Kellogg’s is waging a war here over Tigre Toño and Sam el Tucán.

A 2019 policy requires companies that make unhealthy foods to include warning labels on the front of any boxes they sell in Mexico to educate consumers about things like excess sugar and fat. Any food with a warning label — like Kellogg’s Fruit Loops or its Frosted Flakes, which typically contain more than 37 grams of added sugar in a 100-gram serving — is also banned from including a mascot on its packaging.

    • cerement@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      considering they’re still not required to enter the “% daily value” for “total sugars” …

      • Swiggles@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Isn’t the daily amount like 0 you need? So Infinity % for any added amount?

        This is actually an honest question, because you can easily cover your daily needs with other carbs and even those are technically not necessarily as it can be metabolized by fat in your body, but no point in bending the truth here. The body needs sugar one way or the other, but none of them are processed sugars and should probably come from rice, potatoes or bread instead.

        • cerement@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          “% daily value” is supposedly something like “percent recommended daily value” and it’s a bizarre balance between minimum to avoid deficiencies and maximum to avoid overdose as determined by a board of corporate employees with no training in medicine, diet, or nutrition

          so, while there’s no minimum for “total sugars”, most who are actually trained in diet and nutrition seem to agree you really shouldn’t be going over 25–30g total sugars …

          FDA does provide a daily value for “added sugars” – 100% daily value is 50g (10-ish teaspoons) which sounds a little excessive to me …

          • Swiggles@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            At least it sounds almost reasonable if the sugar comes from fruits. That’s roughly the amount (25g sugar) you ingest when eating 2 apples.

            Thank you for the interesting, but concerning answer.

              • Swiggles@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Maybe, kinda. You have to eat them in moderation like anything. They at least provide other useful nutrients.

                In my opinion fruits are slightly more beneficial than bread, pasta or potatoes which do not contain as much sugar, but more of other carbs which are in my opinion not much better.

                So I see your point, but I don’t think they are as bad.

                  • Swiggles@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Actually I can’t argue against that. You are obviously correct.

                    I just believe that fruits are not as bad as it helps with variety in your diet and they are not just empty calories.

                • idiomaddict@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Potatoes are very low glycemic index* and have potassium, fiber, B6, and an alright amount of protein. I will fight for potatoes.

                  Edit: preparation matters, just mashed potatoes are super high glycemic index, but boiled waxy potatoes with the skins on alongside a protein is at the top edge of low or medium glycemic index. I will still fight for potatoes, but they probably need to be a side dish if you are looking out for your blood sugar.

                  • Swiggles@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Sorry, but aren’t potatoes even worse than white bread and sugar regarding the glycemic index? According to google they have scores between 80 and 90 on average while sugar (sucrose) has a score of 68.

                    I guess starch is really bad. I wasn’t aware it has such a high impact.

                    Don’t get me wrong they are not terrible in a balanced diet, but I don’t believe they have any real benefits either. Besides they are tasty which is honestly a good reason to like foods.