|Basic InformationMore InformationLatest News|Primary Care Pharmacy Model Attractive to Patients1991-2014 Saw Minimal Change in Health Spending Per StateLegalized Pot May Lead to More Traffic CrashesMany Doctors Silent on Cost of Cancer CareGroup Urges Tougher Limits on Chemical in Shampoos, Cosmetics18 Percent Increase Projected in Primary Care Demand by 2023Why Patients Leave the Hospital Against Doctor's OrdersRaise the Smoking Age to 21? Most Kids Fine With ThatComprehensive Audiologic Care Feasible in Free Clinic ModelMany Tanning Salons Defy Legal Age Limits on UsersLifesaving Drugs From Pfizer in Short Supply: FDALeading U.S. Doctors' Group Takes Aim at Rising Drug PricesU.S. Hospitals Still Prescribe Too Many Antibiotics: StudyFDA Puts Brakes on Rule Requiring New 'Nutrition Facts' LabelCardiac Arrest? Someday, Drones May Come to Your RescueSAMHSA: 9.8 Million U.S. Adults Have Serious Mental IllnessFDA Asks Maker of Opioid Painkiller Opana ER to Pull Drug From MarketHealth System Sees Success With E-Visits Via Patient PortalOvercharging Common in U.S. Emergency RoomsAdvocating for a Loved OneHigh Costs for Myeloma Patients Not Getting Low-Income SubsidyGetting Bedbugs Out of Nursing Homes, Apartment Buildings - for GoodCosts of ER Treatments a Mystery to Many DocsNew Bill Intends to Repeal Limits on Physician-Owned HospitalsTechnology Can Help Patients Facing Routine DecisionsKidneys From Deceased Diabetics Might Ease Organ Shortage: StudyElements of a Patient-Centered Hospital Room IdentifiedCan Tracking Germs in One Hospital Make All Hospitals Safer?Chances of Successful CPR Dwindle as Seniors AgeNew FDA Head Outlines 'Forceful Steps' Against Opioid CrisisChecking Patient's Drug History May Help Curb Opioid AbuseAt Major Teaching Hospitals, Lower Death RatesAmericans Skeptical of Corporate-Backed Health ResearchToo Many Americans Still Go Without Cancer ScreeningsBlack, Hispanic Americans Less Likely to See a NeurologistSome Lead Poisoning Tests May Be FaultyYour Doctor's Age Might Affect Your CareMany U.S. Travelers Skip Measles Shots, Despite Infection RiskPatients Satisfied With Telehealth Primary Care VisitsNearly a Third of Drugs Hit by Safety Issues After FDA ApprovalNo Routine Screening for Thyroid Cancer: Expert PanelPAS: Internet Info Can Lower Parent Trust in Doctors' DiagnosisFDA Warns of Tattoo DangersBystander CPR Not Only Saves Lives, It Lessens Disability: StudyMore Starring Roles for Booze in Kids' Movies, Study FindsMental Health Myths Abound in the U.S.Half of U.S. Docs Get Payments From Drug, Device Industries: StudyAMA Urges Doctors to Talk About Safe Opioid Storage, DisposalRoutine Blood Tests Can Harm Patient CareApril 29 Is National Prescription Drug Take Back DayQuestions and AnswersLinksBook Reviews
FDA Puts Brakes on Rule Requiring New 'Nutrition Facts' Label
by -- E.J. Mundell
Updated: Jun 13th 2017
TUESDAY, June 13, 2017 (HealthDay News) -- The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday announced that the launch of an updated "nutrition facts" panel on foods, developed during the Obama administration, will now be delayed.
The deadline for which the food industry must comply with the new labeling will be pushed back for an undisclosed time, the Associated Press reported.
The new nutrition panel was designed to make it easier for consumers to see how many calories and added sugars a product contained.
Specifically, the revamped label would make information on calorie counts more prominent, make serving sizes easier to understand, and point to the amount of added sugars a food or drink contains. Current labels only cite amounts of total sugar in a product, which might include naturally occurring sugars, the AP said.
The original FDA deadline for compliance was July 26, 2018.
In a letter sent earlier this year to Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) and other food industry groups had asked for an extension to 2021, the AP noted.
Nutrition experts were disappointed at Tuesday's announcement.
"The nutrition facts panel needs to be easier to understand so that consumers can make more informed food decisions," said Arlene Stein.
"If some food labels change and others do not, it will make it more difficult for consumers to compare foods and make a healthier choice," said Stein, who's a nutrition support dietitian at NYU Winthrop Hospital in Mineola, N.Y. "With the prevalence of obesity increasing, these changes would be better made sooner rather than later."
Stephanie Schiff, a registered dietitian at Huntington Hospital in Huntington, N.Y., agreed. She called the delay "surprising and disheartening."
"The new nutrition label would allow consumers to have a better and clearer idea of the amounts of certain nutrients in their foods, as well as of ingredients they might choose to reduce or avoid, such as added sugars," Schiff said.
"The new label would list the amount of potassium in food," she noted. "That information would be very beneficial to people who wanted to boost their potassium intake for heart health, or who wanted to reduce potassium intake due to kidney issues, or medication interactions -- information that was not on the old label."
But the grocers association applauded the postponement. In a statement, the group said that food and beverage companies want to help consumers make informed choices, but that the "fast-approaching compliance deadline" was tough to meet without further guidance from the FDA.
This isn't the first time the Trump administration's FDA has slowed the introduction of Obama-era food industry rules. According to the AP, the agency recently delayed legislation forcing restaurants, grocery and convenience stores to post calorie counts for foods they sold until 2018.
There's guidance on using the current Nutrition Facts panel at the FDA .
This article: Copyright © 2017 HealthDay. All rights reserved.