The Wall Street Journal published two interesting articles last week that may, in one case, apply to the world of health and diet and, in the other case directly applies. The first said the FDA's Office of Criminal Investigations should be more active. But, it also mentioned that an appellate judge had reversed a case ruling from a lower court where the FDA had charged a food wholesaler with misbranding the labels on their food product.
Hmm, on the one hand the FDA announce s(they did so in a letter to a senator) they will increase their prosecution of food industry executives, but one of their officials said they will do so with considerable thoughtfulness. The article itself shows why they have to, since their 2007 case got reversed.
The other article said the agency has warned a number of food and beverage makers that they must stick to government labeling requirements. They're particularly concerned about unproven health-benefit claims that don't help us as consumers decide which foods are healthy and which aren't.
Good so far, but I want to see this in action. While walking down the aisles of our favorite supermarket, I've see cereals I wouldn't dream of eating be labeled "a healthy choice" and that's just the beginning. Another example is "no trans fat" in products that still have lots (I define this as >4) grams of saturated fat per helping. One ice cream "snack" mentioned has 20 grams of saturated fat per serving.
The proof is in the pudding; I'll be happy if the FDA does crack down on labeling, but in the meantime I'll continue to read labels carefully and to do most of my supermarket shopping in the outer ring where the fruits and vegetables (and dairy products) are.