Truth-in-Packaging Wrapped Up in Controversy : Labels: Turf wars between government agencies, industry resistance and misleading information are turning supermarkets into ‘caverns of confusion,’ activists say.

Regina Medina is an informed consumer, a consummate label reader who shrinks from grocery shopping with anyone--even her husband--who dares speed up her meticulous process of comparison and contrast.

But these days, she says, she’s steamed. Citrus Hill calls its juice fresh when it drags its oranges all the way from Brazil? Please. Corn and vegetable oil companies boast that their products have no cholesterol? Well, when did they ever have cholesterol?

“I think (food companies) should have more information on things and establish standards,” said the Crenshaw District woman as she transferred bags from shopping cart to car trunk at the Boys market on Crenshaw Boulevard. “They should be consistent. . . . (Shopping) is like going through a maze. There’s so many tricky things.”

Although this is an era of growing nutrition consciousness, many shoppers and consumer advocates believe that making informed and healthy choices about foods could become tougher than ever before.

There is a growing turf war between the federal Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture over labeling language. In addition, critics contend that food companies will resist labeling changes until the moment they are enforceable by law. And some consumer-product companies are “downsizing” packaging, giving less product for the same price without significant packaging changes.

“It’s easy to give people information about nutrition and what they ought to eat, but when you put them into the marketplace, it’s difficult for them to make the choices,” said Nancy Chapman, director of public policy at the Society for Nutrition Education.

Conflicting labels have turned supermarkets into “caverns of confusion,” said Ellen Haas, executive director of Public Voice for Food and Health Policy. And the battle between the agencies that regulate the food we eat could add even more confusion to grocery store shelves.

The FDA is in the process of enacting the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act, which was signed last November and mandates such labeling changes as more information on fat and cholesterol, serving sizes that bear a resemblance to what people actually eat and definitions for controversial terms such as “low fat” and “fresh.”

But just last month, the USDA announced that it will overhaul its own labeling rules for meat and poultry, products that are not governed by the FDA. Consumer advocates are wary, concerned that “low fat” and “serving size” will never have a consistent meaning for diverse products such as hamburger meat and ice cream.

“If the USDA proposals become law, consumers as a practical matter would not be able to compare the nutritional values of meat and non-meat products,” said Bruce Silverglade, director of legal affairs for the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “Comparing fat content information on a frozen chicken nugget label with a frozen fish stick label would be like changing dollars into yen.”

Despite considerable hand-wringing, there have been recent signs of hope that package labeling will receive the kind of attention and enforcement that were stripped away during the Reagan Administration.

Most recent was last week’s seizure of 2,000 cases of Citrus Hill Fresh Choice orange juice from a warehouse in Minnesota. The seizure capped months of wrangling between food processor Procter & Gamble and the FDA. The agency said Citrus Hill’s use of the term “fresh” was false and misleading. Two days after the raid, the company agreed to change its labels.

“The food label must be truthful,” announced Dr. David A. Kessler, the new FDA commissioner, after the juice was impounded by U.S. marshals. It was Kessler’s first definitive enforcement action, and it marked the first time in many years that the agency has moved to seize such a high-profile product.

Consumer groups cheered the move. And even food industry organizations were impressed--whether they agreed with the decision or not. The times, all agree, are changing.

“We have a new FDA commissioner who has publicly pledged that his single-most important job will be to restore public trust,” said Jeffrey Nedelman, spokesman for the Grocery Manufacturers of America. “There’s going to be a whirlwind of activity. The (Citrus Hill) decision, whether you agree on the merits, came swiftly, it was decisive and it stuck. Those are all new changes at FDA.”

More are coming, including definitions for at least some of what consumer groups consider to be the dirty words of food labeling: Light/lite, no cholesterol, high fiber, fresh, fat free/low fat, natural and organic.

Right now, the FDA does not define these terms, although it has policy guidelines regarding fresh, low fat and light among others. Fresh can only be used on products of recent origin, not on processed or cooked foods.

Low-fat foods should not have more than two grams of fat per serving. And light or lite foods must be at least one-third lower in calories than their regular counterparts. Although the FDA has yet to officially define these terms, industry watchers expect that the guidelines will probably stand.

Citrus Hill is not the only company in fresh trouble. Ragu Foods Co. of Turnbull, Conn., got embroiled in a labeling dispute with Texas officials in late 1989 that eventually was joined by the FDA.

Although the company satisfied the Texas government by changing its name from Ragu Fresh Italian Pasta Sauce to Ragu Fresh Italian Brand Pasta Sauce, FDA spokesman Jeffrey Nesbit said the company has been warned by letter against using the term fresh.

Ragu spokeswoman Eileen Sharkey defends the label. “We never claimed that our Fresh Italian Brand Pasta Sauce is uncooked or just-made,” she said. “It is a trade name, not a description of the product” and therefore is protected.

Serving size is another controversy that the new law will clear up, one that has torn apart the food industry and enraged consumer groups. Right now, there are no rules regulating serving sizes, so a company can market a product as “low fat” simply by making the portion minuscule.

Potato chips are one example of how confusing packaging can be for consumers. Laura Scudders, for example, sells a two-ounce bag of potato chips that would normally accompany a lunch or constitute a snack. The problem, however, is that nutrition information on the label is for a one-ounce portion.

“For potato chips, serving size should be more realistic as to what’s in the package,” said Chapman, who pointed out that few people spread a small bag of chips over more than one meal. Laura Scudders officials could not be reached for comment.

On the flip side, for Kraft Singles of “American pasteurized process cheese food,” nutrition information is given in a serving size of one ounce. But each slice is only two-thirds of an ounce, meaning that to get the nutrition the company boasts, you have to have more than one slice.

“We would like to offer nutrition information based on the weight of the slice, not the one ounce,” said Nancy Nevin, Kraft General Foods spokeswoman. “But it’s the measure that’s been offered by the FDA in its proposed standard size for a serving of cheese. . . . We’re kind of in a bind.”

Where else can a consumer go wrong in the increasingly unfriendly neighborhood supermarket? Head on over to the meat department, the aisle that consumer advocates love to hate, where FDA regulations end and the USDA takes over.

In March, the consumer advocacy group Public Voice for Food and Health Policy surveyed 1,600 prepackaged meat and poultry products in 10 Washington supermarkets. The group found that 60% of all such items had no nutrition labeling whatsoever, and that the higher in fat a product was, the less likely it was to have nutrition information.

Food processing companies give relatively full nutritional information on expensive, single-serving frozen foods such as Lean Cuisine. But big frozen dinners and family-sized boxes of fried chicken--foods geared to lower-income shoppers--tend not to be labeled at all.

Another problem is the “percentage fat-free” claim, which shows up on processed meats and frozen dinners and pizzas that have meat as an ingredient.

Tombstone Light Pepperoni Pizza, an eight-ounce product, is sold as “92% fat-free,” but that’s a far cry from low fat. The pizza gets 35% of its calories from fat. It has 15 grams of fat in a six-ounce serving, which is far from the FDA “low-fat” criteria of two grams per serving.

Because the pepperoni pizza is regulated by the USDA--which the Center for Science in the Public Interest dubbed “Uniformly Slack in Demanding Accountability”--the “92% fat-free claim” is perfectly legal.

Margaret O’K. Gavin, the USDA’s deputy administrator for regulatory programs, defends the policy.

“There are criticisms that (the percentage fat-free claim) is not understood by consumers,” Gavin said. “One of the problems is that there does not exist consumer data about what’s least confusing.”

Which is where the USDA is getting into trouble with its proposal for new labeling regulations. In its announcement that it would make new rules about meat and poultry labeling, the agency suggested three possible ways to attack the issue of serving size, for example.

One suggestion was to set serving sizes on amounts of meat normally consumed, the second on the recommended amount to be eaten (a much smaller number) and the third was on a unit of weight such as an ounce, an amount smaller than any realistic portion.

Gavin said that USDA intends to work out labeling issues with the FDA, but that it’s too early in the process to begin to do that. And she insists that the consumer will not be left unprotected.

Nutrition is not the only place where consumers can be tripped up in the market. A group of attorneys general banded together in March to fight a trend called “downsizing” products or “package shorting.”

The group’s favorite example is the familiar coffee can, which used to hold 16 ounces and now holds 13--generally at the same price. But it also pointed to products as varied as baby food, cocoa, dog food, spaghetti sauce and tuna fish in a recent report on the problem.

The New York attorney general’s office argues that the law should protect not only consumers who consistently read labels but those who don’t give the label a second look.

“These to us are examples of the discredited concept of let the buyer beware,” said Sandy Mindell of the New York attorney general’s office. “It’s a concept that has no place in today’s marketplace. “

COMMON CONCERNS Among complaints voiced by consumers, activists and governmental agencies about food labeling in America: Fat Claims

Klondike Lite Frozen Dessert Bars with chocolate flavored coating. “Sugar-free, low in fat and contains only 110 calories.” “The Klondike Lite Frozen Dessert Bar is 86% fat-free and is reduced in cholesterol. It is made with Nutra-Sweet; so it contains no added sugar.” But it has seven grams of fat per 2.5-ounce serving, more than three times the FDA’s recommendation for low-fat claims.

Lean Cuisine Zucchini Lasagna. “Less than 300 calories. Now! At least 95% fat-free. No more than 5% fat.” But it has seven grams of fat per 11-ounce serving.

Lean Cuisine Chicken Oriental. “Less than 300 calories. Now! At least 95% fat-free. No more than 5% fat.” But it has six grams of fat per 9.4-ounce serving.

Banquet Kid Cuisine Fried Chicken dinner. 88% fat-free (12%) fat. “Finally, a line of nutritious meals for kids.” But it has 28 grams of fat per 8.65-ounce dinner.

Serving Size

Plantation Turkey Meat Products, Turkey Polish Sausage. 90% fat-free, contains 10% fat. But it has 3 grams of fat per serving. And the serving size is one ounce, or a mere 1/16 of the sausage, which is nowhere near what a person would eat. Normally, a person would eat at least three to four ounces, which would make a serving have nine to 12 grams of fat.

Kraft Singles, American pasteurized process cheese food. The nutrition information is given in a serving size of one ounce. But each slice is only 2/3 of an ounce, meaning that to get the nutrition they talk about, you have to have more than one slice.

Laura Scudder’s Potato Chips. They come by the bag for inclusion in a lunch that goes to school or work. They are snack-sized, two-ounce bags. But the nutrition information is given in a serving size of one ounce, which means that the bag should last two meals.

‘Fresh’ Claims

Citrus Hill Fresh Choice, Pure Squeezed 100% Orange Juice from concentrate. “Provides the delicious fresh taste and nutrition of 100% pure orange juice. We pick our oranges at the peak of ripeness, then we hurry to squeeze them before they lose their freshness. . . . We don’t add anything. Just pure nutrition and fresh taste.” The FDA last week demanded that Procter & Gamble delete such terms as “fresh” from the label because they are misleading.

Ragu Fresh Italian 100% Natural Pasta Sauce. “With more crushed tomatoes and less paste, for a fresher tomato taste and lighter texture.” Heat processed, so how can it be fresh? The FDA has warned the company to stop using the term “fresh.”

Never Had It, Never Will

Wesson Corn Oil. “ No Cholesterol .” But wait a second, it never had cholesterol in the first place. The FDA’s new rules will most likely say you cannot make a claim about something you did not take out. Oh, it’s still 100% fat.

Skippy Creamy Peanut Butter. No cholesterol. But, it never had any to start with.