I have seen the NuVal system which is a scientic system where they have analysed the nutrients: carbs, fats and calories and given them a value.  The higher the value the better the food source.  I think it is cool.

"they saw that many consumers found the information difficult to understand and interpret, especially those with poor math and literacy skills"

Gosh, ya think?!

Uh ... after this comment within the second paragraph, I'm very skeptical.   I'm reminded of a similar initiative implemented in the 90s concerning cost per ounce.  One could/can look at the shelf label to determine the most cost effective choice based upon price per ounce.  Here we are two decades later and the hard-of-thinking still can't do sums.  It pays to take a calculator to the store and done one's own sums, since the "labels" are not always accurate or even there.      

I will still read the nutritional labels on the food in the stores regardless of what the store puts in front of me.  I prefer to do my own thinking, thank you.  

Is that a sledge hammer?

I think so ... I thought it was appropriate to expressing my perspective on breaking the "weight barrier" ... as it were.

That makes sense.  Sometimes you just have to lay down the law!

wow, if people would stick with whole foods like a tomato or an apple in the fresh foods section of a supermarket than I don't think they would have any problems staying healthy. If we buy everything in a box than we have no idea what it is, so we need all these SYSTEMS... I like that there are still 2 markets over here that sell only fresh fruits and veggies, going there you know that everything is healthy. its just unfortunate that there are so few left.

I pretty much know before I go into the store exactly what I'm going to buy.  When I make my list, I go into my store's website.  They have everything listed by aisle.  And, I can click on most items to find out nutritional content.  It helps me determine which spaghetti sauce, what pasta, frozen foods, etc., etc., I want to purchase.  I'm usually successful in sticking to my list.  Not only do I only buy the items I allow myself to eat, but it cuts down on the time in the store.

i think all these "nutrition guides" are not teaching people what really is healthy. all the companies that were listed fill their food with high fructose corn syrup and hydroginated oils, things that are really really bad for you. people need to learn to read the ingredients and make themselves aware of what they are actually eating, not just how many calories or grams of fat they are consuming.

I have been checking out some of our supermarkets for healthier brands. I buy all the fresh fruits and veggies, but when it comes to meat, I like the packaged versions as they are portioned and you can pick some very low fat ones. Such as beef burgers and turkey burgers. I compared a box of frozen regular beef burgers to the healthier choice (Blue Menu Brand) and they were by far superior with lower fat content and higher protein values. Same with the marinated chicken breasts, salmon burgers and sausages. Also, the frozen yogurt and regular yogurt, cereals, nut butters and even bread. There are lots of items we rely on that we need help in finding the healthier choices. I have compared the guides to regular brands and most are by far superior. You really do have to watch and be aware. Sure I could make some of these things by scratch, but as it is, I am in the kitchen most of the time. 99% of the vegetables and fruits I eat and feed my family are fresh. Need some shortcuts or I would never get out of the kitchen. Now the healthier brands are pricier, but well worth the money for the value.

I think we all know how to eat healthy, its just actually doing it. For example YOU know that eating 3 snickers bars isnt healthy or having McDonalds eveyrday too.

I just think it takes self control. My advice and this is how I went from 130lbs to 120 in 6 months. If at night you usually snack on Dorrritos or something bad cut it out for one night and see how much better you feel about yourself. Do it again the next night. Hang a picture of what u want to look like on your refridgerator. Look at that everytime u want to grab that ice cream. That will be your goal. and most importantly we all have to do some kind of excersise. If you dont have a gym, you can go outside for a walk. My mother knew a lady who lost 20 pounds in one summer just by walking outside after dinner everynight.

Good luck to us all!

~Sally NJ 31

I simply don't see what is so difficult about the regular nutrition pannels? They are straight forward and easy to use.

I can't help but think of the 'SmartChoice' label on Diet Pepsi ... which can only be considered 'smart' if 'smart' means 'calorie-free,' or the equivalent label on Baked Lays,' which may be 'smarter' than regular potato chips, but still pale in comparison to an actual potato, or (better still) a sweet potato.

Not to say I never drink diet sodas (or -- gasp! -- even regular ones, once in a while: I have a weakness for Cherry Coke, so I slot it in from time to time) or eat chips -- I do.  I just don't try to convince myself that I'm eating health food.  I still consider them, more or less, junk food.

Ultimately, I think most of us probably grasp the concept of good nutrition better than we realize, but we've all become quite terrified by the constant conflicting messages from the medical community and the sheer array of comestibles claiming nutritional superiority. 

Some of us were lucky enough to be raised with a healthy dose of skepticism toward all marketing claims -- I suspect that, for others, these labels may merely cloud the waters, and that ultimately they will lead people astray who might make better choices if they read the Nutrition Facts instead.

Perhaps the programs at Meijer, et al, are better designed -- I like the idea that the Healthy Foods program at Giant and Stop & Shop automatically endorses fresh produce -- but I still have my doubts.

When I read the title of this article, I was expecting that they were going to talk about the nutrition grade CC gives items.  Heck, maybe grocery stores would be better off using that.

Either way, for the most part, the people who would "need" these labels (i.e., cannot easily read nutrition info and make judgements based on that info) are likely not going to be represented in any comments posted here.  If you have easy access to the internet, you also have easy access to research - and therefore can decide for yourself what foods and brands are good for you.

The only thing i can see that this would really save is time in weeding out things that have a low grade or no grade in different brands of the same item - but you would still want to check the nutrition info and ingredient list on the highest-graded items, unless you really do want someone else choosing what you put into your body.

Here in the UK most supermarkets and brand names have Nutritional panels with percentage,grams % of daily allowence and are color coded, im not sure why you would want 6+ Different methods of identifying nutrition.

Some of the comments above are rather rude, and It is VERY easy to underestimate the hidden dangers in some foods, people are not too stupid to understand...the food companies are deliberatly trying to mislead people.

I was SHOCKED last week I went to my local co-op and checked the label on some sausages, The nutrition on the front said 'xx calories,xx salt,xxsugar,xxcarbs AND 'only' 4g SATURATED Fat per portion...I did a double take at seeing only 4g fat, until i realised they didnt list total fat, only saturated fat, which is incredibly misleading. The majority of people would see the 'only 4g' saturated fat and think it was healthy unless they read the back of the pack to find it was actually 16g fat per portion.

I have seen these and while they might make me look at an item I would otherwise have ignored, I frequently find, after scanning the ingredients and the label, that it is not as healthy as they make it seem.  Like others who posted their opinions, I find the best way to stay healthy, watch fat and calories and avoid lots of unnatural additives and colorings is to eat fresh (and frozen) vegetables and fruits, and avoid pre-prepared foods.  

Having said that, I think it's still a good idea for people who need that guidance.  It's a positive step in the right direction.  Hopefully, it will lead the public away from high calorie, high fat, preservative and additive laden foods. 

Or for that matter... Be the Hammer

And speaking of nutrition grades...Am I the only one who thinks that the cc system is up for an upgrade?  I mean, why does Meatlover's Pizza get a D+ but Soy Sauce get a B?  Soy Sauce is REALLY high in sodium, and at least the Meatlover's pizza has lots of calcium, vitamins, etc.  And, why is it possible to get an A for the day, and be nowhere near meeting my nutrition targets in calcium and iron?  And, some days I get a C+, but meet all my RDAs.  What gives?

OK, I'm done now.

I have been a label reader for many years. While it is good to see some groceries and companies with guidelines I will still read the labels for myself. I don't trust the stores or food producers to be accurate in assessing their own products. Buyer beware at all times.

libsterdc - totally agree with you - the grades listed on here are definitely wrong.  I find they vary from as much as D to A on something as simple as say Regular hot coffee vs. Regular Iced coffee.  I don't trust or use them.  I have 'reported' many 'bad grades' only to notice that years later they have not changed.

Regarding the actual article, I think it's going to take something that is fully regulated (like our current nutrition labels) in order to make it work.  Kudos to the supermarket for at least making an effort.  Shop on the perimeter of the store for the most healthy selections, and when in doubt - leave it out!!

Original Post by: libsterdc

And speaking of nutrition grades...Am I the only one who thinks that the cc system is up for an upgrade?  I mean, why does Meatlover's Pizza get a D+ but Soy Sauce get a B?  Soy Sauce is REALLY high in sodium, and at least the Meatlover's pizza has lots of calcium, vitamins, etc.  And, why is it possible to get an A for the day, and be nowhere near meeting my nutrition targets in calcium and iron?  And, some days I get a C+, but meet all my RDAs.  What gives?

OK, I'm done now.

The cc grading system is sometimes confusing. Lately I have been looking at the "Eat This Not That..." series for their recommendations. One of them, "Worst and Best Supermarket Foods: is especially enlightening.

I noticed that the only things that get bad grades are items that contain fat, cholestrol, salt and sugar. Everything else gets better grades. For instance, when you get the list of coffee's and it has a low grade, like some of the instant low fat, low sugar varieties, if you look at the nutrition report, they may have higher amounts of sodium. This will affect the grade. Meatlovers pizza has a lot of fat and cholestrol in the cheese and meat, so it will get a lower grade.

I like the grading system here. If it has a low grade, click on the food to view the nutrional label and find out why. Oh, and I have never found meat of any kind to be graded an "A". Because it does contain some cholestrol and fat no matter how lean it is. I have gotten a "B" on some meat items, but it is very rare. Some of the healthier brand name pre-packaged portioned meats from the store have turned out to be a "B".

The more nutritious a food is, the better the grade. The lower the fat, cholestrol, salt and sugar content, the better the grade. I find this very useful and always try to aim for an "A". All our natural fresh vegetables and fruits are graded "A". This has to tell you something about how we should be eating.

Another thing to watch out on labels, that I ran across about a week ago. I was viewing the portion size of an item. It listed the portion in one tablespoon when you know you would probably eat a cup!

The only problem I have with the shelf cost labels and the nutrition values is they are not consistent.  For instance buying something sold by the lb, one label will give you the cost per ounce, the other give you the cost per unit or some other measurement that is not always clear.  They do not always compare apple to apples so you need a calculator to do the math.

The same is for the nutrition labels, one cereal will give you the values for a cup, the other brand of the same cereal will give you the values for 3/4 of a cup.  Again not always the same and again need to calculate to be sure you are getting the best ratio.  I thought I was doing so good with my shredded wheat, I bought the brand in the bag instead of the box as it had a little less calories.. but I found out later, it also had a lot less iron.  I tend to struggle with anemia so iron is important to me.  Life and learn!  I can take an iron supplement and still eat the kind with less calories. 

I do not know all the details but I did notice some new color coded shelf labels at my store and I had to laugh because they had one on the Pepsi.. Low Fat...LOL!  I thought what a joke so I did not even look at them further as to me they lost their credibility.  That is how I feel about most of the grade label systems and by what the manufactures put on the boxes that are not regulated, they can say anything really to try and get you to buy their product.

As far as the CC grading goes, I look at it but I do not use the grades not to eat something, for instance I LOVE Shrimp and it is good for you but is a C.  Chicken Breast is a B but does not have as much protein as the shrimp.  Also Almonds are a good snack once in a while but they are a D.  I check it out, but I do not let it stop me from eating something I know has value to my body, you have to eat some fat, just want to eat the right kind.  It is just one tool of many to use to make sure you are getting what you need each day, at least that is how I look at it.

Shrimp is so good. I wish I could eat it, but it is too high in cholestrol for me. I had gall bladder problems about 10 years ago and the Specialist told me not to eat shrimp. Apparantly it is also hard to digest. I tried to eat it about a year ago and got violent pains in my stomach. I guess she was right. Check the cholestrol in shrimp compared to skinless chicken breast. I think that is why it has a D.

I'm not sure where the grades are coming from that some people are noting. I eat shrimp ( an A-), walnuts ( a B-) and Beef tenderloin ( a B-) all the time. Caloriecount helped me lose 80 pounds and is still an everyday tool. How are you all choosing these foods? I just chose from the food browser. How can the grades be so different??

An article of interest appears in The New York Times Fitness & Nutrition section.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/05/business/05smart.html?ref= nutrition

Here's a snippet of what interested me:

(snip) 

He said the criteria used by the Smart Choices Program were seriously flawed, allowing less healthy products, like sweet cereals and heavily salted packaged meals, to win its seal of approval. “It’s a blatant failure of this system and it makes it, I’m afraid, not credible,” Mr. Willett said.

(snip)

They've put the fox in charge of the henhouse.

Wow! I read the article and all I can say is ,"Big food comapny interests do not include helping consumers be healthy!"

My local grocery store just recently started using the Nu-Val system and I gotta say that while I was skeptical at first, I find that is in incredibly useful.  Sure I could stand in the cereal aisle for 4 hours comparing the Nutritional Facts printed on the boxes and try to decide "Ok, I like the taste of this one and it has fiber, but this one is lower sugar and carbs, but this one is low cal but low fiber..."  OR  I can take a sneak peak at the NuVal label...disregard the ones under a certain value, disregard the ones that I hate, and THEN take a detailed look at the Nutritional Facts on the box to make an informed decision. Saves time. I mean, I used to just go shopping and just worry about getting the best bargain and the taste...now that I'm trying to lose weight, I have to thing price, calories, fat, taste, fiber, protein, vitimins...there's a lot to consider, there's SO many choices out there, and packaging is incredibly misleading. I will take any help that I can get.

I'm not going to blindly buy something that has a high NuVal number...but I am going to take a closer look at it.  So far, I have noticed some pretty interesting surprises that I would have overlooked before.  For example, in the granola bar aisle, the brand that really was promoting itself as healthy and full of nutriants was actually one of the lowest valued bars.  After taking a closer look, I realized that it was very high in sugar and lacking in some of the good stuff that the others had.  Would I have come to this discovery without the NuVal scores?  Eventually...but with help of NuVal  I realized almost immediately after spotting the product that the score was dramatically lower than the others.

So no...we shouldn't check our brains at the door but don't knock the system until you've tried it. I found it very simple to use and helped me to be more conscious of the choices I was making...

I personally and professionally know the MD who created the NuVal system.  It has been his passion for years to fight obesity. He and his team spent many man hours researching foods before assigning a value to them.  He has quite a few books on diet and nutrition if you care to check it out.  Go to his website.  I think you will find his information beneficial.  His primary objective is not to make money, it is to help people.