Put Me Down as Another Who Did Not Know
May. 5th, 2009 11:07 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shipperxThe Fine Print: What's Really in a Lot of 'Healthy' Foods
From the Wall Street Journal
A lot of Americans think they're eating a healthy diet these days. But it's easy to be fooled by our assumptions and the ways that food manufacturers play on them.
Producers must mention the added ingredients on the package -- but the lettering can be small: just one-third the size of the largest letter in the product's name. If you're trying to watch your sodium to cut your risk of high blood pressure, heart attack and stroke, it pays to check the Nutrition Facts label. Untreated chicken has about 45 to 60 mgs of sodium per four-ounce serving. So-called enhanced or "plumped" chicken has between 200 and 400 mgs of sodium per serving, almost as much as a serving of fast-food french fries.
Adding salt water became widespread when big discount stores began selling groceries and wanted to sell chicken at uniform weights and prices. Plumping packaged chicken helps even out the weight. But that means consumers are paying for added salt water at chicken prices -- an estimated $2 billion worth every year, according to the Truthful Labeling Coalition, a group of chicken producers that don't enhance their products.
Makers of enhanced chicken, including some of the biggest U.S. producers, say many consumers prefer it in blind taste tests and that it stays moister. Ray Atkinson, a spokesman for Pilgrim's Pride, says the company sells both enhanced and unenhanced chicken because consumers ask for it. He also notes that even at 330 mg of sodium, the enhanced chicken qualifies for the American Heart Association's mark of approval.
A survey released this week from Foster Farms, a member of the Truthful Labeling Coalition, found that 63% of consumers are unaware of the practice, and 82% believe that salt-water-injected chicken shouldn't carry the all-natural label. The telephone survey polled 1,000 consumers on the West Coast.
Take chicken. The average American eats about 90 pounds of it a year, more than twice as much as in the 1970s, part of the switch to lower-fat, lower-cholesterol meat proteins. But roughly one-third of the fresh chicken sold in the U.S. is "plumped" with water, salt and sometimes a seaweed extract called carrageenan that helps it retain the added water. The U.S. Department of Agriculture says chicken processed this way can still be labeled "all natural" or "100% natural" because those are all natural ingredients, even though they aren't naturally found in chicken.
Complete article covering other 'healthy' foods
From the Wall Street Journal
A lot of Americans think they're eating a healthy diet these days. But it's easy to be fooled by our assumptions and the ways that food manufacturers play on them.
Producers must mention the added ingredients on the package -- but the lettering can be small: just one-third the size of the largest letter in the product's name. If you're trying to watch your sodium to cut your risk of high blood pressure, heart attack and stroke, it pays to check the Nutrition Facts label. Untreated chicken has about 45 to 60 mgs of sodium per four-ounce serving. So-called enhanced or "plumped" chicken has between 200 and 400 mgs of sodium per serving, almost as much as a serving of fast-food french fries.
Adding salt water became widespread when big discount stores began selling groceries and wanted to sell chicken at uniform weights and prices. Plumping packaged chicken helps even out the weight. But that means consumers are paying for added salt water at chicken prices -- an estimated $2 billion worth every year, according to the Truthful Labeling Coalition, a group of chicken producers that don't enhance their products.
Makers of enhanced chicken, including some of the biggest U.S. producers, say many consumers prefer it in blind taste tests and that it stays moister. Ray Atkinson, a spokesman for Pilgrim's Pride, says the company sells both enhanced and unenhanced chicken because consumers ask for it. He also notes that even at 330 mg of sodium, the enhanced chicken qualifies for the American Heart Association's mark of approval.
A survey released this week from Foster Farms, a member of the Truthful Labeling Coalition, found that 63% of consumers are unaware of the practice, and 82% believe that salt-water-injected chicken shouldn't carry the all-natural label. The telephone survey polled 1,000 consumers on the West Coast.
Take chicken. The average American eats about 90 pounds of it a year, more than twice as much as in the 1970s, part of the switch to lower-fat, lower-cholesterol meat proteins. But roughly one-third of the fresh chicken sold in the U.S. is "plumped" with water, salt and sometimes a seaweed extract called carrageenan that helps it retain the added water. The U.S. Department of Agriculture says chicken processed this way can still be labeled "all natural" or "100% natural" because those are all natural ingredients, even though they aren't naturally found in chicken.
Complete article covering other 'healthy' foods
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-05-05 08:14 pm (UTC)Most of the time, I don't bother to brine chicken. I did it once recently when I was roasting a whole chicken. It was good, but I don't think it was enough better than plain old roasted chicken to make it worth the trouble.
I think putting rosemary and butter under the skin improved it more than the brining did.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-05 04:27 pm (UTC)When you go to the grocery store, the "unnatural chicken" is the cheapest one. That's why people buy it. And so does my family. We can't afford 4-6 small organic chicken breasts for $12. We buy the 20 pack for $8 and freeze it.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-05 05:11 pm (UTC)Thanks for sharing -- I'll know to pay attention next time!
no subject
Date: 2009-05-05 05:35 pm (UTC)A couple years ago I read the fascinating In Defense of Food by Michael Pollan. It was an eye opening look at the food industry and how food is marketed. It was an informative, entertaining read.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-05 06:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-05 06:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-05 07:56 pm (UTC)I'll now be on the lookout. Thanks.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-06 12:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-06 11:49 am (UTC)