I bought a pack of gum today. It’s sugarless gum (with “Extra Long Lasting Flavor!” by the way), and declares in very small type on the front of the package: “not a low-calorie food.”
The Nutrition Facts label on the back of the package says the serving size is one stick, and that this contains a grand total of five calories.
If we round to whole numbers, and assume that negative numbers aren’t allowed, then there are only five possibilities for “low-calorie food,” and it seems like one of those might just as well be called “zero-calorie.”
I’d be willing to accept that gum isn’t really “food” in any conventional sense, but I’m doubtful that the labelling regulations are just trying to point that out. If they were, then the small type would just declare “not a food product,” to warn us all not to fill our cellars with gum in case of an emergency.
So, that still leaves the question: What does it take to be a low-calorie food?
A regular stick of gum, sugar and all, is low-calorie. The way I see it, Federal regulations probably prohibit labeling a product as low-calorie unless the thing it’s substituted for is not low-calorie.
So, what you’re saying is that it’s not a low-calorie food because gum is already a low in calories??!!
We might also assume from this that rice cakes aren’t a low calorie food, unless we assume that they’re replacing marshmallow pies (or, in the case of a current US TV commercial, rice krispies snacks)… Or would I also have to market a fried rice cake in order to sell a puffed rice cake that’s labeled “low calorie”?
I think what that means is:
If I market Super Creamy Marshmallow and Chocolate Cookies with Fudge Frosting and it’s 500 calorie a cookie, I can’t market it as “low calorie” because there is nothing to compare it to. It’s simply a regular old Super Creamy Marshmallow and Chocoloate Cookie with Fudge Frosting. However, if I find a way to make it a 300 calorie cookie, I could market THAT as “Low Calorie”, because it’s in comparison to my first product.
I think if it didn’t work this way, you could market any old thing as “low calorie”, because there’s nothing to compare it to. And a lot of gullible shoppers will buy anything “with a green label”. So, to keep me from selling my 500 calorie cookie as a low-cal, thus suckering in a lot of customers and deceiving them in the process, the regulation was established.
Available now, in the meat case next to the bacon and the health insurance applications.
I’m also pleased to announce
*** Mike’s LOW_CALORIE Rice Cakes ***
The only low calorie rice cakes on the market!
Good thing for this law, or all my competitors would be able to sell their rice cakes as “low calorie” too.
Only Mike’s rice cakes are low calorie by comparison. We at Mike’s do this, of course, because we care about your family’s health. Unlike our competitors, who don’t even offer a low calorie rice cake.
Now, what about Mike’s lard gum…?
And, of course, its companion product, Mike’s low-calorie gum. It’s only five calories, unlike other gums that may have FIVE calories or more!
Calorie Free = Less than 5 cal per reference amount and per labeled serving
Your gum sure came close to that.
However,
Low Calorie = 40 cal or less per reference amount (and per 50 g if reference amount is small)
My guess is that bit in the parentheses screwed your gum. It may have 5 cal per serving, but 40+ cal per 50 g. I’d also guess that any food with less than 40 cal per serving which is technically not a low calorie food, must add “not a low calorie food” to the label.