The Center for Science in the Public Interest (aka “The Nanny Center”) has long fought for additional labeling requirements,
arguing that labeling is “a basic consumer right-to-know” issue. So far, they have demanded:
- Labels describing how much caffeine is in food and drinks
- Labels on soda advising parents that soft drinks may be replacing low-fat milk, fruit juice and other drinks in their children’s diets
- Labels on fresh, unpasteurized juice, warning of contamination
They even sued the Food and Drug Administration (and won!) when restaurants were first excluded from new labeling rules adopted in 1994.
But when the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms granted wine makers the right to add a label to wine bottles encouraging
consumers to learn about the health effects of drinking wine, CSPI quickly dropped their support for the “consumer’s right to know.”
“A lot of people who see the words ‘health effect’ will read that as ‘health benefit’ and may end up drinking more wine than they
should,” said CSPI head Michael Jacobson.
Funny, he seemed to have such confidence in us before.
