Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Part of This "Good For You" Breakfast Has More Sugar than a Twinkie

Recs

3

December 09, 2011 – Comments (8) | RELATED TICKERS: K , GIS

http://static.ewg.org/reports/2011/cereals/pdf/2011-EWG-Cereals-Report.pdf 

1980

 

1995 and now it is "part of your complete breakfast".

p> 

 Best wishes,

 Steven

8 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On December 10, 2011 at 4:48 PM, dwot (45.58) wrote:

Dang, I love honey nut cheerios.  I actually haven't eaten them for years, but I see they are featured at the top of the report.

I don't eat them because they don't make me feel good, but they are tasty.

Report this comment
#2) On December 10, 2011 at 4:58 PM, dwot (45.58) wrote:

Excellent article.  There is quite a bit of diabeties where I live and we have sugary cereal in our breakfast program.

Report this comment
#3) On December 10, 2011 at 5:59 PM, FleaBagger (28.93) wrote:

The futility of trying to get government to impose good guidelines on food is typical of the futility of trying to make anything better by handing over more power to government. The USDA's entire raison d'etre is to cartelize and empower corporate grain and sugar beet farms, as well as Louisiana and Hawaii cane growers.

Report this comment
#4) On December 10, 2011 at 6:01 PM, devoish (98.27) wrote:

Debbie,

Thanks, and happy belated birthday.

Best wishes,

Steven

Report this comment
#5) On December 10, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Varchild2008 (83.79) wrote:

Eat a banana....Eat something with less sugar if you are concerned about your sugar intake.

We do not need to legislate anything and shouldn't.  Just pure education.

BTW:  Is eating ZERO sugar the goal of anti-sugar health activists?

Doubt it.  So you have to also be aware that SUGAR isn't bad for you if taken in modest amounts.

Some people have sugar in their Coffee... I don't....  But are we going to legislate we BAN sugar in Coffee now?

Report this comment
#6) On December 11, 2011 at 7:08 AM, devoish (98.27) wrote:

Flea and Var,

Are you sugar addicts? You fellas reacted pretty hard to the opportunity to learn how much sugar is in your breakfast.

How about legislation that demands if you are selling sugar, you call it sugar? I am sure that is to socialist for you fellas too, but probably not most of us in this Democracy.

What about the legislation that demands you tell what ingredients are in the box? Too much Gov? Still over the top for some I am sure.

Thank you for the perspectives and the advice.

Would you choose an organic banana?

Best wishes,

Steven

Report this comment
#7) On December 11, 2011 at 6:08 PM, NOTvuffett (< 20) wrote:

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!, sugary cereals contain large amounts of sugar?  I am stunned!!!!  Who would have ever thought that?, lol...

The govt. has mandated the posting of nutritional facts on packaged food products for many years.  I just pulled a couple items out of my pantry:

diced tomatoes- label says cholesterol 0%

a carton of salt- label says protein 0%

Why do companies have to expend the resources to print this lame sh!t? The govt,. that big fat nanny state govt. you love.

 

Report this comment
#8) On December 14, 2011 at 4:28 PM, devoish (98.27) wrote:

Notvuffett,

Companies have to expend resources to meet labeling requirements because they have proven themselves to be sc*um sucking liars.

The labeling requirements are lame because companies have found it more profitable to lobby for lame than make better products they can tell the truth about.

You are siding with cheats.

Best wishes,

Steven

 

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement