Answer

Article Critique: FDA Proposed Amendment to Nutrition Labels

Article:

 Grossman, M. R. (2017). US FDA updates rues for nutrition labels and serving sizes. European Food & Feed Law Review, Vol. 12, Issue 1, p. 63-66.                 

The article informs readers regarding FDA’s Nutrition Label rule update. The contents include information on new food labeling regulations as well as the purpose of such updates. Furthermore, the publication outlines different parts of the proposed rule and the manner in which it is underpinned through current laws as well as regulations.

            Grossman’s (2017) subject matter revolves around safety regarding food products. In particular, the author explores the area of nutrition label rule and updates to demonstrate changes and the manner in which its new components function to improve the safety of food products. This includes concepts such as serving size rule and others. The theme is on nutritional information even as the author attempts to present the content in the simplest way possible. More so, the article focuses on the area of new food labeling guidelines as proposed by FDA.

            The viewpoint adopted by the author includes objectivity. The article seemingly presents FDA’s regulations without distorting them or even adding misleading information concerning the all-significant nutritional information. In doing so, the author tries to report FDA’s rule on the revision of nutrition labels, which includes revealing facts such as the agency issuing its first regulations in 1993 as well as several amendments that have been made. Furthermore, the author provides information as published by FDA regarding the effect of nutrition label rule. The presentation is also backed using findings from other works of literature all of which helps to improve objectivity throughout the report. It means potential input and opinion from the author is kept in check to prevent skewed analysis. The implication is that the account presented in the article comes across as factual, and readers can see the author is trying to remain objective by including facts as well as referring to other researchers’ work.

            Some of the issues presented in the article include food branding, increased rates of chronic diseases such as obesity and diabetes, the introduction of new serving size rule, and list of nutrients update.     

            The author concludes that the procedure of revision nutrition labels is beneficial to all people because it encourages individuals to adopt healthy dietary practices. What is more, the process will provide users of food products with increasingly realistic information regarding serving sizes. To this end, the article implores consumers to not only read, but also rely on nutrition data provided on product labels, which should serve as a guide in making daily choices of food as well as beverages.

            I concur with the author’s conclusions especially the claim that revised nutrition labels will lead to increased healthy habits in the population. This is because the development means increasingly realistic information on food labels, all of which can be said to be informative. Usually, consumers are given inconclusive information when they make purchases and consequently make poor decisions regarding dietary needs. Indeed, the FDA’s proposed rule is designed with grim facts in mind considering that the longstanding regulations on nutrition have done little to nothing as far as addressing poor health outcomes is concerned. As an example, Grossman (2017) observes that since 1993 when the agency issued its first regulation concerning nutrition fact labels, there have been increased rates of chronic diseases. It follows that new information regarding the same is much needed, and revised nutrition labels represent an important step towards creating a healthy population. Additionally, the suggestion that consumers should take time to read product labels is significant because it demonstrates the need for stakeholders to join hands to realize positive health goals underpinning FDA’s decision.

            The article has taught me the need to preserve objectivity when presenting information that is especially related to diet and health. I will apply the experience in the professional future career through observing the different components needed to maintain credibility including citing other people’s findings.

            Given the information presented in the article, FDA should amend its existing policy concerning labeling regulations. The aim is to enable consumers to increase their understanding of the contents of their food products. It must be noted that amending the policy potentially leads to detailed information, which implies clients are not kept in the dark as far as dietary information is concerned. In other words, manufacturers are required to declare all vital information on product labels and thus help consumers to make informed decisions. Amendment of the policy would necessarily mean update to daily intake recommendations and possibly reflect modern scientific findings even as technological advances and understanding of human body revolutionize. For instance, a detailed product label display of protein per serving of a given food product would probably mean people who have been advised by their doctors to reduce its intake have a chance to make informed decision. More so, a consumer would choose when to take the particular protein-rich product rather than eating the nutritional component even without his knowledge and possibly complicating his well-being. It follows that FDA should adjust its current policy to match modern realities regarding dietary requirements.

            It is beyond doubt that the amended labels present an opportunity to decrease health care cost. More so, the ballooning health care-related cost is by and large attributed to increased rate of chronic diseases such as obesity and cardiovascular ailments. The suggestion is that unhealthy dietary practices have somewhat led to increased health care cost. Amended labels would help to reduce and eliminate chances of people engaging in poor health practices as far as food and beverage intake is concerned, which would translate into decreased chronic health conditions and thus expenditure by individuals and government. Furthermore, the effect on American economy would be positive because people would use resources to develop themselves further rather than utilize them to treat and manage a disease. As an example, since amended labels would contribute to proper eating habits in the population and decreased cases of chronic health conditions, it would mean people are increasingly active in key economic activities such as employment. The outcome is improved productivity as well as earnings which would contribute to economically secure families and neighborhoods. In particular, increased productivity in America would have far-reaching influence on the economy of the United States because resources such as time and manpower would be used effectively. Rather than waste these all-important resources when people are bedridden with chronic diseases, the country would concentrate on creating a resilient population to overcome potential economic pitfalls. The implication is that amended labels are increasingly vital to achieving American goals concerning reduced care cost as well as the improved economy in which all people benefit.