Labeling Added Sugar: 3 Reasons to Support FDA’s Proposed Rule to Include the Percent Daily Value

, former analyst, Center for Science & Democracy | July 30, 2015, 2:27 pm EDT
Bookmark and Share

Last week, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced it was amending its proposed rule on updating the Nutrition Facts label to include a recommended maximum percent daily value (%DV) for added sugar. The original proposed rule, announced in March 2014, included a line for added sugar separate from total sugar but provided no context for people to understand the implications of the amount of added sugar in a given product the way they could for protein, fat, and sodium.

Following recommendations in the Scientific Report of the U.S. Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC), which UCS supported, the FDA’s decision to update its proposed labeling rule to reflect the scientific evidence on added sugar is a positive and welcome next step. Here are three reasons why.

1) Relying on science to inform policy

Experts are finding increasing evidence that excessive sugar consumption—whether from sugar cane, sugar beets, or corn—has been implicated in a myriad of health problems. Sugar, in the amounts and frequency Americans are consuming it, causes tooth decay. It is also associated with weight gain and with the rise in the incidence of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, high triglycerides, and hypertension. The association between sugar and these chronic metabolic diseases is separate from sugar’s effect on total caloric intake and exclusive of its effect on obesity.

Sugar can also activate the brain’s reward and craving centers, and high sugar consumption can stimulate addiction-like behaviors. In addition, added sugar, particularly from sugar-sweetened beverages, is a source of empty calories—harmful because they displace calories in more nutritious foods.

Like experts at the World Health Organization and the American Heart Association, the DGAC recommended in its Scientific Report that people consume no more than 10 percent of their daily calories from added sugar. In order to follow that science-based recommendation, people need to see the %DV for added sugar on packaged foods and beverages, as the FDA is proposing.

2) Fighting food industry misinformation

It’s hardly a secret that the food industry will oppose the FDA’s new proposal. Food and beverage manufacturers and their trade associations overwhelmingly opposed the original proposed rule to simply include a separate line for added sugar.

sugar-tactics

In our 2014 sugar reports, we documented the different ways the food industry works to misinform the public on added sugar. This graphic summarizes their tactics.

As UCS documented in two 2014 reports—Added Sugar, Subtracted Science and Sugar-coating Science—the food industry has gone out of its way to persuade the public to eat more sugar.  They’ve attacked the science, lobbied policy makers, and spent billions on advertising and high-powered PR firms. Along the way, they’ve to make sugar-laden products appear healthy and have even pushed sugar on diabetics and children under the guise of social responsibility.  We only celebrate Halloween once a year, but thanks to Big Sugar too many Americans are overdosing every day on the added sugar equivalent of a Halloween haul.

The FDA’s proposed changes to the Nutrition Facts label won’t magically stop food industry misinformation campaigns but will provide one more tool to empower the public.

3) Supporting the public’s right to know

Simply put, we have the right to know what’s in our food, and the current Nutrition Facts label doesn’t provide enough information about added sugar. Most people aren’t familiar with the 61 names for sugar and therefore cannot recognize them in the ingredients list. And without a %DV for added sugar, a separate line for the amount, whether it lists grams or the more familiar teaspoons, doesn’t tell people how much is too much.

Ultimately, the ubiquity of added sugar in our food and beverages means eating healthy foods is not just a matter of consumer choice, as the food industry would like us to believe. It’s hard to avoid added sugar even when we want to, and we need all the information we can get just to understand the scope of the problem.

The FDA’s updated proposed rule to the Nutrition Facts label to include %DV for added sugar is a welcome step in the right direction and would be a victory for science-informed policy if and when the rule is finalized. Tell the FDA you support their proposed changes by submitting a comment on the proposed rule. And tweet your opposition to food industry misinformation and efforts to block science informed policy on added sugar at the hashtag #bullsugar.

Sugar---tobacco

Posted in: Food and Agriculture, Science and Democracy Tags: , , , , , ,

Support from UCS members make work like this possible. Will you join us? Help UCS advance independent science for a healthy environment and a safer world.

Show Comments


Comment Policy

UCS welcomes comments that foster civil conversation and debate. To help maintain a healthy, respectful discussion, please focus comments on the issues, topics, and facts at hand, and refrain from personal attacks. Posts that are commercial, self-promotional, obscene, rude, or disruptive will be removed.

Please note that comments are open for two weeks following each blog post. UCS respects your privacy and will not display, lend, or sell your email address for any reason.

  • Penelope Pane

    I think this is an important step in making consumers aware that they are consuming more sugars than they even thought and may make it easier for them to know what it is doing to there health.. It is a positive step.

  • Richard Solomon

    The food industry is doing what the tobacco and fossil fuel industries have done for years: dispute and discredit the science in order to protect their profits. For those interested, one can read Merchants of Doubt. It outlines how these industries have done this very effectively for the last 50+ years. To be forewarned is to be forearmed!

  • Amanda Sipe

    These labels would provide more information to the consumers.

    These labels would surely make people more aware but right now as well it is not that difficult to find out the sugar or calorie contents in foodstuffs.

    When i had to lose 22 pounds and was following the diet of lisa plog, the diet advised me regarding approximate calories and that helped me lose those 22 pounds. Google for “lisa plog diet plans” and you would be able to find her diet.

    It is important to look into your own diet choices instead of waiting for the government to do something.

    • No one method is going to magically solve the diet-related health crisis we are facing. It’s great that you were able to lose weight by paying attention to calories, but one of the big problems with added sugar is that over-consumption is linked to negative health impacts like cardiovascular disease independent of weight gain. With added sugar, it’s not just about the calories. It’s about the amount of added sugar, and the current label doesn’t tell us what we need to know. Moreover, with added sugar in some 74% of packaged foods, it’s hard to make the case that avoiding added sugar is purely about personal diet choices.