Live data from Hacker News

Kellogg’s is going to war over Mexico’s nutrition label rules

statnews.com

51–60 of 207 posts

Re: Kellogg’s is going to war over Mexico’s nutrition label rules

#51
Go Mexico! Unregulated markets often don't produce great outcomes for society. Regulate them for the public good.

I live in Australia, this reminds me of our tobacco plain packaging legislation [1]. A post implementation review was conducted a few years afterward [2]. Some interesting bits from the PIR conclusion:

> Applying the government’s RBM framework, the regulatory burden was estimated as $73.87 million across the entire industry (including manufacturers, importers, wholesalers and retailers).

> While it was not possible to complete a full Cost Benefit Analysis for this PIR (due to the limitations on the data available at this time and provided by industry), potential monetised benefits were also analysed including an illustrative example of health benefits. That example estimated that a 0.07 percentage point drop in smoking prevalence would be equivalent to $273 million in monetised health benefits

> Dr Chipty’s modelling also estimated a 0.55 percentage point drop in smoking prevalence in Australia, over 34 months following implementation, attributable to the 2012 packaging changes. This strong result, that is “likely understated”, is expected to grow into the future as the full effects of the 2012 packaging changes are realised over the longer term

So, within 3 years after the introduction of packaging changes, smoking prevalence throughout the population had dropped by at least half a percent (approx 100k people). It cost the tobacco industry less than $100m in one-off transitional costs, and it's estimated to have more than $2b in monetised health benefits over that three year period alone.

It also cost tobacco industry lost revenues & profits, but hey, that's their problem, maybe they can find a different business to invest in.

[1] https://www.health.gov.au/topics/smoking-and-tobacco/tobacco... [2] https://oia.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/posts/2016/02/Tob...

Re: Kellogg’s is going to war over Mexico’s nutrition label rules

#52

Mexico’s big black hexagons warning across excess fat/sugar/calories are kind of ridiculous. I don’t think they are serving to dissuade consumers, and even foreigners stop noticing the labels after just a couple of weeks in the country. The problem seems to be a wider one: Mexico is importing the convenience-store junk-food culture of its northern neighbor. People are often eating crap because there isn’t much else a…

> Mexico is importing the convenience-store junk-food culture of its northern neighbor.

True. How many people think drinking a coke is great for hydrating yourself or think pre-packaged/fast-food-chain products are "good food"

This is the main issue

How many daily calories are from snacks and other 'needless crap'?

Re: Kellogg’s is going to war over Mexico’s nutrition label rules

#53
I don't believe such measures have a significant impact on obesity because they don't target the main causes of obesity which are the easy availability of food and the reliance on private cars for transportation.

Furthermore, they push the misleading idea that you can still drive to the supermarket, buy processed foods, load them in your car, drive home, eat them in front of the TV and be fine, as long as you don't buy the high-in-sugar stuff.

If you want to beat obesity start by buying just the ingredients and then cooking meals at home. It's not that hard. Then start walking to places instead of taking the car. Taking public transportation is also good because it frequently forces you to walk a non-negligible amount. Also stop eating while watching TV. You can go one step further and throw out the TV altogether.

You don't need to work out (although you should for other health reasons); you also don't need to diet; the vast majority of dieters gain all of the weight they lost during the diet and then some.

Re: Kellogg’s is going to war over Mexico’s nutrition label rules

#54
post #49

> They included a provision in the policy that required companies to also warn when products contained artificial sweeteners. Well there goes half the incentive to remove the excess sugar.

I'm unconvinced. Artificial sweeteners still have the problem that you prime yourself to expect sugar-flavors in everything.

You're not convinced it decreases the incentive?

And having one major problem is better than two.

Re: Kellogg’s is going to war over Mexico’s nutrition label rules

#55
post #47

This is a drink[1] which millions of Indian kids drink while growing up. Just see the amount of added sugar. And parents wonder why is the kid addicted to sugar growing up. Out of 100grams, added sugar = 32.2 grams. 32% of the drink is just pure sugar. People wonder why kids have rotten teeth growing up. [1] https://www.amazon.in/Cadbury-Bournvita-Chocolate-Health-Dri...

This is the Australian equivalent we had when I was growing up[1]. Someone worked it out and basically realized it manages to give you more sugar per volume then actual sugar.

[1] https://www.milo.com.au/powder

Re: Kellogg’s is going to war over Mexico’s nutrition label rules

#56

Mexico’s big black hexagons warning across excess fat/sugar/calories are kind of ridiculous. I don’t think they are serving to dissuade consumers, and even foreigners stop noticing the labels after just a couple of weeks in the country. The problem seems to be a wider one: Mexico is importing the convenience-store junk-food culture of its northern neighbor. People are often eating crap because there isn’t much else a…

[dead]

Re: Kellogg’s is going to war over Mexico’s nutrition label rules

#57

Nutritional labelling is such a cesspit of lies. My pet hate is the 'portion' or 'serving' sizes which are blatantly wrong just so the companies can lie about how much sugar they are selling to you. So you get 500 ml bottle with nutritional info shown for every 100 ml and 250ml because that's the 'serving size'. No-one has ever drunk 250ml (8 ounces) and then left the rest for later.

It does make sense to have the same "serving size" for a beverage across 0.33, 0.5 and 1.5L bottles though, regardless of whether no one actually shares the smaller ones. If anything, the "what's the sugar content of this whole package" should perhaps be declared separately.

No it does not make sense. We know that larger container sizes alone can increase intake (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22306436/) and the purpose of nutrition facts is not to tell you what an arbitrary amount of something contains in a vacuum, it's to inform you on the contents of what you're about to ingest.

"Servings" are just a convenient way to capture the fact that there are some cases where you're not expected to ingest the entire container: that's why a packet of mayonnaise and a jar of mayonnaise have near identical serving sizes, and same for packets of sugar vs boxes of sugar.

Re: Kellogg’s is going to war over Mexico’s nutrition label rules

#58
post #28

Mexico’s big black hexagons warning across excess fat/sugar/calories are kind of ridiculous. I don’t think they are serving to dissuade consumers, and even foreigners stop noticing the labels after just a couple of weeks in the country. The problem seems to be a wider one: Mexico is importing the convenience-store junk-food culture of its northern neighbor. People are often eating crap because there isn’t much else a…

If someone eats froot loops and can't see by themselves that they are too sugary do they even have the intelligence to make decisions based on those black hexagons?

The point of food labels is help consumers make more informed decisions on what food they consume, especially when the food industry works to make food as addictive as possible. Lets not forget that the messaging behind many (most?) products, especially the unhealthy ones, is one of health and nutrition. When the only message about a food is it's health benefits it's not too farfetched that people may consider Froot Loops part of a healthy breakfast. Froot Loops is an extreme example, in most cases it's more subtle, like granola.

Re: Kellogg’s is going to war over Mexico’s nutrition label rules

#59

Nutritional labelling is such a cesspit of lies. My pet hate is the 'portion' or 'serving' sizes which are blatantly wrong just so the companies can lie about how much sugar they are selling to you. So you get 500 ml bottle with nutritional info shown for every 100 ml and 250ml because that's the 'serving size'. No-one has ever drunk 250ml (8 ounces) and then left the rest for later.

> So you get 500 ml bottle with nutritional info shown for every 100 ml and 250ml because that's the 'serving size'. No-one has ever drunk 250ml (8 ounces) and then left the rest for later.

Actually I had a coworker who would in fact drink 250 ml of a 500 ml bottle and leave the rest for later, although usually he would never get around to finishing it because he drank carbonated beverages and by the time he was next thirsty they had gone flat.

The odd thing was he did this for all size bottles and cups. E.g., if I went to get lunch and he was too busy for a break then and I offered to bring something back for him no matter what sized drink I got for him he drank half.

Re: Kellogg’s is going to war over Mexico’s nutrition label rules

#60

Mexico’s big black hexagons warning across excess fat/sugar/calories are kind of ridiculous. I don’t think they are serving to dissuade consumers, and even foreigners stop noticing the labels after just a couple of weeks in the country. The problem seems to be a wider one: Mexico is importing the convenience-store junk-food culture of its northern neighbor. People are often eating crap because there isn’t much else a…

Going even further from that, to many mexicans having those labels is now considered similarly to a badge of honors. The more labels you have, the more the average mexican expect the product to taste well. This song from Fito Olivares is quite old and is still a hit in most parties. You'll also encounter it in many tiktoks and instagram reels: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-RV8ZbMcdQ

Mexican people also jokingly say stupid shit like you have to act gay 5 mins to avoid it the gayness to accumulate. I put the joke about black labels being a taste rank on the same “stupid things people say” bucket.
Post reply on HN