salmon is a fairly good source of omega-3 fatty acids, but that’s because salmon is high in total fat. Only fish that are fairly high in fat will have enough omega-3 fats to make them good sources of these beneficial essential fatty acids. This is why canned tuna is not a good source of omega-3 fatty acids (despite many media/dietitian “bloopettes” professing otherwise).

118. Many products (such as cookies) are sweetened with fruit juice concentrates instead of sugar. Often these products show significant vitamin C content (e.g., 15% of DV), with juice concentrates being the only possible source of that vitamin C.

Vitamin C is present in many fruit juices when first prepared from the fresh fruit and if stored frozen. However, juice concentrates that are cooked or baked in a product do not retain much, if any of the original vitamin C. Vitamin C is very sensitive to heat and exposure to air.

117. A biscotti manufacturer describes all its products as “healthy” on the packaging. Some are low in fat (although all appear to be because the serving size is too small). None has at least 10% of the DV for at least one of the following: protein, fiber (not even listed on the Nutrition Facts – another Blooper), vitamin A, vitamin C, iron or calcium.

Not all low-fat products meet the requirements for a claim of “healthy,” including these products. To make a claim of “healthy,” a food product must not only be low in fat, but other criteria, pertaining to saturated fat content, cholesterol, sodium and other nutrients, must be met as well.

116. A bakery gives its name on retail product packaging, but no address of any kind.

Under 21 CFR 101.5, all packaged food products sold in the US must “specify conspicuously the name and place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor.” At a minimum, the place of business must include city and state. “The street address may be omitted if it is shown in a current city directory or telephone directory.”

115. A cracker product is labeled “healthy…low sodium…low fat,” and its Web site further describes the product as “low calorie.” Its Nutrition Facts label shows the following for a 1/2 oz serving: 65 cal, 2 g fat, 85 mg sodium, 0 g fiber, 2 g protein, vitamins A and C and calcium O%, and iron 6%.

Even if the reference serving size for crackers were 1/2 oz (it’s 1 oz), this product still could not make a claim of “healthy” (at least one of the following must be at least 10% of the Daily Value: fiber, protein, vitamin A, vitamin C, calcium or iron) or a claim of “low calorie” (no more than 40 calories per serving). And when the proper serving size is used (1 oz), no claims for healthy, sodium, calories or fat would be permitted.

114. A diet book by a dietitian recommends getting most of our dietary fat in the form of monounsaturated fats. The sources of these fats most promoted in the book are peanuts and peanut butter. The diet also recommends consuming foods lowest in saturated fat.

Of eight common nuts (almonds, cashews, hazelnuts, macadamias, peanuts, pecans, pistachios and walnuts), peanuts (which are technically not a nut but a legume) are next to last in terms of percentage of fat coming from monounsaturated fat (only walnuts have less monounsaturated fat). They also are the next-to-highest in percentage of fat coming from saturated fat of these nuts (only cashews are higher). When other assets of nuts are taken into consideration (such as calcium and iron), it makes more sense to choose almonds, hazelnuts or even macadamia nuts (and their butters) rather than peanuts. The stats on peanuts simply do not add up to a “high-mono, low-saturated fat” powerhouse.

Nut Stats: Peanuts have 50% of their fat coming from monounsaturated fatty acids; almonds have 65%; macadamias have 77%; hazelnuts have 81%. Peanuts have 14% of their fat coming from saturated fatty acids; macadamias have 12%; almonds have 10%; hazelnuts have 8%. In addition, almonds, hazelnuts and macadamias are better sources of calcium and iron than peanuts.

113. A news article (from a press release) claims that “goat meat is lean and higher in protein than chicken.”

Compared to chicken breast meat, the leanest cuts of goat meat are on the average only slightly lower in fat, and are actually a bit lower in protein. But the difference is not significant, so white meat chicken is the wrong thing to compare with goat if the object is to make goat meat look superior.

112. An online food industry newsletter describes a new frozen fruit bar product as “low-calorie” and “low carbohydrate.”

“Low-calorie” products cannot have more than 40 calories per serving. The product mentioned here has 130 calories per serving, and therefore is not low in calories. The term “low-carbohydrate” is not authorized for use in describing any food products, and has no definition.

111. A best selling skin care/diet book frequently mentions the importance of getting the fatty acids known as essential fatty acids (EFAs) in the diet. It states that EFAs are “good fats,” then states that one type of EFA, omega-6s, are “unhealthy fatty acids,” which it says are “most often found in animal fats.” The author goes on to recommend eating shellfish to increase levels of omega-3 fats, and to consume olive oil and olives for EFAs (implying both EFAs). On one page he says that omega-3s “stop inflammation” and omega-6s “cause inflammation;” 29 pages later he says that “both of these oils…fight inflammation in the body.”

The author’s statements are at various times contradictory, misleading and simply inaccurate. There are two “essential fatty acids” that the human body cannot make on its own (thus we must consume them): linolenic acid (an “omega-3” fatty acid) and linoleic acid (an “omega-6” fatty acid). Deficiency of the latter is rare: Linoleic acid is plentiful in vegetable sources (e.g., corn, safflower and soybean oils) compared to animal sources, and it is suggested that we reduce intake of such oils to establish a more beneficial ratio of linoleic to linolenic. Notable sources of omega-3s are fatty fish (such as salmon), canola oil and flax seed. Shellfish (which are low in all fats) and olive oil (which is high in monounsaturated fats and has twice the saturated fat and only 6% of the omega-3s found in canola oil) are not good sources. Also, the book’s claim that the fat present in lean cuts of poultry is somehow “better” than the fat in lean cuts of beef, pork, etc. is debatable. The fatty acid profile (i.e., ratio of saturated to monounsaturated to polyunsaturated fatty acids) from one meat to another (including poultry) is very similar, and variations are more a factor of the animal’s diet.

110. A dietitian’s new book on mood and libido-enhancing foods states, as reported in an online food news article, that “omega-3 fatty acids [are] plentiful in canned tuna,” and hence “eating canned tuna…uplifts moods and libidos.”

Fatty acids (of any kind) are only “plentiful” in foods that have a significant amount of fat. Canned tuna is very high in protein, but low in fat, including omega-3 fatty acids. Canned white tuna has less than 1 g total fat per 100 g serving, and an insignificant amount is from omega-3 fatty acids. Canned white tuna (packed in water) has up to 3 g total fat per 100 g serving, with a little more than 1/2 g from omega-3s. Salmon (a more fatty fish) is a much better source of omega-3 fatty acids (1-2 g per 100 g serving, cooked).

109. A packaged dried kelp (seaweed) product from Japan shows Nutrition Facts in English for the US market (with a serving size of 50 g) and a separate nutrition panel in Japanese (with a serving size of 100 g).

Even after adjusting for serving size, the values given in the two nutrition labels do not even come close to matching. For example, the English version shows 0 calories for 50 g and the Japanese version shows 190 calories for a 100 g portion. Values for sodium, protein, carbohydrate and fiber also do not equate. Be aware that many nutrition labels on imported products are not accurate and often useless as a source of nutrition information.

108. An “11% juice,” “carrot-orange” beverage product is labeled “healthy refreshment.” According to the Nutrition Facts label, one serving of this product has no significant amounts of vitamin A or vitamin C.

Despite the predominant mention of carrot and orange in this product, it does not appear to contain very much of either juice, or the beverage would contain significant amounts of vitamins A and C. And since it does not contain at least 10% of either protein, fiber, vitamin A, vitamin C, calcium or iron, this product cannot legally be described as “healthy.” The predominant ingredients are water and high fructose corn syrup.

107. In the online version of a national TV news station’s article about diet/nutrition, a dietitian includes “leafy green veggies” in a list of foods that provide omega-3 essential fatty acids.

Leafy green vegetables contain virtually no fat of any kind, including omega-3 fatty acids. Fatty fish, flax seed and certain nuts are much better sources.

106. A press release promoting veal characterizes it as a “low cholesterol” meat.

While some cuts of veal are lower in fat than some cuts of beef, pork or chicken, the difference is not that great among lean cuts of each, and no cut of veal is low in cholesterol (in fact it has more cholesterol than most equal-size portions of lean pork, chicken and beef). To be called “low in cholesterol” a serving (3 oz cooked) must have no more than 20 mg cholesterol and no more than 2 g saturated fat. The average piece of lean veal meat has only 2-3 g saturated fat, but cholesterol averages around 90-100 mg, which is far from “low.” Veal also is lower in iron than most meats (including all red meats), so nutritionally it is not superior.

105. A major US newspaper states that “mushrooms are nutritional powerhouses:…high in vegetable proteins and rich in zinc, iron, fiber…”

Mushrooms are not high in any of the above. To be “high in,” “rich in” or “an excellent source of” a nutrient, the food must provide at least 20% of the RDI for that nutrient in a serving (serving sizes are defined by FDA). A 100 g serving of raw mushrooms (enoki, portabello, or agaricus bisporus (basic white mushroom)), which is a little more than 1 cup (and a little larger than the 85 g defined serving size), has 4-6% of the RDI for protein, zinc, iron and fiber, except for enoki, which have about 10% of the RDI for fiber. There are nutritional differences among the different varieties of mushrooms, but these three mushrooms are the most commonly consumed and they do not even come close to the 20% level.

104. A major newspaper’s Health & Fitness section compares the nutritional benefits of apricots, plums, nectarines and peaches. It states that per 100 g serving “plums and apricots each have 10 mg vitamin C, vs. 7 mg for peaches and none for nectarines;” that “all have 1 g of fat and 1 g saturated fat;” and that “peaches and apricots offer protein (1 gram),…but only apricots offer beta carotene and just a pinch of salt.”

Most of the above information is either not true or not significant in comparison to the other fruits. Nectarines have 6-7 mg vitamin C (not significantly lower than the others with 7 or 10); all have less than 1 g fat and no appreciable saturated fat (it would be declared as “0” on a nutrition label); all are a poor source of protein (1 g from fruit is trivial); all have some beta carotene (although apricots do have the most); and all are very low in sodium (as is typical of fruits). It sounds like someone at the apricot board has sent in a press release with poorly researched and/or misleading data and the reporter simply repeated it. A healthy diet includes a variety of fruits to ensure intake of a variety of nutrients (including antioxidants not mentioned in the article and some yet to be discovered).

103. A pretzel product that includes a small amount of soy flour advertises “WITH SOY PROTEIN” on the package.

This is an implied health claim for soy protein and therefore, pursuant to US nutrition labeling regulations, the product must contain at least 6.25 g soy protein per serving, and the actual amount of soy protein per serving must be provided on the package. The Nutrition Facts label for this product shows a total of only 3 g protein (from all sources) per 1 oz serving, so there is no way this product has 6.25 g protein from soy.

102. A very large frozen food manufacturer includes “1/2 vegetable” in its diet exchange values for its “baked fish with cheddar shells” product.

This product once contained broccoli, but now has no vegetables. Apparently they are still using the diabetic exchange information for the former version of the product. The vitamin C content (15% of Daily Values) in the Nutrition Facts label also appears to be based on the former (broccoli-containing) version of the product. It is not likely that the current version contains that much vitamin C when lemon juice is the only source of vitamin C in the product.

101. An online food industry publication recently included in a list of new food products a frozen, cheeseless, grilled vegetable pizza and described it as “fat-free.”

This product actually has 2 g fat per serving (according to its Nutrition Facts label), so it is not “fat-free” (or nonfat), a term reserved for foods with less than 0.5 g fat per serving. It should be described as “low-fat.” The fat comes from oil in the crust and most likely on the grilled vegetables.

Prior Bloopers: bloopers 60 through 100.

Send us your favorite nutrition bloopers! You may “name names” (of products, publications, etc.), but we will not identify these names on the Bloopers Page.

home consulting services food startup/tune-up kit food biz/nutrition links food/nutrition bloopers about us/contact

Copyright © 1997-2008, Palate Works