RoseGoesToYale Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 So after seeing that packets of watermelon iced tea from Korea was erroneously labeled as having a whopping 85 grams of sugar (which can't be possible, each packet is only 14g), I removed the American-printed label and saw a packet contains 12g of sugar. So then I added it up. A serving size is 14g, or one packet. Contained in that packet is 0.1g of total fat, 13 grams of total carbohydrates, and 30mg of sodium (no protein or cholesterol). That adds up to 13.4 grams, which can easily be rounded up to 14g. I tried the calculation again with a small box of Hello Panda (which ironically says made in the US). A serving size is 30 grams. 9g of total fat, no cholesterol, 90mg of sodium, 18g of total carbs, and 2g protein. 29.9g, almost spot-on. Then I tried it with a package of linguine from in Italy. A serving is 56g. 1g total fat, no cholesterol, no sodium, 41g of total carbs, and 7 grams of protein. 49 grams, which leaves 7 grams unaccounted for. Nutritional value per 100g of salmiakki... less than 0.5g of fat, 60g total carbs, 0.5g of protein, and 4.4g of salt (prob not necessarily sodium in this case). ~65g. Where's the other 35g? Some fig jam. Serving size 20g. No fat, no cholesterol, 10mg sodium, 16g total carbs, no protein. 16.1g. Where's the other 3.9? Clearly no one is required to be tremendously accurate about this (or there's a bunch of inert stuff in our food?) Any else care to join in? I'm bored 😂 Link to post Share on other sites
Lichley Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 You’re saying they add things to food specifically to make it more filling without any nutritional value?? My goodness how shocking Link to post Share on other sites
RoseGoesToYale Posted January 21, 2020 Author Share Posted January 21, 2020 6 minutes ago, Lichley said: You’re saying they add things to food specifically to make it more filling without any nutritional value?? My goodness how shocking Haha, true. But I'm surprised no one is required to state "Inert Ingredients" contents in grams as well. Link to post Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 Knock yourself out. Weighs 90g Link to post Share on other sites
Ashmedai Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 For wet ingredients there's things like water weight which wouldn't show, as well as potential things like preservatives, flavour enhancers etc. Link to post Share on other sites
Dreamer23 Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 Only nutritionally relevant ingredients will show up in the "Nutrition Information" section of a product - why would you need to know the exact quantity of water, spices, or who knows what?! (Also, how'd you break it down? you'd have to define some other molecule groups like "fats" and "proteins" - covering everything that exists would be a pretty insanely long list) It'd also make food trade secrets kinda pointless if you'd be giving away the exact mix (though I suspect that's just a minor factor) You'll still get your ingredients list (though that's ingredients, not nutrition information) - that's the one that's required to contain everything that's in there (and it's sorted by quantity, so as long as you know the nutritional breakdown of all those ingredients, you can approximate where those remaining grams go ) Link to post Share on other sites
Skycaptain Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 No mention of dietary fibre, common in grains and some vegetables, but indigestible Don't forget that when thay say Sodium they mean salt, which is heavier. It's when the quantities per 100g exceed 100g you really begin to wonder. Link to post Share on other sites
ExquisiteMystery Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 It's probably a rounding up issue. At least in the United States, labels are allowed to round down less healthy things ( like trans fats), by making a "serving" fall under the threshold. Also, they can round up things like fiber, to make it "easier for the common person to understand". Safest math is to read the amounts per whole package, and divide into whatever you actually have eaten. Also, plenty of things are hidden by flavoring, stabilizing agent, and preservatives. There are always reforms suggested. Don't even get me stared on allergy labelling in the US. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 Nothing here. Link to post Share on other sites
Skycaptain Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 Also if, say a bag of crisps weighs 100g, why do they say a serving is 30g? Link to post Share on other sites
Dreamer23 Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 On 1/21/2020 at 1:41 AM, Skycaptain said: Also if, say a bag of crisps weighs 100g, why do they say a serving is 30g? I mean, because who wouldn't share a pack of crisps with almost three other people?! Also very nice to make people not think about it too much. It also often gets into the malicious realm of rounding based on FDA rules. I generally always assume they select portion sizes to maximize the amount they can round down their nutrition label, so a "110" is probably a 114 etc. Can get really weird as well: Like this package of effectively raw sugar: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1280/3913/products/2_5d8a3a5c-cbe2-4f41-844f-5a98b105a06c_580x@2x.png?v=1482175121 1100 x "0" calories, where the 0 is a 4. If you make your portion size 1g you can sell pure sugar as no calories. Meaning you get a bag of 4400 calories with a label that says it has 0, which feels so insane to me Link to post Share on other sites
gisiebob Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 On 1/20/2020 at 4:35 PM, Anthracite_Impreza said: Knock yourself out. Weighs 90g right, kilojoules of energy...my jury's quite out on what unit is better, the magical calorie or the magically measured joule. while I like real measurements like the metric system of them, I think I might prefer the one that reminds you that what you are working with is well measured fantasy Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.