FDA Questions Wisdom Of “Smart Choices”

Maybe eating those Cocoa Puffs isn’t so smart after all.

Last week, the US Food and Drug Administration announced it’s taking a closer look at the Smart Choices program, which qualifies products based on a set of nutritional data. Today, the food industry group behind the program – which includes major brands and brand families from Unilever to ConAgra – announced it will no longer encourage the use of its logo, featuring a green checkmark, on food packaging. (The logo will still be in use voluntarily, however, by brands including Kraft Foods.)

Last month, the New York Times revealed that the 500 "Smart Choices" included mayonnaise, Fudgsicle bars, and enough sugary cereals to power an elementary school playground. Nutritionists were outraged. Consumers, having to decipher yet another piece of information on a food package, were likely confused (which was, arguably, the program's intention).

Kansas City-based food blogger Jonathan Bender calls the latest development a “victory for the FDA” but wonders "how much hand-holding the average consumer needs in the grocery store. When was the last time you decided that the information on the front of the box was enough when you were trying to buy healthier goods?"

Bender thinks “we’re overestimating the impact of packaging and perhaps underestimating shoppers,” but I would counter that the consumer wants to trust the front-of-the-box information, and until there are clear standards for things like what “light” (or “lite”) means and whether organic really is better, it will be difficult to make a truly smart choice when it comes to healthy food.

Because once the labels are standardized, accurate, and unambiguous, like in the case of calorie counts posted in New York City fast-food restaurants, consumers can feel free to ignore them and eat the bad-for-them stuff anyway.

At least, then, they can conclude they made the right, if “dumb,” choice on those Cocoa Puffs.