U.S. Boosts Nutrition Data on Food Labels : Health: Sweeping new regulations are aimed at giving consumers more useful dietary information.

The federal government Wednesday announced final regulations for the most sweeping revision of food labels in the nation’s history, reforms that will give consumers uniform information about serving sizes and nutrients and standardize terms such as “low” or “reduced” fat.

“We have reached a watershed,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Louis W. Sullivan. “Behind us lies the old food label, too often a source of confusion. Ahead is a more frank and useful label--an information tool that can make a difference.”

The new labels are considered an especially important source for health-conscious Americans as medical research continues to show a firm association between diet and the development and prevention of certain medical conditions, such as cancer, high blood pressure and heart disease.

Revised labels should start appearing on products in mid-1993 and are required to be on virtually all processed foods by May, 1994.

The regulations mark the culmination of more than two years of work by the Health and Human Services Department and the Food and Drug Administration, and the end of a stalemate between Sullivan and Agriculture Secretary Edward R. Madigan over details that had threatened the entire package.

The dispute between the two Cabinet secretaries ended with the unusual intervention of President Bush, who met with both men for more than an hour earlier this week and ultimately sided with Sullivan.

“Dr. Sullivan made a very forceful presentation (to the President) on public health grounds, not political grounds, and made it clear he would not compromise,” said one White House official who requested anonymity. “That meant something in the end.”

The most significant change is that labels will now list the amounts of nutrients--such as fats, carbohydrates, sodium, protein and fiber--in the context of a daily intake of 2,000 calories, which is roughly the need of an average adult woman.

For example, if a product contains 13 grams of fat, the label will say this amount is 20% of the daily value--or daily maximum intake--for a 2,000-calorie-a-day diet.

Children require about 1,800 calories, while men need up to about 2,800 calories. Using 2,000 calories as a reference point for consumers “is good for kids, it’s good for women and it is certainly not going to harm any man,” said FDA Commissioner David A. Kessler.

The new rules also spell out how terms such as “light,” “fat free,” “low fat,” “low calorie,” “cholesterol free” and “high fiber” may be used on packages so that they will mean only one thing for nearly all foods.

For example, a food must contain less than 0.5 grams of fat per serving--and have no added ingredients containing fat or oil--to call itself “fat free.” The term “low in saturated fat” may be used to describe a food that contains 1 gram or less of saturated fat per serving, and not more than 15% of calories from saturated fat.

The regulations also will allow products to make certain health claims if they are supported by scientific evidence, such as the role of fiber in reducing the risk of some types of cancer.

The changes are expected to cost the food industry about $2 billion. Sullivan said, however, that their impact would result “in savings in health care costs in the multiple billions of dollars.”

Sullivan also said the department would soon begin a nationwide public education campaign to explain the changes.

Madigan, who reportedly had been under heavy pressure from the meat industry to weaken the rules, received some concessions.

The feud, which had delayed the release of the rules for nearly a month, involved such specifics as whether labels should state the amounts of nutrients in the context of a 2,000-calorie diet--or a higher number, as sought by industry.

Although Sullivan won this argument, the new labels also will include a standard chart in smaller print at the bottom of the panel listing the daily-value totals of fat, and other nutrients for a 2,500-calorie diet alongside the numbers for a 2,000-calorie diet.

For example, this chart will tell consumers that the total amount of fat in a 2,000-calorie diet should be less than 65 grams. It will also say that the total amount of fat in a 2,500-calorie diet should be less than 80 grams.

The FDA lost an argument to the Agriculture Department over whether the term “light” could be used to describe a product low in sodium. The FDA had wanted the term to be used only when describing fat, fearing that consumers could be misled by the use of “light” on a product that was low in sodium but high in fat. But Bush ruled that the term “light” could be used to describe low-sodium products.

Also, Bush decided that descriptive terms on restaurant menus would be exempt from the requirements of complying with the proposed standard definitions.

The regulations were required by a law Congress passed in 1990 that applies only to foods regulated by the FDA. But the Agriculture Department, which has authority over meat and poultry and processed foods containing meat and poultry, had agreed to go along with the labeling changes so consumers would have uniform information on all products.

Sullivan, at a press conference, refused to characterize the decision as a victory for his department and the FDA, saying that the result is “an issue where everyone wins--HHS, USDA, the Bush Administration and the American consumer.” But Madigan was conspicuous by his absence.

“I am satisfied with President Bush’s decision on the food label format,” Madigan said in a statement. The two departments, he said, will now work “to get the labels done quickly. We will implement the rule as soon as possible, and our lawyers are working on it now. We can now look forward to uniform food labels that include the meat and poultry products regulated by (the Agriculture Department).”

J. Patrick Boyle, president of the American Meat Institute, said his industry “has been working to take the fat out of its products” but that government “has decided to fatten the label. The result is a nutrition label that is neither suitable nor relevant for most Americans. . . . Consumers have been left with a morass of numbers many will neither understand nor use.”

But Dr. W. Virgil Brown, professor of medicine at Emory University in Atlanta and past president of the American Heart Assn., praised the Administration for “placing the public’s health above the special interests of the meat and poultry industry.”

Brown said the new labels “will empower Americans to evaluate individual food choices in the context of their total diet,” adding that the heart association “has long contended that changes in the way foods are labeled has the potential for dramatic benefits for the health of the American people.”

C. Manly Molpus, president of the Grocery Manufacturers of America, said Bush’s action clears the way for industry “to begin the massive job of changing over 257,000 food labels. While we do not agree with each and every decision, we will now start the enormous job of providing this new information to consumers as quickly as possible.”

The dispute over the labels had taken an unusual turn when it became a focus of attention at the White House. It became one of the rare issues to land on Bush’s desk at a time when all but the formal authority to act has shifted to Little Rock, Ark., and President-elect Bill Clinton.

White House officials said, however, that the fact that Bush spent the time on the issue was a reflection of its importance, rather than a reflection of the relatively empty presidential calendar in the post-election period.

Times staff writer James Gerstenzang contributed to this story.

New Labeling

Here is a sample of the dietary information that would appear on a package of macaroni and cheese.

Nutrition Facts Serving Size: 1/2 cup (114g) / Servings Per Container: 4 Amount Per Serving Calories: 260 Calories From Fat: 120 *

% Daily Value * Total Fat: 13g / 20% Saturated Fat: 5g / 25% Cholesterol: 30mg / 10% Sodium: 660mg / 28% Total Carbohydrate: 31g / 11% Sugars: 5g Dietary Fiber: 0g / 0% Protein: 5g Vitamin A: 4% Vitamin C: 2% Calcium: 15% Iron: 4% * Percents (%) of a daily value are based on a 2,000-calorie diet. Your daily values may vary higher or lower depending on your calorie needs:

2,000 2,500 Nutrient Calories Calories Total Fat Less than 65g 80g Saturated Fat Less than 20g 25g Cholesterol Less than 300mg 300mg Sodium Less than 2,400 mg 2,400 mg Total Carbohydrate 300g 375g Fiber 25g 30g

1g fat = 9 calories

1g carbohydrate = 4 calories

1g protein = 4 calories

Source: Department of Health and Human Services