New Nutrition Labeling Rules for Meat a Missed Opportunity, Says CSPI
The U.S. Department of Agriculture today releasedfinal rules for the labeling of meat and poultry--rules that have been stalled at the agency for 10 years. Unfortunately, the rules provide no new consumer benefit, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest.
Under the rules, packages of ground beef, a major source of saturated fat, and ground poultry must bear Nutrition Facts labels by January 2012. However, the Center for Science in the Public Interest said that most ground beef already has such labeling.
The group had urged USDA to prohibit "percent lean" statements on labels of ground meat. CSPI says that its research shows that the term "lean" misleads consumers into thinking that, say, "80 percent lean" ground beef is lower in fat than it really is. The term "low fat," as defined by the Food and Drug Administration, could not be used on products that contain more than 3 grams of fat per serving, a level that no ground beef meets. When consumer and health organizations opposed "percent lean" claims in the 1990s, USDA shelved its proposed rule. Now the agency is allowing the claims because, it says, consumers are used to seeing them.
"Use of the word 'lean' in the context of ground beef is designed to deceive," says CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "The meat industry has insisted on labeling ground meat that way to make ground beef appear leaner. Consumers assume that they are following advice to eat lean meat when they purchase ground beef that is 80 percent lean, yet it is one of the fattiest meats on the market. Nutrition Facts labels don't correct that deception."
For steaks, chops, roasts, and other cuts of meat, USDA is requiring nutrition information either on labels or on signs in supermarkets. To date, supermarkets have always chosen to post signs rather than use labels. CSPI says that the signs are hard to find, difficult to decipher, and show nutrition information for relatively puny 4-ounce servings, thereby understating the calorie and fat content of typical servings of steaks. Many Americans actually consume steaks that weigh two, three, or four times the official USDA serving size.
"It's too bad that USDA missed an opportunity to give consumers easy-to-use, on-package information about how many calories and how much saturated fat is in steaks, roasts, and other cuts of meat," Jacobson said.
CSPI had urged the agency to require that single-serving packages of meat—one steak, say—bear nutrition information for the whole cut as sold. Alternatively, said CSPI, labels could have stated "Nutrition Facts are based on a 4-oz. serving. This package contains multiple servings."
"USDA should err on the side of protecting consumers' health," Jacobson said. "But I fear that when the food industry wants one thing and consumers another, consumers get the short end of the stick."
Contact Jeff Cronin (jcronin[at]cspinet.org) or Ariana Stone (astone[at]cspinet.org).