Food labeling is required for drinks.
But beer is a drink. Wine is a drink. And when was the last time you
bought a bottle of beer or wine that had a nutritional panel? Why are
alcoholic drinks conspicuously exempt from US food labeling laws?
Due to this exemption, consumers are
not able to make informed choices about the alcoholic beverages they
ingest. This is in stark opposition to the standard US government
policy of consumer empowerment. To rectify this anomaly, the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act should be amended to require
mandatory labeling for beer and wine.
The labels should be in the form of
nutritional panels that detail calorie count, nutrient composition,
and ingredients (highlighting any allergies).
CALORIE COUNT
A standard 750mL bottle of wine
contains 644 calories, the equivalent of a McDonald's cheeseburger
and medium fries. A 590mL bottle of coke contains 240 calories.
Hence, by volume, wine is far higher in calories than Coca-cola. Why
then is it mandatory for McDonald's to label the calorie content of
the cheeseburger and fries, but wine and other alcohol producers get
let off scott free? Why then has Mayor Bloomberg recently implemented
a ban on any sodas bigger than 16 ounces, but done nothing to require
labeling of alcohol?
Yes, studies have shown that although
alcohol drinkers consume a higher daily calorie intake than
non-drinkers, alcohol drinkers are not more obese than non-drinkers.
Thus there does not appear to be the same direct correlation between
alcohol consumption and obesity, as there is with fast food and
sugary drinks consumption and obesity. Regardless, no one is arguing
that a fruit salad is likely to lead to obesity. And yet fruit salad
is not omitted from food labeling requirements. Equally, alcohol
should not be omitted.
Alcohol
comprises between 5% to 10% of the average adult American's daily
energy intake. Given that alcohol is playing such a large role in our
diet, it should be treated in the same way as any other food or
beverage. That is, alcohol should be subject to food labeling laws.
NUTRIENT
COMPOSITION
It
is fairly universally understood that the calories in alcohol come
from alcohol itself, and that straight alcohol contains very little
carbohydrates, fats or protein. For this reason, alcohol is said to
be a source of “empty calories”. But this is not 100% true.
Alcohol does contain some nutritional value. For example, beer
contains vitamin B6 and red wine contains resveratrol. But do the
levels of these vitamins and phytonutrients vary greatly from brand
to brand and vintage to vintage? Which beer or wine is best for those
wishing to maximize their nutrient intake? Currently, there is no way
for consumers to tell. Labeling would assist health conscious
consumers to make informed decisions for the betterment of their
personal health and well-being.
INGREDIENTS
In
countries such as Brazil, Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic, a
statement of ingredients is included on alcohol labels. In America,
no such statement of ingredients is required. Why not? All food
products contain a statement of ingredients. Discerning consumers are
able to read this label and know what they will be ingesting. But,
where alcohol is concerned, these same discerning consumers have no
way of knowing what has gone into their drinks. Alcoholic drinks,
particularly beer and wine, are often clarified using animal-derived
substances such as gelatine (from bones and connective tissues),
isinglass (from the swim bladders of fish), casein (from milk),
chitosan (from crustaceans), and albumen (from eggs). Vegan
alternatives exist, which are derived from clay or algae. And yet no
labeling exists to indicate whether animal-derived or vegan
alternatives have been used. Given that 1 million Americans are
currently vegan, it would seem prudent to label alcohol so that
vegans can at least gauge which alcoholic drinks are suitable to
drink. Indeed, this may even benefit non-vegans who would be
squeemish to know the wine they are drinking contains fish bladder or
connective tissue.
ALLERGENS
Moreover,
labeling of ingredients would assist persons
with allergies. Many of the additives listed above, particularly
casein, crustaceans, and eggs, are known allergens.
There
is an argument that allergen levels from clarifying agents are
extremely low, and neither activate the immune system nor induce
anaphylaxis. However, if you were a particularly sensitive subject
would you want to take the risk? Wouldn't you just rather know
whether the wine you were about to drink contained casein or eggs or
some other ingredient that, in the right amount, could send you into
anaphylaxis?
Sulphur
is an additive that can trigger asthma attacks and anaphylactic
shock. Consequently, US labeling laws require the bottle to be
labeled with the term “contains sulfites”. These laws simply need
to be extended to encompass other allergens. In places such as
Australia, Hong Kong, and the European Union, it is required that
allergens be labeled. The United States should follow suit.
CONCLUSION
Now
that the vending machines have been tackled, it is time for Obama to
turn his attention to the liquor stores and bars. His recent
amendments to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act are
good, but there is still work to be done.
