2 ms·
just as a datapoint: we learn to carefully (compulsively perhaps) read labels stateside, for all the reasons you mention. i.e., these same revelations and frus
by jjtheblunt 1y ago
just as a datapoint: we learn to carefully (compulsively perhaps) read labels stateside, for all the reasons you mention.
i.e., these same revelations and frustrations are shared by a huge swath of people born in the States (probably Canada too), and it is indeed a pain in the neck being continually paranoid about what nutritional rubbish is included in ingredient lists.
- jay_kyburz 1y agoFood labels in the US and Canada suck as well compared to the UK and Australia. How big is a serve, who's percent daily value? Those numbers just aren't useful. Here in Australia we have a column for grams per 100g by weight. It makes it much easier to compare foods.
- hvb2 1y agoUnits in the US make comparisons hard... Same problem in recipes...
- jay_kyburz 1y agoYou could just have percentage per weight. ie. This product is 30% sugar. Instead you have than x% of your recommended daily amount, if you are an average size American, eating an average size serving according to the FDA. How are you supposed to do anything with that.
- jjtheblunt 1y agothat sounds actually useful!
- tpmoney 1y agoThe RDV is based on a 2000 Calorie / day diet as noted on the same labels.